14 replies to this topic

[David Faulder]

Spawned from

Diggers Reburied to Avoid Red Tape Article in The Daily Telegraph (NSW) 21 April 2011
as the discussion is becoming more general.

Steven Broomfield, on 24 April 2011 - 04:19 PM, said:

Every time these stories break we are told that our MPs ought to "do something", but I'm at a loss to think what.

Imagine  you're a British or Australian MP. Your constituent comes along and  informs you that French farmers are digging up remains of men killed 90  years ago and quickly reburying them to avoid the time, paperwork, fuss  and bother and expense, I suspect, caused by delays to work schedules  and so on). What do you do - you utter sympathetic words and promise to  look into it. What can you do - nothing.

You're  a French  deputy, representing a large rural constituency in northern France. A  British or Austrlaian government official comes along and makes you  aware of the problem. You mutter platitudes, perhaps shrug in a Gallic  fashion, but the you consider this: your job depends on the votes of a  set of farmers, who want to press on and make a living. As we know from  the various instances of incinerated British sheep, French farmers are  not renowned for their open-minded, adaptable to circumstances outlook  on life.

Suggesting to them that they stop, call the Gendarmes,  wait for several days while the site is excavated and all evidence  collected, then have a potter to see what else is there and then - only  then - may you proceed is going to go down like a pastis with no Pernod.

This  might sound terribly negative, but in reality your MP, the CWGC, the  MOD, the Ministry of Veterans' Affairs and all the king's horses are not  going to affect Monsieur Dupont in his desire to earn a living.

Sorry, but that's how I see it.

Steve,

I think your post accurately sums up what happens if people "go through  the motions".  Possibly a more thorough consideration of the issue is  required.

There are possibly two main issues:

• (Some) British / Australian etc.  sensitivities are offended by the idea of "ploughing back in" - respect etc.
• French landowners are irritated by the delay and loss of "free use of their land" - part of the reason "we" went to war

  
Resolution is basically possible in one (or both) of the following manners:

• Brits and Australians etc. learn to be less sensitive - look at official practice in Gallipoli
• We look to ways to reduce the irritation
  • "educate them about our sensitivities" - rather you than me!
  • "reduce the delay" - some form of guarantee to recover remains within a given time
  • allow  "lower quality recovery" - Farmers etc (or keen amateurs) can move  remains to the edge of the field together with any associated artefacts  and then CWGC (or whoever collects).  This breaches the much proclaimed  "archaeological/forensic" standard of recovery  - and reduces the chances of an identification, but ... if the  alternative is ploughing in should this be allowed as the lesser of two  evils?  I am not saying that I am necessarily convinced, but should it  be discussed and thought through?  Then the British MOD /  Australian Department of Defence can actually discuss something with the French authorities.

  
What are the priorities?

• Free use of the land by local landowners
• Decent burial of found remains - even if as "Known unto God"
• Maximising the chances of identification

  
David

[towisuk]

David Faulder, on 24 April 2011 - 05:16 PM, said:

Spawned from

Diggers Reburied to Avoid Red Tape Article in The Daily Telegraph (NSW) 21 April 2011
as the discussion is becoming more general.



Steve,

I think your post accurately sums up what happens if people "go through  the motions".  Possibly a more thorough consideration of the issue is  required.

There are possibly two main issues:

• (Some) British / Australian etc.  sensitivities are offended by the idea of "ploughing back in" - respect etc.
• French landowners are irritated by the delay and loss of "free use of their land" - part of the reason "we" went to war

  
Resolution is basically possible in one (or both) of the following manners:

• Brits and Australians etc. learn to be less sensitive - look at official practice in Gallipoli
• We look to ways to reduce the irritation
  • "educate them about our sensitivities" - rather you than me!
  • "reduce the delay" - some form of guarantee to recover remains within a given time
  • allow  "lower quality recovery" - Farmers etc (or keen amateurs) can move  remains to the edge of the field together with any associated artefacts  and then CWGC (or whoever collects).  This breaches the much proclaimed  "archaeological/forensic" standard of recovery  - and reduces the chances of an identification, but ... if the  alternative is ploughing in should this be allowed as the lesser of two  evils?  I am not saying that I am necessarily convinced, but should it  be discussed and thought through?  Then the British MOD /  Australian Department of Defence can actually discuss something with the French authorities.

  
What are the priorities?

• Free use of the land by local landowners
• Decent burial of found remains - even if as "Known unto God"
• Maximising the chances of identification

  
David

Ah..! at last..! some positive suggestions, well done David.
regards
Tom

[truthergw]

When remains are found,the immediate assumption has to be that a crime has occurred. Gendarmerie have to attend to satisfy themselves that no crime is involved. Then the official mills start to grind. Resources are not unlimited. It may be days before remains can be recovered. For a farmer who is ploughing on one of the battlefields , that is going to be something that happens regularly. It happened to his father too. There is no shock or horror or sense of historic responsibility. He feels no duty toward these remains. His fields are full of them. So are the fields of his neighbours. I am surprised at the number of finds that are reported and re-buried every year. I am not surprised to hear that occasionally, a tractor driver turns a blind eye. I do not think it is right, I do think that there is no way to stop it happening unless a large reward is offered. Stand by then for remains being 'discovered' a bone at a time.

