Absolutely, it's the lack of respect thing that is the damaging aspect.
Incidentally, if NT are saying they "did give permission for access" that's being a bit spinful as although the horse is the council's, the whole of Cherhill Down is NT owned and they grant full public access so if someone asked for permission it wasn't merely to go for a walk.
Anyway, the notice was on their land, wasn't it?
Should we write and ask them if it's OK to put a "No Brandalism" notice up there? (For free, as it's a good cause).
Reply | with quote | Posted by nigelswift 21st January 2004ce 05:56 |
More Brandalism! (Pete G, Jan 13, 2004, 17:56)- Re: More Brandalism! (nigelswift, Jan 13, 2004, 19:00)
- Re: More Brandalism! (Visitor, Jan 13, 2004, 22:05)
- Re: More Brandalism! (third degree, Jan 13, 2004, 23:29)
- Re: More Brandalism! (Pete G, Jan 16, 2004, 16:39)
- Latest BBC report (Pete G, Jan 16, 2004, 19:12)
- Re: More Brandalism! (pure joy, Jan 18, 2004, 20:30)
- Re: More Brandalism! (RiotGibbon, Jan 20, 2004, 17:06)
- Re: More Brandalism! (pure joy, Jan 20, 2004, 23:51)
- Re: More Brandalism! (Steve Gray, Jan 21, 2004, 00:09)
- Re: More Brandalism! (nigelswift, Jan 21, 2004, 05:56)
- where's it going to end? (FourWinds, Jan 21, 2004, 07:42)
|
|