Silbury Hill forum 180 room
Image by photobabe
close
more_vert

No point in going on and on, but I am not trying to tell anyone that they shouldn't go to the meeting or that there shouldn't be one. I just don't want to see further delays for what ever reason. When I read this http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/server/show/nav.8820 I was very relieved and thought that at last a decsion had been made and work would soon commence. I honestly thought that it would be welcomed by all and was dismayed to see immediate hostility and opposition to it. I still believe that this proposal is the right one, but you may differ. I have no specialist knowledge of my own regarding landscape engineering etc so I can only form my opinion from what I read. Perhaps HA has sought expert opinion from elsewhere and have got a better practical solution to offer. If so, then I sincererly hope that you prevail and show EH that your scheme is better. In reality I fear that you will be patronised and at best may modify their scheme - at worst you will delay the start of remedial work perhaps beyond the point of Silbury's stability.

Of course we should protest like hell to save the Thornborough landscape from gravel extraction and other sites from quarries. If there was a proposal to demolish Silbury then the issue would be clear. I have no more idea of the best way to protect Silbury than I have of constructing a motorway - so I have to listen to those that do have that expertise. My over riding concern is that more talk will mean more delay and more delay will inevitably worsen Silbury's condition.

" I honestly thought that (tunnelling) would be welcomed by all and was dismayed to see immediate hostility and opposition to it."

That's because as you state you - " have no specialist knowledge"

"I can only form my opinion from what I read." With respect that cannot have been much up until recently, beacuse EH didn't pass anything on until the BA articles, and they would not have done that had they not been commissioned.

Now thanks to the campaign that has gained the meeting, there is also comprehensive material on the EH website albeit it is like the BA articles - spun.

"Perhaps HA has sought expert opinion from elsewhere and have got a better practical solution to offer. "

The great British public consists of experts from all walks of life, many of whom have an interest in history/heritage, but they can't apply their knowledge to a problem unless they know about it that is why some of us have spent five years arguing for transparent public information. Elsewhere you alluded to me and others as amateurs, but you overlook that we are also professionals. Some are academics, some engineers, other surveyors. One of the people you address is directly involved with Silbury but through attempting to keep their pension and future employment can't say who they are; the fact they are keen for the public to have more information and have a say should tell you something !

"In reality I fear that you will be patronised and at best may modify their scheme"

There is every chance of the first and no chance of the second.

"at worst you will delay the start of remedial work perhaps beyond the point of Silbury's stability"

EH don't stop their plans to consider the public ! Tenders are going out as I type if not in the post already and work will not start until a scheme's details are agreed and suitable weather arrives. As for Silbury's stability, there are no concerns there.

" My over riding concern is that more talk will mean more delay "
Even if it did, this is democracy attempting a foothold - besides there will be no delay.

"No point in going on and on,"

something we can at least agree on.

We at long last have some information on the website and a meeting - other than making sure enough interested parties attend and the right questions are asked I don't think there is much more to be said. other than - anyone travelling on Friday and staying over who wants to meet for a quiet beer don't make it the Bear as EH VIPs will be staying there.

VBB

"My over riding concern is that more talk will mean more delay and more delay will inevitably worsen Silbury's condition."

I understand what you are saying Peter, but I really think there are two agenda's here which is why we have seen such an innordinate delay already. I do not think those two agenda's have been resolved and this latest proposal is a fudge to try to appease both. That being potentially the case, it does not bode wel for the solution no matter how quickly they implemented it.