Preamble:
The purpose of this document is to propose common sense and innovative solutions in order to limit the anarchic use of metal detectors, magnets, and other materials, taking into account the different parts impacted by the use of these materials, and in optics to draw all the advantages while avoiding the disadvantages. It is therefore important and urgent to work on a responsible and reasoned use and to move towards a prospection of scientific surface, in collaboration with the archaeological services of all France. This document is the culmination of reflections by several users of metal detectors and archaeologists, aware of the urgency of finding a solution to this archaeological disaster. .
Why today a Collaborative Contract?
Every day, on social media, we see hundreds of objects, coins, and ancient artifacts invading private and non-private groups, discovered most of the time with metal detectors. Some objects, too few, are declared to the regional Drac or in a town hall, but this approach remains very little carried out today. Thousands of objects, thousands of information are disappearing for the scientific community.
Each of us has seen for many years that, depending on the archaeological potential of certain land being developed, it will never be excavated and will be delivered to the civil engineering of our ever-expanding society. This observation leads us to extrapolate this state of affairs in many areas where it seems that archaeological furniture is in a deterioration phase, or even much more serious, being in a phase of nonexistence, inexistence in the sense that they will never be found. , never identified, never studied before destruction, partial or total destruction, which is the same thing since not knowing that they existed, they will never exist.
Can we and on what argument justify the disappearance of an object, however insignificant it may be, on the simple fact that they are not part of a site justifying a search or that they do not fit into a particular context ?
We must also take into account the problem of latest generation agricultural machinery. In fact, many more efficient machines have been on the market for a few years, which have resulted in much deeper plowing than before. These plows irretrievably bring up protected objects until now, and brought to light by the detectorists. Certain places detected 20 years or more, and which had given interesting discoveries, ironed with more reliable detection devices also, show discoveries in large numbers on abandoned places long before lack of finds.
It is also necessary to take into account the destructive effect of new machines, such as gyro-crushers and subsoilers, which reduce in small fragments the stones and flint of certain regions of France, and which suddenly, also reduce the least artefacts or soil objects. All these elements, metallic or not, fossils, fragments of pottery, tiles and others, or simply flint cut by our ancestors, are irretrievably lost since reduced to dust. Even the smallest objects are cut, crushed, crushed, twisted, shredded. On a French scale, the loss is absolutely huge.
Taking into account the different chemical elements used by the agricultural world does not help matters either. Agents used in certain regions favor the destruction of certain metallic objects. Indeed, identical coins found in the same place more than 20 years apart, show chemical destruction of certain metals. Coins in superb condition when found in the 80s become almost illegible, not to say completely smooth, when they are updated today.
Until now, and with a few exceptions, an administrative ban or non-authorization has made cooperation between archaeologists and prospectors difficult in order to recover this archaeological information because it creates a deleterious climate of mistrust and mistrust not conducive to dialogue. The CICC is therefore indeed to create a climate of trust between the two parties.
All the elements highlighted above, show us the urgency and the importance of developing an effective collaboration between the prospectors whoever they are and the Dracs of our regions, in order to avoid this anarchic and often uncontrollable detection devices.
The Ministry of Culture and heritage safeguarding associations having no means of monitoring the entire national territory, must consider a "cordial understanding" instead of a pseudo repression for lack of human resources which only block statements and scientific knowledge related to certain exceptional discoveries. In addition, given the proliferation of objects posted online, it is obvious that many objects deserve to be declared. There are examples every day on facebook groups but also on the net and in particular on auction sites such as Ebay and others…
What does French law tell us?
However the texts are quite clear, only the text is aimed at a research whose effect is archaeological, numismatic, historical, which is the free use of a metal detector was limited to the search for an object or lost jewelry, pipes, family property, agricultural tool, etc. It falls to justice, using a body of evidence to assess whether the accused was engaged in a search for an object really lost, loaded by its legal owner to find it.
