Julian Cope presents Head Heritage

There are a mishmosh of laws. Yes, Federal protection applies only to Federal lands and Native reservations. But there are many states with protection laws that apply to private lands. What kind of enforcement is actually applied I don't know. I assume little, but not none.

And thanks to all who have replied with kind words. I apologize for thread hijacking! So here's a warning: if I've highjacked, read no further. This will be my last little rant.

To me, the problems of protection, whether from random Yahoos, hardworking farmers, big business or even government seem to be to be all of a piece, albeit--as you point out--on a spectrum of damage from probably inconsequential to disastrous.

So while it may seem to be one thing to be gracious and respect the freedoms of offerers, or those who wish the sites to be untrammeled and natural; and another to protest governments running roads through them, to me the "crimes" are basically the same thing.

It's a question of the thin end of the wedge. Where is the universally agreeable line between photography, drumming, (eventually dead) flowers, (rotting) fruit, tea lights, dolls' heads, litter, elimination, farming, protesters' purple spray paint, Banksy, much needed transportation systems, etc. etc. Isn't that what this thread is about? Where's "the" line?

All I'm saying is that in true fairness to all, there really isn't one. And that the attempt to draw it is the red herring that leads inexorably from one to the next. Quite likely I seem like Alexander and the knot. And quite likely my own feelings that all modern views about the purposes or nature of the old stones are modern impositions leads me to be able to be crass about those views and therefore irritating. So here's the end to it! Thank you all for being so nice.

There was a precursor to Monty Python, called Do Not Adjust Your Set, and each week it had a song from the Bonzo Dog Doo Dah Band. One of them was called the Monster Mash and, on the record but not the TV show, there is a line that goes something like 'here comes Dracula with his group, the Crypt Kicker Five'. Pure Stanshall!

the Taliban blew up the Bamiyan Buddhas in the name of their religion while the rest of the world looked on in disbelief.

Hi Bucky,

The point about the lack of state owership/guardianship is essentially a moot one. In the UK (and I'm sure in the US) there are thousands and thousands of prehistoric sites. Some are big and well-known, and you can put a fence up and have a gift shop, etc, etc. But these represent a tiny fraction of the sites that remain.

Most sites are on land that is privately owned, but much of that land (especially in upland areas) is open to the public to walk on. Whether this land remained privately owned or if the sites themselves were transferred to state ownership, there is no practical way whatsoever of fencing off or allocating security to any but a few. Most UK sites are "scheduled" and it is an offence to damage them - but how many barrows in fields are ploughed down to non-existence? How many upland barrows are turned into walker's shelters? How many urban sites become areas for fly-tipping? Most of these are scheduled but it doesn't prevent misuse.

It seems to me that the nearest we can get to having cake/eating it (allowing sites to be freely accessed while seeking to prevent them from being misused) is for people to be encouraged and educated to act responsibly and realise the true, irreplaceable value of what is being slowly eroded or destroyed by, in many cases, thoughtless actions. Most sites are not damaged intentionally (although some clearly are, paint spraying being particularly abhorrent), most are destroyed slowly, through lack of understanding. There are guidelines and perfectly reasonable standards published all over the place, not least on notices at some sites and in most guidebooks to visiting the countryside in general as well as sites in particular. They almost always include something along the lines of "take everything home with you that you brought to the countryside", which seems to be a pretty reasonable request.

If those guidelines are not always followed, then unless people like Heritage Action and perhaps some TMAers (yes, us) actually do their bit to keep the sites tidy and free of litter and other assorted "leavings", the importance of the sites quickly becomes diminished and even more prone to damage.

In other words, waiting for the state to intervene or take over is not a practical answer. Personal responsibility is.