Aerial Archaeology in Ireland - The Heritage Council

92
‘…numerous sites in pasture marked as “de-listed” on the Record of Monuments and Places which can still
be seen as crop marks in the more recent aerial Ordnance Survey high-level vertical aerial photographic
coverage (Black and White 1995; Colour 2000)…’
The NMS note that the records for all monuments are under review, including the de-listed monuments in the context of a
reissue of the Record of Monuments and Places.
In 2004, 374 applications were dealt with through this procedure, among which 25 definite new archaeological sites or
monuments were identified largely as a result of the aerial photography. As a result, 8.6% of these cases had areas permanently
excluded; another 3% were made subject, either in part or total, to an ‘archaeological impact assessment’ (AIA); 5% were subject
to archaeological monitoring; and just under 2% were refused outright. In addition to the desk-based assessment procedure, 46
(12.3%) of the applications in 2004 referred to the Forest Service Archaeologist were also inspected in person in the field.
The inter-visibility of sites and landscape relationships are now being taken into account for archaeological complexes and areas,
with outright refusals or requirements for the maintenance of linkages or whole areas to be left open and unplanted. Often, this
can be achieved at least partly through targeted application of a 15% biodiversity/open space provision with the afforestation
grant/premium scheme. This can be used to protect individual sites and allow for the maintenance of linkages or whole areas to
be left open and unplanted (Figure 50).
Figure 50: A relatively recent forestry plantation adjacent
to a moated site on the southern slope of Brandonhill, Co.
Kilkenny (Ian Doyle, 26 July 2005)
In addition to the 2001 regulations, new and additional assessment procedures were put in place in November 2003. These apply
to all initial afforestation applications identified through the ‘Environmental Considerations’ criteria which include areas that
have a definite or potential archaeological concern. This has made archaeology a standard issue to be assessed for any forestry
proposal. In the last two years, 16 individual consultant archaeologists or companies have been working for farmers/forestry
companies involved in the preparation of archaeological assessments, monitoring or inspection reports, either in advance of or
in conjunction with afforestation proposals.
While aerial archaeology now plays a significant and effective role in the procedures for individual forestry proposals, less progress
has been made in terms of a more strategic Afforestable Land Survey (ALS) of the type that the Scottish Royal Commission
undertook in the 1990s, and which was part of the Heritage Council’s recommendations. To some extent, the Scottish model of
an afforestable land survey is now outdated, as it dealt with large stretches of unimproved uplands that were once considered
the prime target for afforestation. Mr Emmet Byrnes points out that in the last 15 years, the yearly planting rate in Ireland has
almost halved and the average block of land proposed for afforestation is now only 10ha in size. Planting now occurs in a more
fragmentary way, and on average only 50% of those farmers who make an application to the Forest Service for ‘consent to
afforest’ end up planting their land in any given year. Furthermore, the recent designation of over 80,000 acres of land in the