Sometimes, a few cases of prospectors taken from archaeological sites, or selling rare and historic objects, make the headlines. Some judgments circulate on social networks and are not necessarily in line with the law. Indeed, the judgment often interprets, in one direction or the other, these laws which would merit a modern and simpler recasting, like certain other European countries.
Update on the progress of certain European countries:
In 2011, 970 discoveries were declared in Great Britain, and 864 were recognized as treasure after expertise. To date fortuitous discoveries represent 1.7% of the total, archaeological excavations represent 3.4%, while discoveries made by prospectors are 92.7% of the total, over an area 4 times smaller than France. The English Treasure act is an example.
Belgium recently set up a registration system and a declaration obligation. We do not have enough hindsight currently, but it has shown from the start a significant number of joint operations and collaboration, which seems to be clearly increasing from year to year.
Update on what is done in France to date:
To date, collaboration between archaeologists and udms remains on the fringes of what is practiced. Very few associations work and advocate this responsible detection, such as Fnudem (national federation of users of metal detectors) which is the only entity to have interesting dialogues but without results, with the Ministry of Culture.
Many associations carry out these detection activities under the cover of pollution control. This ecological practice, well seen by the general public, all like the use of magnets for depollution in rivers, also shows us the current limit of the understanding of the laws, but also and above all a certain ambiguity, left by the legislator in 1989. These different depollution practices, which in form remain interesting to study, also show the limit, since almost nothing that is found in depollution is declared. Worse still, there is absolutely no information collected on certain objects that are discovered during each depollution campaign. However,the reality of using a metal detector is that the finds of a prospector consist of 70 to 90% of polluting metal waste. Based on this observation, many of them value for ecological purposes, this use of metal detectors.
Finally, note also, some unscrupulous associations, who do not hesitate, under the guise of depollution or even rallies, to seek without any rules, purely archaeological objects. However, depollution remains for certain places an interesting and ecological solution which could be implemented, subject to certain rules or protocols which could be implemented.
There are also associations, which despite being named by the prefecture, are completely left to their own devices, and too often ill-informed or who follow false information, or articles of law by easy to find and often incomprehensible for the layman. Their outings, sometimes in groups, are not supervised, often even without the owner's authorization, and they even organize wild rallies without any authorization.
A significant part of the udms prospect in their corner without being known and often without saying anything to anyone. There are two very distinct and opposite categories. First of all, there are those who love history and immerse themselves in detection, a way for them to give life to a passion, most of the time without ulterior motives. Then there are those who do this without any rules, just for the mercantile side, that is to say the outright sale of archaeological or historical objects. Often, this category of plunderer does not hesitate to break any rule, detection at night, on an archaeological site in the process of excavation or not, the aim being only resale.
The interest of shops and boutiques:
For many years, very few stores or boutiques have wanted to help prospectors by explaining the law. In fact, the sale of metal detectors is directly linked to the discovery of lost treasures and coins. The imaginary and the dream of the treasure is even shown in some stores with display cases showing antique objects. A clear explanation of the law and the obligations would mean a forced fall in turnover, and competition is moreover clearly visible between different brands, different stores and others. To date, there has been no frank and massive aid from certain traders. In addition, some cases with the justice system taint some of them, following the discovery of objects and artefacts not declared following searches by the State services.
Proposal of the CCPI project:
The collaborative inventory prospecting contract is proposed by volunteers, in partnership with archaeologists, aware of the mass of information and artefacts of all kinds that disappear every day from France, in the face of anarchic use and uncontrolled by a majority of uds. This contract could result in a license (proposal), the details of which could be discussed..
This contract is only a framework for detection under several actions, and a fight against illegal detection and looting. This framework has several components:
1st part: educational action: This is a mandatory training and information part, which could be set up by an association or federation. This includes various themes of awareness and collective awareness on the protection of heritage (declaration, why, how, the law, information on the drac, contacts, risks and dangers, etc.)
