|
 Log in |
Register
|
|
 Head To Head The Modern Antiquarian Stonehenge and its Environs Forum | Start a topic | Search |
202 messages | Select a forum: |
nigelswift wrote: To further clarify (lest Jon misunderstands) it's impossible to quantify CULTURAL value. Politicians wanting to suck up to interests which have other ambitions than culture apply monetary values to culture and compare it with the monetary value of speedier travel and conclude the latter is more beneficial. But the monetary value of culture, though real, is not the value of culture. Unless that reality is accepted this thread is kind of pointless! I agree with most of the above Nigel - except your final sentence. I started this thread to help in some small way in getting information about the Highways England consultation process on the short tunnel proposal. I readily admit to being just a 'punter' but have listened to all the arguments and strongly feel tunnel or dual carriageway both to be highly damaging to the Stonehenge environment. It was jonmor who came on and diverted (for want of a better word) the thread talking about quantifying the value of heritage. He seems like a reasonable sort of person and may genuinely want to use the monetary value of Stonehenge WHS as part of the argument in the consultation process - though in fact, only the NT and EH could possible do that by stating the net income they receive from the Stonehenge ticket office. But as they want the short tunnel that would be kind of pointless ... Reply | with quote |  27th February 2017ce 09:48 In reply to: Re: Julian Richards gives his view on the tunnel (nigelswift)3 replies: Re: Julian Richards gives his view on the tunnel (nigelswift) Re: Julian Richards gives his view on the tunnel (jonmor) Re: Julian Richards gives his view on the tunnel (jonmor) |
Messages in this topic: |