It may have escaped the lobbyist's notice that there has been a debate about the PAS in the Papers from the Institute of Archaeology. The forum piece posed the question: "The Portable Antiquities Scheme and the Treasure Act: Protecting the Archaeology of England and Wales?" PAS lists reported find-spots but the removal of archaeological material from the ground by unscientific methods can hardly be described as "help[ing to] preserve context". The two things are very different.
I also note that the quote "pays people to loot" (cited in the ANS "article") ---
many archaeologists remain dismissive of the U.K.’s program, claiming that it “pays people to loot.”--- was coined, if I may use the term, not (apparently) by an archaeologist (or even by "many archaeologists") but by the coin collecting lobbyist himself.
If the ANS wants to join the debate about cultural property, could it select a more informed commentator than an individual "who provides lobbying services and advice to the International Association of Professional Numismatists and the Professional Numismatists Guild"? (The quotation is from the introduction written by Rick Witchonke [sic.].)
The third essay in the series will be by Dr Roger Bland of PAS.