Detectorists are saying they must be consulted on forthcoming reforms to the Treasure Act and Detecting Code, But why? Why should those who take from the resource advise on conserving it? Isn’t that what caused the current guidelines to be in need of revision? Shouldn’t the rules be made by those who have only Society’s interest in mind? The United Arab Emirates have just signalled so:
> “Antiquities are to be identified as items of national interest and importance and the ownership of both portable and non-portable items are for the nation regardless of who has found it”
> “Anyone in possession of an antiquity who does not properly register it, or who takes action regarding the antiquities without a permit, will face a minimum of two years in jail and/or a fine between £10,300 and £41,200″.
No “negotiating” the rules with artefact hunters there! Only Britain does that. The rest of the world knows that allowing artefact hunters to influence the rules is about as logical as asking the Trump boys to draft rules on big game hunting!
Update 11/12/2017 Several metal detectorists have criticised this article on the grounds that because the United Arab Emirates has many policies which are unacceptable, its policy of regulating metal detecting in the interest of heritage protection must be wrong!!!! 😉
__________________________________________
The Heritage Journal 
3 comments
Comments feed for this article
10/12/2017 at 17:55
John Schmidt
Using the UAE as an example of society’s best interests is probably the most laughable logic I have ever seen written.
10/12/2017 at 18:50
heritageaction
Umm, but how could you not get it? That was the point of the article! If the UAE has better provision for avoiding the depredations of metal detecting how awful are Britain’s provisions? Are you an American detectorist perchance?
11/12/2017 at 03:59
Paul Barford (@PortantIssues)
I think this is another instance that proves the general observable truth, Americans ‘do not do irony’.
The UAE is now one of Trump’s key allies in MENA.