Vanoord - you are much harder to wind up than Jagman, and consequently less fun.
Sorry, I thought we were discussing the pros and cons of your occupation, not pulling each other's hair in the playground: apologies for not joining in as I was supposed to - I may have unwittingly given you more respect than was due...
Mineral extraction is a mine's purpose and one cannot state with confidence that a mine will never be reworked. In fact with soaring metal prices it is increasingly likely, and modern reworking tends to mean big opencasts.
Again, that is not justification for destruction. I can count on my fingers the number of mines which have been untopped in north Wales, yet there are probably well over a thousand of them.
As for "disturbance of historic remains" I think a sticking point here is just what one calls "distrbance". To some merely chipping a handful of rock away is "disturbance". To others nothing less than gelignite is "disturbance". For me I would avoid anything that destabilises the mine, or damages functional structures (like hoppers) or unusual features (like the walls of coffin levels). Where one is dealing with the bare rock, or rubble piles, then collecting is unlikely to matter (except, of course to the killjoys).
Oh that I believed you!
I would refer you to my earlier comment that if your impact is such that someone who is familiar with the site would not notice the difference, then that is the upper limit of what could be considered acceptable.
Anything which damages, or has the potential to damage when in conjunction with other actions, a site is also indefensible.
There must remain a distinction between the present, the past and the future. Only a fraction of abandoned mines will be reworked: the possibility that one might be worked again does not justify robbing it in the present.
See my comment about reworking earlier. Also, as I keep saying, mines eventually collapse anyway. That remains a powerful pro-collecting argument.
It does not justify destruction at an early stage, in the same way that artefact removal may only be justifiable in order to prevent
imminent destruction. Anything else is unjustified opportunism.
(i) why are photographs not good enough for the elderly, the infirm etc. not good enough?
How can one chemically analyse a photo? X-ray it, or otherwise do the tests necessary to identify the mineral(s) in question? How can one microscopically examine it for the rare and unusual?
You often see the elderly chemically analysing rock samples, do you...?
How can one effectively photograph a mineral when it is behind a foot of solid rock, or mud covered, or buried, or in an inaccessible place, and without proper lighting?
What you're trying to justify there is removing a foot's thickness of rock in order to find out what's there. Unless, of course, you can see through rock, which I doubt ;)
As far as the 'without proper lighting', you may have noticed that several people on this site are capable to taking exceptionally good photographs underground, so if you ever feel that something needs recording properly, I'm sure we can assist.
unique things are being found in British mines all the time.
That does not justify destroying something unique.
(iii) is there a requirement for the extraction of minerals from abandoned mines due to the overwhelming pressure from the general public for them to be put on display so that they can be 'enjoyed'? Or are we talking about private collectors?
There is interest from many quarters, some you might approve of (?) some not. Collectors, whether private or commercial, museums and universities seeking material for display/research/educational use, seekers of pretty sparkly things fro the mantle piece, even "healy feelies" wanting crystals for their imagined healing powers.
Again, demand does not make something justifiable. A decent proportion of London cabbies might want to see anyone without a British passport deported, but that doesn't justify it.
Better to take no chances I say, and collect what one can now while the window of opportunity presents itself.
This, I think, is called a '**** you' mentality?
but anyone who tries to interfere with my collecting will be sent off with a flea in his ear. And I have done this on several occasions when self-righteous prigs and jobsworths have strutted up to me and huffed and puffed. I am not afraid to tell these miserable killjoys to their faces exactly what I think of them, and it is not complimentary. I find it ridiculously easy to refute their stupid, ignorant and pathetic arguments, so I do so and leave them to storm off in a huff. I have no respect for these people.
The feeling is, I'm sure mutual :)
Again, you write off the arguments of people who disagree as being worthless - presumably on the basis that you are, in some way, superior.
Although I have stood my ground when confronted with killjoys, and the sad fact is their arguments do not stand up, but they cannot see that and invariably in these confrontations (which I do not seek out) they end up getting irate and going off in a huff.
The rhetoric of bravado, I'm afraid. It doesn't impress me, sorry :(
The pen (or word processor) being mightier than the chisel. Now what do I have to say to provoke a Jagman from you?
:confused:
Hello again darkness, my old friend...