Re: What's acceptable when interacting with sites? | Forum

Sanctuary wrote:

Littlestone wrote:

Inserting coins into cracks in stones can result in the stone cracking Nicki. The use of t-lights can also damage stones (not to mention just how environmentally unfriendly the little critters themselves are). As for the old ‘tat’ chestnut; food and drink can and does attract vermin, and one person’s offering is another person’s rubbish. Best to leave nothing, not even footprints (and the resulting erosion of sites from same by frequent or mass intrusion).

In the context of the ‘free access’ argument, there is a worrying parallel between the increase in visitor numbers to a site and the damage that can cause. Ten or fifteen years ago, for example, there was hardly anything left at the Swallowhead Spring, and what was left there was mainly a few, hardly noticeable, wicker objects in the tree. Now the place has reached tipping point (pun intended ;-) outdone only by the mess left at Stonehenge after the ‘celebrations’ there at solstice time.

In other words, as visitors to sites increase so too does the increase in tat and the erosion of those places - re: this recently photographed scene at the Rollright Stones. Most people on this board are aware of the problems of tat, and erosion at sites, and follow the guidelines of not climbing on structures or leaving things. Sadly not every visitor to a site is a Stonehead, and climbing on stones etc is seen by some as a bit of a lark - in some cases even a god-given right.

IMHO the only right thing is the intrinsic right of a site (or in the wider context our cultural and environmental heritage) to survive undamaged, and our obligation to future generations to preserve those places and things as best we can...

I don't know how best to stop it LS unless we don't try, instead, have an area set aside at the sites where it is more popular (a type of Garden of Rememberance if you like) where people can show their 'respects' but in a controlled way and from an area that can be tidied up as and when.
Personally I'm more concerned over the damage caused at places such as the WKLB where trampling all over appears to be totally overlooked.

Education, education, education perhaps Mr S – that’s what this board and others like it go some way to achieving. Most old handers here and elsewhere don’t do the sort of things we’ve been discussing because, apart from respecting the sites and not wanting to leave our personal imprint on them, we’ve mulled the issue over with like-minded folk for a good few years and, although not in 100% agreement, a sort of consensus has emerged. Not so with newcomers who might be acting out their own agenda at sites, not aware of the damage they might be causing or the annoyance their actions often generate in others.

I take your point about WKLB, though I would say that the roofed area over the main chambers has been reconstructed and that is where most people climb or sit to view Silbury and the surrounding landscape. Perhaps, as a compromise, access to the reconstructed area could be allowed while the rest of the barrow is cordoned off...