Encouraging responsible metal detecting

close
more_vert
nigelswift N
nigelswift Aug 3, 2005 07:23:34
Replying to Cheshireman

"If you could show me hard evidence that those figures are correct, and not based on assumption, I will be standing alongside you, fighting the good fight on this."

Well it's hard to provide evidence for that which is, by the nature of how it's defined, concealed!

Can't you fight the good fight on the basis that there's probably "a lot"?

If you really need stats, such as they are, but with unavoidable assumptions built in, you could take two sets of figures from PAS, last year -

Average number of finds by "reporters" - 17.
Multiply by number of non-reporters (choose your figure).
Caveat on this calc: a posting on ukdetectornet: "I'd have thought the average detectorist found 17 in a week, not a year".

Or, you could go "local". PAS figures: last year in Norfolk, 162 detectorists reported nearly 19,000 finds. Project that onto your number of non-reporters and you could cover a number of football pitches with finds that have gone walkies.

IMO opinion, the first calc you do will be too low and the second will be vastly too high (distorted by someone bringing in their whole collection?)

But still, doesn't this all suggest "an awful lot" is a fair estimate?

C Cheshireman
Cheshireman Aug 3, 2005 09:17:02
Replying to nigelswift

Valid point. Still an estimate though, which leads to assuming. Something I have been taught (and learned from experience) never to do - ASS U or ME.

I will look into this deeper. Where can I find those quotes you mentioned?

B BrigantesNation
BrigantesNation Aug 3, 2005 10:24:45
Replying to nigelswift

I agree Nigel, I was recently shown a fieldwalkers collection - some 1,000 flints, the walker told me that his ambition was to have his own Thornborough Axe - I wonder how many are already in private hands?

V venicone
venicone Aug 3, 2005 10:39:46
Replying to nigelswift

NIgel posted "IMO opinion, the first calc you do will be too low and the second will be vastly too high (distorted by someone bringing in their whole collection?)"

17 too low? I personally do not think that can be said across the board. I know of some detectorists who certainly find more recordable items than that. I also know of detectorists who find much less recordable items than that depending on their location - from zero finds which are deemed recordable to someone like myself who in nearly a year have had 5 items published on PAS with another 3 to be recorded shortly.

Norfolk has historically had a vast number of recorders who worked with the local units. The largest number of detectorists recording with PAS are in the County -The East region account for a third of total finds recorded.

There is no reliable way of calculating any figures for detectorists who do not record nor indeed the number of recordable finds they make. You are not talking apples and apples.