The Paragon of Metal Detecting -Insurance Conditions

This report is in response to the APPAG inquiry into metal detecting, issued in April 2024.
There is a wealth of detecting experience across the NCMD Committee and Board of
Trustees, many of us have been metal detecting for more than 25 years, so we were
extremely surprised at the comments suggesting that the relationship between
archaeologists and detectorists has improved significantly over that time.
We would beg to differ and have highlighted a number of key points that we feel clearly
demonstrates the reasons for this view.

We would also like to make you aware that we have had a flood of calls and emails from
across our 38,000 membership that mirror this view and in particular, the consensus is one
of concern that this inquiry is extremely one sided and that the detecting community is not
being fairly represented in it.

Telling us that everything is fine, and that the inquiry is in our best interests doesn’t make it
so, and the suspicion that abounds tells its own story.

In general, detectorists feel that we are treated with a level of contempt by a large section
of the archaeological community, particularly the hierarchy, and there is little or no
acknowledgement of the significant contribution that we have made to the archaeological
record over the past 40 years.

Academics sing the praises of the PAS database, yet the vast majority of the 1.7 million
finds have come from detectorists and many hundreds of treasure items have added to the
displays of museums across the country, including items of National and International
significance, yet still detectorists are still branded as the bad guys.

The aim of this report is to reflect a much clearer picture from both sides.