Be grateful it isn't right on the horse. But then it wouldn't be would it, as the Horse is owned by the local parish council whereas the surrounding downland is owned by...... wait for it .... the National Trust!

(According to Google searches anyway)

Without wishing to set off an unnecessary geyser (it's only a stupid temporary notice) I wonder if they authorised it, and got paid like at Uffington. Surely not, as they virtually admitted that was a mistake.

Well, my next car won't be a Panda, then.

But not to worry, there's a good strong wind out there tonight...

seems rather hypocritical to me,letting companies daub their adverts all over sites when they threaten normal folk with certain death if they as much as break wind.surely the rules should apply to everyone,regardless of whether these companies pay a fee or make a 'donation'.it would also be nice to see where these 'donations' go and how much they are..bet cherhill down doesnt see one penny of it !

Someone tore the plastic sheets off of the horse and turned the advert over today.
The ad agency annouced they were "Dissapointed" on the lunchtime news :0)
PeteG

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wiltshire/3403247.stm
TV news said the ad company had asked the police to investigate.
It was bloody windy here last night!
PeteG

I hadn't heard about this until I saw this story.

I'll try to find out more about what 'deal' was made and why.

just found out some more info on this - it's the Council who own the Horse, and gave permission for the bin bags. The National Trust own the fields around, and *did* give permission for access in order to reach the Horse.

It does make you quite weary. I understand the the Trust has financial responsibilities, has to do a difficult balancing act in order to maintain the properties and sites it maintains. But it's very name, the "National Trust"!

how can you Trust an organisation that keeps doing things like this. What's next, where's it going to end? Each individual act may not in itself (so far) be permanently damaging, but it's building up into a picture of overall disrespect for the very fragile places it is supposed to protecting. These actions are not being driven by the requirements of the site, but short-term financial gains being offered by organisations that do not have the interests of the site at heart, and without consulting the specialists responsible for the site. Which leads you to think - what next? How far are they going to go? What is the alternative to the Trust?

RG