2nd part: fight against illegal detection: This is to emphasize the need to report, alert and protect heritage, and highlight collaboration. Training on this subject will be compulsory in order to clearly distinguish the prospector from the looter in violation. Looting control documentation should be available everywhere, and information could be considered on certain occasions.
3rd part: the supervision of the udm by the CCPI and the Drac, with the intermediary of an association or federation type structure or another entity, would make it possible to make the link between the different actors. However, once registered, this contract will link the udm to certain rules of common sense and ethics, making it possible to frame this so-called leisure detection, which will quite naturally become a reasoned, supervised and responsible detection.
These rules can undoubtedly vary from one region to another, however the main criterion retained could be the field, which many times stirred up by agricultural crops, presents no danger of upsetting the archaeological stratigraphy. Indeed, a modern agricultural machine, turns the earth between 30 and 40 cm deep depending on the crop, generally maximum depth of a modern average detection device..
It is also essential to integrate users of metal detectors, prior to an excavation project, that is to say before the first stripping, in order to recover the maximum of objects brewed in the plowing layer.
Rules of common sense and ethics must however be edited and necessarily followed by the signatory of the CICC, such as the obligation to declare all the objects discovered, on a database specific to this effect, within a specific time after discovery, and with all the information provided (GPS coordinates, depth, photo information, size, etc.) as well as the owner's authorization and an agreement from the Drac. All these administrative obligations must also raise awareness of the imminent arrival of a large mass of information but also undoubtedly of additional information work to the profile of udms. An association that acts as an intermediary, even with many volunteers, will probably not be able to absorb, at least at the start, all the questions and requests from the udms.
The CCPI which we wish to set up in collaboration with the archaeological services, must also guarantee the declarations in time, but also guarantee a certain security for the declarant who currently is not ready to declare following the constant disinformation of social networks who encourage more to hide these discoveries to declare them and make them available to researchers and the general public.
Contribution to Archeology, History and Numismatics:
The contribution of thousands of information, collected in the field, all over France, will undoubtedly provide additional information on dozens of current issues. These contributions will also bring information on traces of human occupations from certain periods in places no doubt unknown until then. At the same time, a contribution of no tangible discovery on a given field is also important information in the globality of certain studies.
Thousands of coins discovered every year, also provide invaluable information to museums, researchers and numismatists, as well as the place of discovery of certain coins which could specify the limits of exchange of certain coins at certain times.
Knowledge of currencies, all like some other archaeological remains, is constantly evolving, and it is now important to make the contribution of serious prospectors before all this information is lost.
Limitation of the use of metal detectors:
Knowing that all of the land making up the national territory has been continuously altered by nature (burrowing animals, vegetation, frost, thaw, movement by mudslides, etc.) or for a significant part by human activity (plowing, stump removal, drainage, earthworks, etc.), there is a layer on the surface without stratigraphy, which may contain archaeological elements which for the vast majority if not all will be destroyed before to know about its existence.
Other means of inventory prospecting:
It is also important to associate prospectors without materials, such as fossil researchers, or flint researchers who do visual prospecting, and who are not necessarily trained, or made aware of the discoveries metallic artifacts.
Some meteorite researchers sometimes use metal detectors, in order to be able to locate certain ferrous stones coming from stars. It is also important to also include those people who are also lacking in information on the subject and who are often confronted with the discovery of archaeological objects.
Declarations of discovered objects:
The limit of notion of object interesting art, history and archeology, requires without any doubt, information for the benefit of udms, all like the need also to declare the objects found and which are not metallic (bones or debris, ceramics and various shards, glass debris, tiles and elements of masonry, etc ...).
This information must be precise, even if we know that among some udms which practice this "leisure" for a long time, some are true researchers or specialists in precise fields.
