SSSIs and Preliminary Examination digs

Canda@CSCC · Post by **Canda@CSCC** » Wed 27 Dec 2006 10:41

What's the score with gaining permission to do exploratory/initial digging within SSSIs to determine whether or not a dig is a worthwhile enterprise? - is it standard procedure to obtain full digging permission (and, if so, how?: is this possible?; is it bureaucratic?; is it supported by EN or blanket denied? etc.) as though a large scale dig is intended or is it sufficient to say "We'd just like to have a look-see to find out whether or not it's a go-er?". Does legislation regarding potential archaeological discoveries affect diggers? What, exactly, is the deal with regard to doing small-scale exploratory digging within SSSIs?

Is digging thwarted or supported?

Post by **Les Williams** » Wed 27 Dec 2006 12:49

Any action within an SSSI that is listed in the schedule requires permission from EN (NE now I think)

However...

The geological SSSI's around Mendip posted because of the caves had exclusions from the PDO's which basically read ...except if this is normally carried out by cavers...

I believe that this exclusion is not listed on the EN (NE) website but was on the original documents.

If this is the case then digging would appear to be supported.

Archaeologically you should have a reasonable idea yourself, but I think the county archaeologist is likely to be involved and if it is important enough then English Heritage might want input.

Post by **David Cooke** » Thu 04 Jan 2007 12:38

LesW wrote:The geological SSSI's around Mendip posted because of the caves had exclusions from the PDO's which basically read ...except if this is normally carried out by cavers...

I believe that this exclusion is not listed on the EN (NE) website but was on the original documents.

It worries me that there is a difference between the EN website PDO's and the PDO's that were agreed when the SSSI's were created. Has EN simply made a mistake and put their standard PDO's on-line, or have they surreptitiously replaced the caver friendly PDO's?

I suspect the former since cock-up is more common than conspiracy, however I think it should be sorted out. Presumably EN wants its website to be accurate?