Given our experience of the areas that have already been quarried, it is our expectation that during the winter months the other quarried areas would flood - effectively surrounding a large part of both lakes with water. It is this season that we chose to show in the picture on our website. This interpretation of the possible future landscape for the henges has to a certain extent been confirmed by a recent article in The Dalesman, entitled "Our Own Norfolk Broads" which explained that the councils after use strategy for worked out quarry sites was to turn them into large open wet spaces.

In terms of the landfill, this already exists, and is located some 100m from the central henge. Although there are no proposals to expand this that we are aware of, we do expect this to be forthcoming should the quarrying be expanded based on the proposals under discussion. Informal discussion with local councillors has confirmed this as a distinct possibility.

It is not our intention to mislead anyone, but neither is it to paint a positive picture of quarrying in archaeologically sensitive areas.

Whilst the wider setting is an important part of our concerns, the relationship with the surrounding archaeology is of major importance. I know very well the problems associated with pit alignments and the interpretation and dating of them. But I can say we have spent quite some time on site with DR Jan Harding, and he is of the opinion that some of the pit alignments are related to some of the very earliest archaeology (early Neolithic double ditch barrow) and that the majority of the pits that he has investigated probably contained posts. Furthermore he is convinced that the evidence we has shows an environment of continued and inter-related use, not simply a set of unrelated archaeological remains. This is one of the reasons why we are most concerned about the nil reinstatement after use plans, this means that if in the future we find that post/pit alignments were a key feature of henges, we would be unable to recreate them within this, our best known example of such alignments.

Mr Campling knows only too well that Tarmac have not published the details of their archaeological investigations of the 1994/5 Nosterfield extension, and therefore our assumptions are open to challenge. As amateurs I guess we are an easy target in this respect.

All I can say is that we are convinced these are some of the most important ancient monuments in the North of England, and they deserve to be treated more carefully than they have been to date.

I should also say that the Friends of Thornborough are not, as Mr Campling implies, against the creation of wetlands in appropriate areas, or the encouragement of sports is these places. Our point is that creating a wetland out of this obviously important historic area is not appropriate.

I hope this answers your concerns with respect to Mr Campling’s statements yesterday.

George Chaplin
[email protected]