To date, the number of declarations remains very low, and it is important as demonstrated above, that information is lost forever and it is therefore more than urgent to reverse the trend. However, it will absolutely be necessary to do joint communication to encourage reporting. Indeed, many udms remain skeptical about the usefulness of the declaration, but also of the consequences of a declaration. The fear of a step against them following a declaration shows the disinformation made for years, but also the false information. This is also why a system like the CCPI, giving all the guarantees of declarations without problem must be set up.
The future of discoveries:
In view of the current law, in principle, the object discovered belongs to the owner of the land. It seems obvious, that on a discovery card, the destination of the object must be as precise as possible. Indeed, for a later study, an object must be able to be communicated quickly and without the slightest error to the archaeological service which will request it.
Object preemption must also be provided. Indeed, in the event that an exceptional object is declared, and the State requests preemption, this formality must be able to be done without the slightest problem. It is therefore important to take this possibility into account from the start of the establishment of the CICC.
The transfer or follow-up of objects after the end of the prospecting activity should not pose any problem either. It is imperative that the information files at the time of the cessation of this activity for whatever reason, be available to the Drac that gave the authorizations, and that the objects held are also given. The sale of these objects and information must be prohibited.
Other suggestions:
Different files and different proposals have already been communicated with the archeology sub-directorate, and different files have been given in the past, without any action being taken. Fnudem has worked in this direction for many years, but without any feedback from the Ministry, these different actors give up. However, a proposal for a license had been transmitted after numerous discussions, and if it had been tested, could have given us information in return on the direction to take. Supervision of this leisure detection practice was the aim, faced with the anarchic phenomenon of detection and sources of looting, a concern shared by the members of the Ministry of Culture.
Conclusions :
This project can be implemented on a trial basis for a given period, and on one or more given surface, which would be test departments. If this project is a success, and we are certain that it will be, it must be possible to extend it more widely and under the same conditions, or even improved. This is the best solution to reduce non-declaration, and probably to lower sales of devices, and it is indeed intelligent cooperation. It is certain that a total ban is impossible and it would undoubtedly increase an increase in wild and illegal searches.
The purpose of this document is to propose common sense and innovative solutions in order to limit the anarchic use of metal detectors, magnets, and other materials, taking into account the different parts impacted by the use of these materials, and in optics to draw all the advantages while avoiding the disadvantages. It is therefore important and urgent to work on a responsible and reasoned use and to move towards a prospection of scientific surface, in collaboration with the archaeological services of all France. This document is the culmination of reflections by several users of metal detectors and archaeologists, aware of the urgency of finding a solution to this archaeological disaster. .
Why today a Collaborative Contract?
Every day, on social media, we see hundreds of objects, coins, and ancient artifacts invading private and non-private groups, discovered most of the time with metal detectors. Some objects, too few, are declared to the regional Drac or in a town hall, but this approach remains very little carried out today. Thousands of objects, thousands of information are disappearing for the scientific community.
Each of us has seen for many years that, depending on the archaeological potential of certain land being developed, it will never be excavated and will be delivered to the civil engineering of our ever-expanding society. This observation leads us to extrapolate this state of affairs in many areas where it seems that archaeological furniture is in a deterioration phase, or even much more serious, being in a phase of nonexistence, inexistence in the sense that they will never be found. , never identified, never studied before destruction, partial or total destruction, which is the same thing since not knowing that they existed, they will never exist.
Can we and on what argument justify the disappearance of an object, however insignificant it may be, on the simple fact that they are not part of a site justifying a search or that they do not fit into a particular context ?
We must also take into account the problem of latest generation agricultural machinery. In fact, many more efficient machines have been on the market for a few years, which have resulted in much deeper plowing than before. These plows irretrievably bring up protected objects until now, and brought to light by the detectorists. Certain places detected 20 years or more, and which had given interesting discoveries, ironed with more reliable detection devices also, show discoveries in large numbers on abandoned places long before lack of finds.
