jimit
|
World Heritage Sites get more protection.
Mar 05, 2007, 17:45
|
Sat TV dishes are a no no at Stonehenge and Cornish tin mines... http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianpolitics/story/0,,2026541,00.html
but you can dig a sodding great quarry next to a site which is not protected by WH. GRRR
Jim.
|
slumpystones
|
Re: World Heritage Sites get more protection.
Mar 05, 2007, 17:48
|
No stone cladding at Stonehenge? Damned shame!
A full-on yet half-hearted attempt at keeping the masses happy by quoting a few well-known places, leaving the rest to grin and hope...
|
nigelswift
|
Re: World Heritage Sites get more protection.
Mar 05, 2007, 18:58
|
Students of the effing ironic will note that prehistoric landscapes have zero statutory protection, so gravel can be dug out of them, but shortly it will be an offence to stick that gravel on a wall within them.
Aaaaaaaaargh!
|
VenerableBottyBurp
|
Re: World Heritage Sites get more protection.
Mar 06, 2007, 11:13
|
Despite this I note that Avebury still has to deal with applications from phone mast bods, and of course it didn't stop the digging up of the High St to put in poo pipes for the Tourist Info Centre they decide to close 18 months later...
Moan, moan, moan...
VBB
|
Pete G
|
Re: World Heritage Sites get more protection.
Mar 06, 2007, 11:17
|
|
I wish I was as skint as the National Trust...
|
nigelswift
|
Re: World Heritage Sites get more protection.
Mar 06, 2007, 11:35
|
"Moan, moan, moan..."
Don't beat yourself up about being a moaner VBB, they have been known to perform a useful and constructive role in shaping events (although its never acknowledged) Eg. -
Doers: "Shall we bury stuff in the hill?"
Moaners: "No!"
Doers : "Exactly!"
;)
|
