+- BAJR Federation Archaeology (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk)
+-- Forum: BAJR Federation Forums (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: The Site Hut (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: Thornborough "debate" (/showthread.php?tid=2060)
Thornborough "debate" - archae_logical - 21st February 2006
Just heard on BBC news. The application has been rejected.
E
Thornborough "debate" - Curator Kid - 21st February 2006
It appears that the site may be safe...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/north_yorkshire/4734994.stm
Thornborough "debate" - historic building - 21st February 2006
Quote:quote:It appears that the site may be safe...
Until the appeal
Thornborough "debate" - Curator Kid - 21st February 2006
Quote:quote:Originally posted by historic building
Quote:quote:It appears that the site may be safe...
Until the appeal
Yes quite.
Thornborough "debate" - Venutius - 21st February 2006
Yes, it is the best news we could have had.
So, what's involved in an appeal?
Save the Thornborough Henge Complex - http://www.timewatch.org
Thornborough "debate" - achingknees - 21st February 2006
Well done campaigners...now, are you willing to lobby the farmers to stop ploughing out the features?
Not only an appeal, but expect a big downturn in co-operation from the aggregates industry on other archaeological issues.
Thornborough "debate" - mercenary - 21st February 2006
I have strangely mixed feelings about this result. One the one hand it is nice to know that public protest combined with expert asessment by EH can protect a site from development. (Leaving aside the thorny issue of plough-damage) I would like to see this happen more often across the UK. On the other hand we are now unlikely to learn anything more about the site, which is a shame.
The sad truth is that most archaeological discoveries are a result of development. No development, no archaeological advancement of knowledge. Sad.
Thornborough "debate" - archae_logical - 21st February 2006
Quote:quote:Originally posted by achingknees
Well done campaigners...now, are you willing to lobby the farmers to stop ploughing out the features?
Not only an appeal, but expect a big downturn in co-operation from the aggregates industry on other archaeological issues.
Why should aggregates companies do anything different, the decision to reject the application by Tarmac was not just on the archaeological grounds but the fact that it went against a lot of the county councils policies. These are policies that apply to every business. Is there something special about aggregate companies that they can ignore them?
E
Thornborough "debate" - archae_logical - 21st February 2006
Quote:quote:Originally posted by mercenary
I have strangely mixed feelings about this result. One the one hand it is nice to know that public protest combined with expert asessment by EH can protect a site from development. (Leaving aside the thorny issue of plough-damage) I would like to see this happen more often across the UK. On the other hand we are now unlikely to learn anything more about the site, which is a shame.
The sad truth is that most archaeological discoveries are a result of development. No development, no archaeological advancement of knowledge. Sad.
This reaction I don't understand. If you would like to see it happen more often then you have to add your voice to all the other voices that want it to happen. Make it more important to the government to find out about the heritage of this country and the funding will be there. (It's always available for guns!!!).
Just because most recent archaeology has been done through PPG16 doesn't mean it always has to be like that.
E
Thornborough "debate" - sniper - 21st February 2006
archaeology doesn't tend to have vast natural resources that the government would like to get their hands on, or fictional weapons of mass destruction...
++ i spend my days rummaging around in dead people ++