It is also necessary to take into account the destructive effect of new machines, such as gyro-crushers and subsoilers, which reduce in small fragments the stones and flint of certain regions of France, and which suddenly, also reduce the least artefacts or soil objects. All these elements, metallic or not, fossils, fragments of pottery, tiles and others, or simply flint cut by our ancestors, are irretrievably lost since reduced to dust. Even the smallest objects are cut, crushed, crushed, twisted, shredded. On a French scale, the loss is absolutely huge.
Taking into account the different chemical elements used by the agricultural world does not help matters either. Agents used in certain regions favor the destruction of certain metallic objects. Indeed, identical coins found in the same place more than 20 years apart, show chemical destruction of certain metals. Coins in superb condition when found in the 80s become almost illegible, not to say completely smooth, when they are updated today.
Until now, and with a few exceptions, an administrative ban or non-authorization has made cooperation between archaeologists and prospectors difficult in order to recover this archaeological information because it creates a deleterious climate of mistrust and mistrust not conducive to dialogue. The CICC is therefore indeed to create a climate of trust between the two parties.
All the elements highlighted above, show us the urgency and the importance of developing an effective collaboration between the prospectors whoever they are and the Dracs of our regions, in order to avoid this anarchic and often uncontrollable detection devices.
The Ministry of Culture and heritage safeguarding associations having no means of monitoring the entire national territory, must consider a "cordial understanding" instead of a pseudo repression for lack of human resources which only block statements and scientific knowledge related to certain exceptional discoveries. In addition, given the proliferation of objects posted online, it is obvious that many objects deserve to be declared. There are examples every day on facebook groups but also on the net and in particular on auction sites such as Ebay and others…
What does French law tell us?
However the texts are quite clear, only the text is aimed at a research whose effect is archaeological, numismatic, historical, which is the free use of a metal detector was limited to the search for an object or lost jewelry, pipes, family property, agricultural tool, etc. It falls to justice, using a body of evidence to assess whether the accused was engaged in a search for an object really lost, loaded by its legal owner to find it.
Sometimes, a few cases of prospectors taken from archaeological sites, or selling rare and historic objects, make the headlines. Some judgments circulate on social networks and are not necessarily in line with the law. Indeed, the judgment often interprets, in one direction or the other, these laws which would merit a modern and simpler recasting, like certain other European countries.
Update on the progress of certain European countries:
In 2011, 970 discoveries were declared in Great Britain, and 864 were recognized as treasure after expertise. To date fortuitous discoveries represent 1.7% of the total, archaeological excavations represent 3.4%, while discoveries made by prospectors are 92.7% of the total, over an area 4 times smaller than France. The English Treasure act is an example.
Belgium recently set up a registration system and a declaration obligation. We do not have enough hindsight currently, but it has shown from the start a significant number of joint operations and collaboration, which seems to be clearly increasing from year to year.
Update on what is done in France to date:
To date, collaboration between archaeologists and udms remains on the fringes of what is practiced. Very few associations work and advocate this responsible detection, such as Fnudem (national federation of users of metal detectors) which is the only entity to have interesting dialogues but without results, with the Ministry of Culture.
Many associations carry out these detection activities under the cover of pollution control. This ecological practice, well seen by the general public, all like the use of magnets for depollution in rivers, also shows us the current limit of the understanding of the laws, but also and above all a certain ambiguity, left by the legislator in 1989. These different depollution practices, which in form remain interesting to study, also show the limit, since almost nothing that is found in depollution is declared. Worse still, there is absolutely no information collected on certain objects that are discovered during each depollution campaign. However,the reality of using a metal detector is that the finds of a prospector consist of 70 to 90% of polluting metal waste. Based on this observation, many of them value for ecological purposes, this use of metal detectors.
Finally, note also, some unscrupulous associations, who do not hesitate, under the guise of depollution or even rallies, to seek without any rules, purely archaeological objects. However, depollution remains for certain places an interesting and ecological solution which could be implemented, subject to certain rules or protocols which could be implemented.
