My grandfathers and great grandfathers were miners. In fact all my past familly were working In the slate and coal industry. And I do not think they were exploited any more than workers in a cotton factory or someone working on a farm at that particular period in time. Of course a lying doctor said that 'slate dust is benificial to ones health'. And some dammed inspector said they lived on 'tea'. But they were perhaps true socialists who helped one another in life. I think it is important to keep the material historical artifacts as well as the verbal history of mining. If it had not happened I would not be here today typing this ### 😉

---

And I do not think they were exploited any more than workers in a cotton factory or someone working on a farm at that particular period in time. 😉

Well I could chuck in some statistics for Cornwall in the 19th century which certainly would not agree with that. A bit late though. I agree it's very important to keep the material artifacts but the key question is why "in situ". We don't leave Bronze Age artifacts where found. Otherwise they would be on e-bay. Why do I get the feeling I'm persona non grata on this subject. :angel:

---

artifacts seam to dissapear even whilst mines are working i think🔗Aberllefenni-Slate-Mine-User-Album-Image-013[linkphoto]Aberllefenni-Slate-Mine-User-Album-Image-013[/linkphoto][/link] this whent missing after my photo, and acusations published as to who took it, but things still disapear. Shurley if at least their is some record of these things we are all hellping preserve the artifacts in some way, even if some b*****d has stolen them.
If we can at least if as far as possible can leave artifacts within the locations for other people to see and find to show that methods and trades of miners hard work and lifestile, showing the contexct the better it is for all of us.

---

So why not something like this.
http://www.kingedwardmine.co.uk/ 

The mines themselves and the various detailed history is testomany enough, I would have thought. And lest not forget the cemetries.

---

I met a bloke from ????? a few weeks ago on the track to M### he was interested in its history etc.he said his interest was electrical contacts (swiches) and he had taken some from the ruined quarry buildings.

I admit I have got a bit of problem with people removing things that are physically attached to the buildings...

The NAHMO guidelines suggest that removal of artefacts is acceptable if they are going to be lost for ever due to permanent inaccessibility, but that they should be left in situ if they are not a risk of being 'lost'.

Yet the majority of artefact loss comes from either vandalism or removal by third parties, with the strong possibility that they'll end up on eBay, which seems to be very prevalent in the States. Thus, as far as I can see, there is a rather grey area where removal to prevent removal by others could be considered acceptable - but of course that depends hugely on the removal by who and the removal to where...

---

Exactly, there are items being removed from buildings and taken all over the country.
But there are people we all know of who have taken items for safe keeping as they know otherwise they would be removed and perhaps land in a place 150 miles away. Or thrown in a scrap skip.
Perhaps in about 5 to 10 years when the dust has settled we should perhaps ask verbaly and on the web if some items can be revealed. And they could be catalouged etc. I am talking about recently closed mines here, and not long closed ones.
I think it is important here to understand that these items belonged to the quarry/mine owners who don't take an interest in historical relics.

---

but the key question is why "in situ".

Why? Because in case you havn't realised, this is a website for mine exploraration. The main reason this site was built, and the reason this site exists, is because most of the people on here explore mines, to look at what remains.

What would be the point in this hobby, and this website, if there was nothing left in the mines to look at?

but the key question is why "in situ".

Why? Because in case you havn't realised, this is a website for mine exploraration. The main reason this site was built, and the reason this site exists, is because most of the people on here explore mines, to look at what remains.

What would be the point in this hobby, and this website, if there was nothing left in the mines to look at?

I do realise the raison d'etre of the site.

"AditNow is an information sharing resource and discussion forum for the mine exploration community as well as industrial archaeologists, researchers, historians and anybody with an interest in mine exploration or mining history. The site provides a searchable database of mines and quarries from across the UK, comprehensive information and thousands of mining photographs and documents."

And I will take this opportunity of saying I believe the members achieve this aim brilliantly. If I have given the impression that I think all artifacts should be removed and mines stripped then I have expressed myself very poorly. I think in general artifacts should be left well alone but as others have mentioned there does exist a grey area. If an artifact of historical interest is under threat either by the vagaries of nature or, probably more importantly, of the human race, then perhaps it may be better to remove, renovate if necessary, and place it in a mine, town or county museum. That way at least the mining history will be preserved. I'm still thinking about the concept of removing something to stop it being removed!

---

If an artifact of historical interest is under threat either by the vagaries of nature or, probably more importantly, of the human race, then perhaps it may be better to remove, renovate if necessary, and place it in a mine, town or county museum. That way at least the mining history will be preserved. I'm still thinking about the concept of removing something to stop it being removed!

