This is a terrible argument. Ploughing a field where there is a site can wreck it, yes. But objects don’t go that far and often the site remains well enough below ground or visible from the air that keeping the objects in situ and reporting immediately is still best practicehttps://twitter.com/boggywood/status/1115342878283313155 …
The onus is not on them, and the law is easily found online within a 2 second google search.
-
-
And these people know the law, and they know they are breaking it. They try their hardest to circumvent it.
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Interesting little piece came to my attention today. This was from March 2018 and from a certain government minister. Anything to add?pic.twitter.com/Oq99rCsIva
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It seems that detection devices are NOT illegal, and beaches & farmland with permission from the landowner is NOT illegal. FACT
-
It’s much less definitive than what you’re saying, and the law states quite clearly that owning one is liable for a fine. And considering that there are sites of archaeological import on or near beaches. But I doubt you are not inclined to be convinced.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
& it's quite funny to see people using the same tired arguments that were used decades ago. I also said the vast majority of finds were small - not big hoards - it is frankly nonsensicle to treat a field that's been ploughed for a thousand years as