There are also associations, which despite being named by the prefecture, are completely left to their own devices, and too often ill-informed or who follow false information, or articles of law by easy to find and often incomprehensible for the layman. Their outings, sometimes in groups, are not supervised, often even without the owner's authorization, and they even organize wild rallies without any authorization.
A significant part of the udms prospect in their corner without being known and often without saying anything to anyone. There are two very distinct and opposite categories. First of all, there are those who love history and immerse themselves in detection, a way for them to give life to a passion, most of the time without ulterior motives. Then there are those who do this without any rules, just for the mercantile side, that is to say the outright sale of archaeological or historical objects. Often, this category of plunderer does not hesitate to break any rule, detection at night, on an archaeological site in the process of excavation or not, the aim being only resale.
The interest of shops and boutiques:
For many years, very few stores or boutiques have wanted to help prospectors by explaining the law. In fact, the sale of metal detectors is directly linked to the discovery of lost treasures and coins. The imaginary and the dream of the treasure is even shown in some stores with display cases showing antique objects. A clear explanation of the law and the obligations would mean a forced fall in turnover, and competition is moreover clearly visible between different brands, different stores and others. To date, there has been no frank and massive aid from certain traders. In addition, some cases with the justice system taint some of them, following the discovery of objects and artefacts not declared following searches by the State services.
Proposal of the CCPI project:
The collaborative inventory prospecting contract is proposed by volunteers, in partnership with archaeologists, aware of the mass of information and artefacts of all kinds that disappear every day from France, in the face of anarchic use and uncontrolled by a majority of uds. This contract could result in a license (proposal), the details of which could be discussed..
This contract is only a framework for detection under several actions, and a fight against illegal detection and looting. This framework has several components:
1st part: educational action: This is a mandatory training and information part, which could be set up by an association or federation. This includes various themes of awareness and collective awareness on the protection of heritage (declaration, why, how, the law, information on the drac, contacts, risks and dangers, etc.)
2nd part: fight against illegal detection: This is to emphasize the need to report, alert and protect heritage, and highlight collaboration. Training on this subject will be compulsory in order to clearly distinguish the prospector from the looter in violation. Looting control documentation should be available everywhere, and information could be considered on certain occasions.
3rd part: the supervision of the udm by the CCPI and the Drac, with the intermediary of an association or federation type structure or another entity, would make it possible to make the link between the different actors. However, once registered, this contract will link the udm to certain rules of common sense and ethics, making it possible to frame this so-called leisure detection, which will quite naturally become a reasoned, supervised and responsible detection.
These rules can undoubtedly vary from one region to another, however the main criterion retained could be the field, which many times stirred up by agricultural crops, presents no danger of upsetting the archaeological stratigraphy. Indeed, a modern agricultural machine, turns the earth between 30 and 40 cm deep depending on the crop, generally maximum depth of a modern average detection device..
It is also essential to integrate users of metal detectors, prior to an excavation project, that is to say before the first stripping, in order to recover the maximum of objects brewed in the plowing layer.
Rules of common sense and ethics must however be edited and necessarily followed by the signatory of the CICC, such as the obligation to declare all the objects discovered, on a database specific to this effect, within a specific time after discovery, and with all the information provided (GPS coordinates, depth, photo information, size, etc.) as well as the owner's authorization and an agreement from the Drac. All these administrative obligations must also raise awareness of the imminent arrival of a large mass of information but also undoubtedly of additional information work to the profile of udms. An association that acts as an intermediary, even with many volunteers, will probably not be able to absorb, at least at the start, all the questions and requests from the udms.
The CCPI which we wish to set up in collaboration with the archaeological services, must also guarantee the declarations in time, but also guarantee a certain security for the declarant who currently is not ready to declare following the constant disinformation of social networks who encourage more to hide these discoveries to declare them and make them available to researchers and the general public.