Absolutely agree with this. In fact I would go further and add that it unrealistic and naive to think that any artifact will be left in situ and photographed by myriads of explorers and yet never touched or stolen and here is an example :
http://www.aditnow.co.uk/community/viewtopic.aspx?t=848 

---

I think in general artifacts should be left well alone but as others have mentioned there does exist a grey area. If an artifact of historical interest is under threat either by the vagaries of nature or, probably more importantly, of the human race, then perhaps it may be better to remove, renovate if necessary, and place it in a mine, town or county museum. That way at least the mining history will be preserved. I'm still thinking about the concept of removing something to stop it being removed!

Well why the questioning whether the artifacts should be "in situ" in your previous post?

I agree it's very important to keep the material artifacts but the key question is why "in situ".

Is that another complete change of opinion, whithin 24 hours, which I *should* have known about?

I think in general artifacts should be left well alone but as others have mentioned there does exist a grey area. If an artifact of historical interest is under threat either by the vagaries of nature or, probably more importantly, of the human race, then perhaps it may be better to remove, renovate if necessary, and place it in a mine, town or county museum. That way at least the mining history will be preserved. I'm still thinking about the concept of removing something to stop it being removed!

Well why the questioning whether the artifacts should be "in situ" in your previous post?

I agree it's very important to keep the material artifacts but the key question is why "in situ".

Is that another complete change of opinion, whithin 24 hours, which I *should* have known about?

Not really. I'll admit to having badly worded the remark. It really would have been better to say 'why always in situ' as I've just attempted to explain.

---

It really would have been better to say 'why always in situ' as I've just attempted to explain.

Good-oh.

But there are people we all know of who have taken items for safe keeping as they know otherwise they would be removed and perhaps land in a place 150 miles away. Or thrown in a scrap skip.

Or even worse, if an important piece of mining history has made it to "preservation", only then to end up in a scrap skip. Look what happened at Gloddfa Ganol, and what continues to happen not too far from there.

I am talking about recently closed mines here, and not long closed ones.

Precisely, this is what sets this discussion apart from recent "theft of artifacts" threads, it is a very different case to long closed mines in which there is, for example, a 100 year old shovel and miners boot, which is in no danger because it is difficult to get to and rarely seen.

One area no one has mentioned is that of mineral collectors and damage they cause. I was astounded at the damage done in carrs level where a large mineral sample was smashed out of the roof. I really question why that was neccessary other than for profit .

The varous mineral colecting societies seem able to justify removing samples but other than for scientific research I fail to see why. These things really should be left for future generations

Mike

There was a thread on mineral collectors,
http://www.aditnow.co.uk/community/viewtopic.aspx?t=787&pid=1&txtSearch=mineral+collector&lblnWhere=all&lblnMatch=all 
I can't remember what conclusion it came to, but as there are mineral collectors on this site, we have to put up with them or they get upset and that's not allowed.

One area no one has mentioned is that of mineral collectors and damage they cause. I was astounded at the damage done in carrs level where a large mineral sample was smashed out of the roof. I really question why that was neccessary other than for profit .

The varous mineral colecting societies seem able to justify removing samples but other than for scientific research I fail to see why. These things really should be left for future generations

Mike

You should see the damage caused in Carrock Mine by succesive mineral collectors chipping away at a hopper until it collapsed nad has now dammed the level.
There seems to be a general ethos amongst mineral collectors that their little specimen doesn't cause any harm and anyway the mines were dug to extract these things in the 1st place.
Mineral collecting causes massive destruction for a tiny amount of personal gain, whats more the damage is deliberated and necessary to get their prized specimen.

Standby for incoming protests of how they are all innocent and misjudged.....

Ok, before this gets philosophical, I will state my opinion, targetting no one in particular.

I don't like mineral collectors, they damage mines. In the same way as I don't like people who steal or damage artifacts in mines where they are safe.

to be honest a large number of people who are interested in mines are interested in the mines' general geology, in fact it's sometimes the only reason; and if doing any kind of geological resurch - what better place to get mineral samples from? Provided of course it doesn't actually make a significant difference to the mine.

On the subject of artifact movement - surely it can be excused if the mine is about to collapse, in which case it should be moved to a different section of the mine (though not a different mine)

---

to be honest a large number of people who are interested in mines are interested in the mines' general geology, in fact it's sometimes the only reason; and if doing any kind of geological resurch - what better place to get mineral samples from? Provided of course it doesn't actually make a significant difference to the mine.

That is the problem though in a lot of cases it does cause a lot of damage! Also, a lot is not removed for research but for selling on ebay and other venues.

Yes I agree, though I'd consider the taking of items for sale a different matter, as it's not for personal interest or scientific purposes - but just to make money!

---

are we going to start the rant about mineral collectors being the worst breed on the warth. as some of you may know i am a mineral collector my self and i have seen the damage caused by some but most collectors you can hardly tell where they have been. also there are quite a few of us on this site. i have seen damage in mines that has not been caused by people looking for minerals but by explorers wanting to get to some where or wanting to look over there so its not just us that cause the damage and no we dont all go out looking at the crystals and see £££ i hardly sell any thing

---