[59165]

David Faulder, on 24 April 2011 - 05:16 PM, said:

• allow  "lower quality recovery" - Farmers etc (or keen amateurs) can move  remains to the edge of the field together with any associated artefacts

David

This is the most common course of action in my part of France & points West.
Many,many fallen have been recovered by metal detectorists & unfortunately,not all are honest enough to hand in personal items found with the remains as they see these as 'their finds' ripe for their Militaria collection.
Makes id harder,to say te least.

[auchonvillerssomme]

What evidence apart from some anecdotal, the originators not always the most reliable of witnesses, do we have that this happens?

And if anyone claims to have seen it happen can I ask what the police said when you reported the perps, because I'm sure you must have reported them.

[ph0ebus]

I truly feel bad for families who have had loved ones go missing over the last century in these areas.  Who's to say some of the bodies being ploughed in aren't victims of some past crime?

-Daniel

[59165]

auchonvillerssomme, on 25 April 2011 - 11:18 AM, said:

What evidence apart from some anecdotal, the originators not always the most reliable of witnesses, do we have that this happens?
You tell me,Mick.Your telling me the originators are unreliable so I now must exclude their anecdotes from future discussion.

And if anyone claims to have seen it happen can I ask what the police said when you reported the perps, because I'm sure you must have reported them.
I'll tell you in English what the Police said,if that makes it easier for you."This is a matter for the Gendarmes."

[seadog]

Is there something missing from the last post?.

[David Faulder]

No, the responses are embedded in the quote.

[auchonvillerssomme]

If someone tells me something about a subject as important as this I want evidence. If you are happy to accept anecdotal evidence than the least you can do is request the person telling you tells you exactly where the information came from, we are all adults, tell them to name names, places, dates, if a farmer told them, which farmer was it? If it was a 'friend' which friend, did they take it further? Otherwise its all b*ll*x.

[auchonvillerssomme]

Perhaps we can list all posters who have provided any evidence, anecdotal or not, and ask them those questions directly?

[Keith Roberts]

I recall reading that some bodies were recovered quite a few years back, close I think to the war cemetery at Ovillers, but that after partial recovery the then farmer ploughed the site because he wanted to get on. I have spent a little time trying to find the source, but it wasn't in the book that I seemed to remember.

The problem in general is that where minor quantities of remains are found and if the farmer choses to plough them back into the ground, evidence is not likely to be forthcoming. tales might be told in a cafe or whatever, but real evidence is most unlikely to be forthcoming.  This topic sprang to some extent from the report of Dominique's find, and probably of discussions with him. As someone who has lived all his life in the area he is probably as well informed as anyone, but the reports will still be hearsay at best.

The other thing of course, is the question of how many times a given story is repeated, and distorted. Several "sources" could easily come back to a single hearsay report.

Keith

[David Faulder]

auchonvillerssomme, on 25 April 2011 - 11:18 AM, said:

What evidence apart from some anecdotal, the originators not always the most reliable of witnesses, do we have that this happens?

And if anyone claims to have seen it happen can I ask what the police said when you reported the perps, because I'm sure you must have reported them.

As the originator of this thread I guess I ought to respond.

I am not claiming to have witnessed any "ploughing in" (or similar), but as someone who has a relative whose remains are probably "still out there" (albeit probably shattered by shellfire into unrecognisable fragments), I have an interest in the issue and wnt to see discussion - see my original post to this thread.  I am not sure if you are suggesting that it just "does not happen".  There are numerous anecdotes, but logically one would also expect it to be happening.

• In Gallipoli the accepted practice is "to slip partial remains back into the soil"
• It is accepted that there are hundreds of thousands of unrecovered casualties in relatively concentrated areas - although most might well be in fragment form
• It is therefore, in my view, highly likely that remains (in some form) will come to the surface, but as Tom Rutherford points out the [low] number of burials is surprising - given the number "out there".

There are of course "degrees" of "ploughing in"

• Fragments probably don't get noticed
• In many cases the farmer will not even realise they have turned up partial remains
• In other cases he may recognise a bone and conclude that that is all there is and just carry on
• In some cases he may recognise the potential of a larger find and choose not to investigate further - possibly ploughing that area a little less deeply
• Then, he may recognise remains that look as if they could relate to a single casualty; then he may
  • Push them back and plough that area less deeply in future
  • Plough heavily through them to ensure the problem does not "recur"
  • Move them to one side and report them
  • Report them and leave the land to investigation

As Tom says there is the small matter of reporting to the Police/Gendarmerie - I suspect that there is a limit to how much they are prepared to be called out to "look at a bone that might be human".  If I observed a Farmer "ploughing in", would I report to the local Police/Gendarmerie?  As a foreigner, probably not.  If I felt that it was an instance where there was a possibility or probablilty of a "set of remains" being ploughed in (the last two cases in my list above), I think I would attempt to note the location and then phone CWGC for advice (or make use of British consular services).  Quite what they would tell me I don't know.  I am sure I would find the situation far more disturbing than the French Farmer, and if it was a particular set of fields in Belgium, I could see myself being a real pain to Consular Officials.

David

[andy pugh]

Good Afternoon All.
I would like to comment about ploughing in. How would the authoreties feelabout this. What would happen if a farmer or a contractor were to plough in a set of remains which could in all honesty be a modern day crime scene? a set of remains of a murder committed a few years ago.

Regards Andy.

[RammyLad1]

I'm surprised that the French farmers and fishermen haven't collaborated on this and claimed an EU subsidy for bone fishing!