Contribution to Archeology, History and Numismatics:
The contribution of thousands of information, collected in the field, all over France, will undoubtedly provide additional information on dozens of current issues. These contributions will also bring information on traces of human occupations from certain periods in places no doubt unknown until then. At the same time, a contribution of no tangible discovery on a given field is also important information in the globality of certain studies.
Thousands of coins discovered every year, also provide invaluable information to museums, researchers and numismatists, as well as the place of discovery of certain coins which could specify the limits of exchange of certain coins at certain times.
Knowledge of currencies, all like some other archaeological remains, is constantly evolving, and it is now important to make the contribution of serious prospectors before all this information is lost.
Limitation of the use of metal detectors:
Knowing that all of the land making up the national territory has been continuously altered by nature (burrowing animals, vegetation, frost, thaw, movement by mudslides, etc.) or for a significant part by human activity (plowing, stump removal, drainage, earthworks, etc.), there is a layer on the surface without stratigraphy, which may contain archaeological elements which for the vast majority if not all will be destroyed before to know about its existence.
Other means of inventory prospecting:
It is also important to associate prospectors without materials, such as fossil researchers, or flint researchers who do visual prospecting, and who are not necessarily trained, or made aware of the discoveries metallic artifacts.
Some meteorite researchers sometimes use metal detectors, in order to be able to locate certain ferrous stones coming from stars. It is also important to also include those people who are also lacking in information on the subject and who are often confronted with the discovery of archaeological objects.
Declarations of discovered objects:
The limit of notion of object interesting art, history and archeology, requires without any doubt, information for the benefit of udms, all like the need also to declare the objects found and which are not metallic (bones or debris, ceramics and various shards, glass debris, tiles and elements of masonry, etc ...).
This information must be precise, even if we know that among some udms which practice this "leisure" for a long time, some are true researchers or specialists in precise fields.
To date, the number of declarations remains very low, and it is important as demonstrated above, that information is lost forever and it is therefore more than urgent to reverse the trend. However, it will absolutely be necessary to do joint communication to encourage reporting. Indeed, many udms remain skeptical about the usefulness of the declaration, but also of the consequences of a declaration. The fear of a step against them following a declaration shows the disinformation made for years, but also the false information. This is also why a system like the CCPI, giving all the guarantees of declarations without problem must be set up.
The future of discoveries:
In view of the current law, in principle, the object discovered belongs to the owner of the land. It seems obvious, that on a discovery card, the destination of the object must be as precise as possible. Indeed, for a later study, an object must be able to be communicated quickly and without the slightest error to the archaeological service which will request it.
Object preemption must also be provided. Indeed, in the event that an exceptional object is declared, and the State requests preemption, this formality must be able to be done without the slightest problem. It is therefore important to take this possibility into account from the start of the establishment of the CICC.
The transfer or follow-up of objects after the end of the prospecting activity should not pose any problem either. It is imperative that the information files at the time of the cessation of this activity for whatever reason, be available to the Drac that gave the authorizations, and that the objects held are also given. The sale of these objects and information must be prohibited.
Other suggestions:
Different files and different proposals have already been communicated with the archeology sub-directorate, and different files have been given in the past, without any action being taken. Fnudem has worked in this direction for many years, but without any feedback from the Ministry, these different actors give up. However, a proposal for a license had been transmitted after numerous discussions, and if it had been tested, could have given us information in return on the direction to take. Supervision of this leisure detection practice was the aim, faced with the anarchic phenomenon of detection and sources of looting, a concern shared by the members of the Ministry of Culture.
Conclusions :
This project can be implemented on a trial basis for a given period, and on one or more given surface, which would be test departments. If this project is a success, and we are certain that it will be, it must be possible to extend it more widely and under the same conditions, or even improved. This is the best solution to reduce non-declaration, and probably to lower sales of devices, and it is indeed intelligent cooperation. It is certain that a total ban is impossible and it would undoubtedly increase an increase in wild and illegal searches.