|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Silbury Hill » Trespass on SSSI sites |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
|
tomwatts 376 posts |
Sep 04, 2012, 20:55
|
||
...3 years ago, Silbury had a monorail running up the side of it...
|
|||
bladup 1986 posts |
Sep 04, 2012, 20:59
|
||
|
tomwatts wrote: ...3 years ago, Silbury had a monorail running up the side of it... Archaeologists have done more damage than anyone's feet.
|
|||
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Sep 04, 2012, 21:28
|
||
|
At my age I’m allowed to be grumpy – it’s one of the few pleasures left in life after realizing that most of what is said and written about (especially on forums such as this) is just hot air cooling down at the rate of knots - and as soon as it’s cooled will fall to earth with little or no effect. So there :-)
|
|||
|
scubi63 463 posts |
Sep 04, 2012, 22:30
|
||
|
nigelswift wrote: You dont have to view it through fences and soon there wont be any and of course, you can go in after hours. Its a very worthwhile experience so long as you dont fall into the trap of cursing the crowds or expect "splendid isolation"... Having done the walk around Stonehenge 'outside the rope' a couple of times and being very disappointed, I did the 'before hours' visit a few years ago very close to the winter solstice. It was an icy cold morning but we were let in just as the sun was breaking the horizon and I must say it was a very moving experience for me. So much so I had trouble taking a steady shot with the camera. You get 1 hour there before the let in joe public and the amazing thing was that most of the other 25 people who were there too left after about 30 minutes leaving a small group of us to stand and take in the place. Even the security guards kept their distance and didn't blink an eyelid at us touching the stones. It was an amazing experience and really did change my view of this much (mostly justified) maligned monument. :o)
|
|||
|
bladup 1986 posts |
Sep 04, 2012, 22:38
|
||
|
scubi63 wrote: nigelswift wrote: You dont have to view it through fences and soon there wont be any and of course, you can go in after hours. Its a very worthwhile experience so long as you dont fall into the trap of cursing the crowds or expect "splendid isolation"... Having done the walk around Stonehenge 'outside the rope' a couple of times and being very disappointed, I did the 'before hours' visit a few years ago very close to the winter solstice. It was an icy cold morning but we were let in just as the sun was breaking the horizon and I must say it was a very moving experience for me. So much so I had trouble taking a steady shot with the camera. You get 1 hour there before the let in joe public and the amazing thing was that most of the other 25 people who were there too left after about 30 minutes leaving a small group of us to stand and take in the place. Even the security guards kept their distance and didn't blink an eyelid at us touching the stones. It was an amazing experience and really did change my view of this much (mostly justified) maligned monument. :o) Sounds Great!!
|
|||
|
Mustard 1043 posts |
Sep 05, 2012, 09:31
|
||
|
Rhiannon wrote: I'm not saying we shouldn't visit places like those and walk there, sit amongst them, picnic, chat, paint, whatever. That's the very thing we all love doing. And there's minimal harm because there aren't 70,000 visitors a year doing the same thing, maybe not even 70. But some places require us to put our personal whims aside and behave in the long term interests of the site and the people in the future that might want to see their inheritance too. I don't see that's so much to ask. I don't think there's a "one size fits all" answer to this question. A lot depends on the nature of the individual site. If I could slip into Skara Brae at night, would I? Absolutely certainly. Is it doing any damage? No. Is it encouraging behaviour from others that will cause damage? No. In reality, very few people would care enough to follow my example - assuming they even knew about it in the first place. This is the old adage of "rules are made to be broken". While there's a need for rules, society has often recognised a need for those rules to be flexible enough to be broken occassionally, without that implying that the rules aren't important or should be abandoned. If a handful of people that care enough want to surreptitiously visit Skara Brae, it's not going to cause any problems. Silbury Hill, on the other hand, is very different. Every person who climbs the hill is creating a visual encouragement for many, many others to do the same - and such behaviour could easily lead to significant damage. Really, it just comes down to exercising a little bit of common sense.
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Sep 05, 2012, 09:59
|
||
|
"If a handful of people that care enough want to surreptitiously visit Skara Brae, it's not going to cause any problems." So if there's no erosion of the monument then erosion of the rules is OK? Thats the very crux of the issue and I strongly disagree. It is simply impossible for me to say if "I" break the rules at Skara Brae that definitely won't increase the likelihood that a vandal may follow suit. Ergo, neither I nor anyone else should break the rules at Skara Brae - for precisely the same reason, increased risk of damage, that you say people shouldnt break the rules at Silbury. The safest policy for both places is dont break the rules.
|
|||
|
Mustard 1043 posts |
Sep 05, 2012, 10:02
|
||
|
nigelswift wrote: "If a handful of people that care enough want to surreptitiously visit Skara Brae, it's not going to cause any problems." So if there's no erosion of the monument then erosion of the rules is OK? Thats the very crux of the issue and I strongly disagree. It is simply impossible for me to say if "I" break the rules at Skara Brae that definitely won't increase the likelihood that a vandal may follow suit. Ergo, neither I nor anyone else should break the rules at Skara Brae - for precisely the same reason, increased risk of damage, that you say people shouldnt break the rules at Silbury. The safest policy for both places is dont break the rules. Sorry Nigel, I don't see the world in such black and white terms as you, so we'll have to agree to differ.
|
|||
|
Rhiannon 5291 posts |
Sep 05, 2012, 10:08
|
||
|
A not-one-size-fits-all solution is exactly what I'm suggesting actually. But I don't think your argument holds water. What if I climb Silbury at night when nobody's watching? That's not encouraging anybody. I think it's a point of principle. That Silbury is being damaged by people climbing it, I want to look after silbury, therefore - I don't climb it. Whether people can see me doing it or not. And likewise Skara Brae. Because we as the public have specifically been told it's going to be damaged if lots of people do it, hence noone is allowed to do it. I think you're still falling back on the 'I'm special' defence. Your mother may tell you that but in the grand scheme of things you're no more special than any other visitor to the site. I don't think the I'm special defence is a very good one. No, you as an individual won't do much damage to Skara Brae. The people who work there won't see you doing it. The other visitors won't see you. Even the baby jesus won't see you. No-one will see you, but you'll have to justify it to yourself that it's necessary because you're more special than anyone else. I don't think that's much of an argument. Personally.
|
|||
|
Evergreen Dazed 1881 posts |
Sep 05, 2012, 10:14
|
||
|
Ooh, a little unfair Rhiannon. I don't think Mustard is hinting that he is 'special' and therefore his after hours excursion would be ok 'because it's him'. I think he's simply saying that the people who care and love the place may do it and people that don't, or are just happy to wander around doing the tourist thing, won't. Correct me if i'm wrong, Mr M.
|
| Pages: 38 – [ Previous | 1 … 9 10 11 12 13 14 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
