Agreed. Reinstating the path would be a backward step IMO.
All steps should be to encourage folk not to climb the hill and to arrange 'things' to make it less desirable to those that will anyway, again, IMO
Reply | with quote | Posted by Harryshill 12th January 2013ce 09:42 |
Silbury Hill trespassers (Littlestone, Jan 07, 2013, 09:49)- Re: Silbury Hill trespassers (Harryshill, Jan 07, 2013, 10:30)
- Re: Silbury Hill trespassers (Evergreen Dazed, Jan 07, 2013, 11:03)
- Re: Silbury Hill trespassers (Harryshill, Jan 07, 2013, 11:15)
- Re: Silbury Hill trespassers (bladup, Jan 07, 2013, 11:37)
- Re: Silbury Hill trespassers (Littlestone, Jan 07, 2013, 14:50)
- Re: Silbury Hill trespassers (harestonesdown, Jan 11, 2013, 20:42)
- Re: Silbury Hill trespassers (VBB, Jan 12, 2013, 07:30)
- Re: Silbury Hill trespassers (Sanctuary, Jan 12, 2013, 07:48)
- Re: Silbury Hill trespassers (nigelswift, Jan 12, 2013, 08:08)
- Re: Silbury Hill trespassers (Sanctuary, Jan 12, 2013, 08:53)
- Re: Silbury Hill trespassers (nigelswift, Jan 12, 2013, 09:19)
- Re: Silbury Hill trespassers (Harryshill, Jan 12, 2013, 09:42)
- Re: Silbury Hill trespassers (Sanctuary, Jan 12, 2013, 09:55)
- Re: Silbury Hill trespassers (tjj, Jan 12, 2013, 09:58)
- Re: Silbury Hill trespassers (harestonesdown, Jan 12, 2013, 12:55)
- Re: Silbury Hill trespassers (harestonesdown, Jan 12, 2013, 12:42)
- Re: Silbury Hill trespassers (harestonesdown, Jan 12, 2013, 12:49)
- Re: Silbury Hill...what's that? (Sanctuary, Jan 07, 2013, 19:47)
- Re: Silbury Hill trespassers (tjj, Jan 07, 2013, 22:32)
- Re: Silbury Hill trespassers (Sanctuary, Jan 08, 2013, 21:17)
- tma discusses Silbury rationally? (VBB, Jan 09, 2013, 17:25)
- Re: Sponsored signage? (VBB, Jan 11, 2013, 08:23)
- Re: Sponsored signage? (Steve M, Jan 11, 2013, 08:27)
- Re: Sponsored signage? (Sanctuary, Jan 11, 2013, 08:32)
- Re: Sponsored signage? (tjj, Jan 11, 2013, 08:50)
- Re: Sponsored signage? (Littlestone, Jan 11, 2013, 09:02)
- Re: Sponsored signage? (nigelswift, Jan 11, 2013, 09:06)
|
|