.... so they would be in flux quite a bit over time
Well ... the average md'r might agree with this logic. But not a purist archie. The same logic you promote would likewise apply to inter-tidal zone wet sand: That sand changes every decade or so, when a big storm washes out the sand, and the incoming spring/summer sand re-builds the beach. Thus a new coin could be 5 ft. deep, and an old coin could be 1 inch deep. Right ? All context is "lost", Right ?
However, this has not stopped a few persons on beaches here in CA from getting the "cultural heritage" card pulled on them. Fortunately, those were flukes and .... you can hunt the state of CA beaches here till you're blue in the face.
Or how about for plowed field ? Some crops (potatoes for instance) can require disk'ing/chiselling down ... what ... 2 ft ? Thus bringing up old stuff, and driving new stuff deep. All context is lost.
But to answer your question, I'll bet that it would be the "camel's nose in the tent" routine if archies started making all sorts of exceptions. Because, let's be honest: We md'rs would then be running around splitting hairs on the value or context (preserved vs not-preserved) of every single inch of land. Put yourself in the archie's shoes: Would YOU want to be involved in those battles of semantics ? OF COURSE NOT. So much easier for them to just make is simple and say "no to all".
Which is exactly why I never ask archies silly questions. If the day came where I decided to have them all love and adore me (and "give me permission" for all the sites I hunt), is the day I would just give up. I bet there's not a site on earth (on land or sea) that you couldn't find an archie somewhere to bristle at the notion of md'ing . So are you really going to knock yourself silly hunting them all down and appeasing them all ?
)
