Tom,
One of the points I had brought up in the thread before walking away was, most detectorists finds are in parks, sports fields, school yards, beaches and farmers fields where the soil has been landscaped, filled, tilled, etc, so the strata of the finds are completely out of context on a historical basis insofar as archeological methods are concerned.
Regards + HH
Bill
Yup. And do you *really* think the British system of trove laws is going to change those people's mindsets ? Of course not.
And BTW: logic like yours makes total sense to us md'rs . But it still doesn't fly with them. I mean, you'd think storm erosion sand (that has gone in and out with seasonal sand movement) has utterly no "context". Eg.: clad and old coins can be at the exact same depth when mother nature distributes them in various patterns. But it still doesn't fly with archies.
And humorously, there's even been some archies quoted that new coins (clad) ALSO "shouldn't be an exception either". The rational cited is this: "That even though it's not an artifact or cultural object
NOW, yet by the md'r taking the object now, is depriving future generation's archaeologists (500 or 1000 yrs. from now), the opportunity to learn about their past"
In any case, put yourself in the fed. or state archie's mindset: Even if it were true that they could relax their standards (if they "saw the light of your logic about clad, about already-disturbed soil, etc....): Let's be perfectly honest: You know what would happen next is, that md'rs would be "forever pushing the envelope" to get as close to history and old stuff as they can. It would forever be a battle of semantics over exactly what spot is historic and undisturbed, versus innocuous, modern, and disturbed. And they simply CAN'T be bogged down in silly imaginary lines drawn throughout all different parks, etc.... So guess what the easy solution is? To simply say "no to all". Presto, problem solved.
And no, trove laws solve none of this.