ments and accusations against EH. It’s Stonehenge that matters.
There is no evidence it ever belonged to the people, it may have been as much out of bounds to the ‘people’ when it was first conceived/constructed as it is now. The argument is not about free access or even restricted access; it is about controlled access, managed in the most suitable way to meet the 21st century needs of all those who visit the monument, their safety and the monument’s long term conservation; English Heritage, and by default we the British public, are patently failing in that respect.
Mary, I never said it belonged to the People.
Alwen, Actually It IS “Strictly” true, and its not ME who seems to be discriminating! its this pathetic proposal thats designed to remove the right of certain LAW ABIDING members of the Public.
This proposal actually confirms my and many others fears for Stonehenge in the future public access.
The overcrowding is a DIRECT result of e/h’s restricted access, extending the access throughout the day would resolve the problem.
Please Note I will not be turned into a tourist in my own country and im not the only one with that veiw.
sorry mary i misread the comment.
E/H reply to the Stonehenge Proposal was to say NO to any discussion regarding extending access?
I suggest that if they Genuinely communicated with the people during there Fake consultations, they would NOT now have the problem they CLAIM to be worried about.
E/H are CAUSING the problems.
Stonehenger, it’s not exactly surprising that EH said “no” to extending the period of access as a means of reducing overcrowding. It patently wouldn’t work and the fact the document you linked to doesn’t explain how on earth it possibly could serves to emphasize the fact.
I suggest you come up with a viable means to ensure many thousands don’t crowd into the circle thereby making it impossible for EH and the stewards to prevent hundreds standing and dancing on the stones (like we have) and they’ll be duty-bound (literally) to listen.
lol, the document i linked to was ASKING for “Discussion” with eh regarding a resolution.
As for your claim to be puzzled regarding extending access resolving the crowding issue, its very simple, the currant focus is solely on the sunrise.
The proposal suggests 4 focuses therefore giving people more choice. This would allow many to attend during the day or evening as suits.
As for “It patently wouldn’t work”??? I agree that e/h are patently unable to make it work, however when they start actually doing their job properly and genuinely seek the cooperation of the public, it patently Will!
The problem with your suggestion is that extending the period of access is very likely to increase the overall number of people turning up and no protection organisation is going to risk that happening and nor should they.
In any case, more time and/or more focuses still wouldn’t solve the central problem of many thousands crowding into the circle at certain times such that it has become impossible for EH and the stewards to prevent hundreds standing and dancing on the stones. EH is quite right not to countenance anything other than a clear solution to that.
This allegation is untrue and is typical of allegations made by people who read news papers.
The one or two who do climb on the stones get arrested and thrown out!
Not only do they get thrown out “the Public” make it VERY plain to them climbing on the stones is AGAINST the wishes of the people.
As for the overall attendance going up, if Stonehenge is open all day of Course it will!
However it would also give a reason for those who spend their entire visit inside the circle overnight to vacate for a morning ceremony. And at the moment thats reason they refuse to move, ie e/h refuse to extend access or even talk about it. To suggest that those who sit in the circle are somehow criminals or disruptive is disingenuous and FAR from the so called truth put out by e/h.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3L0GA78wgOo (2 minutes 5 seconds).
dear me, the SINGULAR person diving off the stone was cheered for getting off it, and as for the other clips they show people standing on a Fallen stone that oddly enough e/h USED to cover with a tarpaulin and LET people stand on?
Your claim “hundreds” are standing on the stones is countered by your own video clips and the fact its NOT true, can be seen.
As for the r/t minutes, there are NONE, the r/t doesn’t do minutes.
I hope you noted how relaxed the events were in your clips and that suggesting things are out of control is deceitful as is your intention to dispossess the public of the right of access.
That’s not how most people would see it (to put it politely!) Here it is again, just in case anyone should be in the slightest doubt! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3L0GA78wgOo (2 minutes 5 seconds).
We really don’t have anything to prove here. As we said, there are scores of videos people can look at showing large numbers of people standing on the stones (as do all the ones we have posted). People can certainly decide for themselves the truth of the matter.
… we’d have to disagree!
I have a few links here that I am sure you will find very informative to the currant debate about the Stonehenge Summer Solstice access.
Two historic Vision Workshops took place in April 2008 and October 2009, which will significantly change the Stonehenge Summer Solstice experience within the next ten years, although everyone’s hands are tied to some extent until the date the visitor centre build with start and be completed.
The Workshop was made up of people from a wide range of backgrounds including English Heritage; National Trust; archaeologists; police; fire and other health and safety advisors; local councillors and residents, druids; pagans; musicians; bards; former-free-festival-goers’ and even ex-convoy members. For many, this was the first time they had met face-to-face and it was astounding the amount of common ground there was between such disparate groups of people. By the end of the meetings the different groups felt much more at ease with each other and the memories of what locals thought of as quote “the bad old days” were largely dismissed, which was throught to be very positive by those who would like the access to continue and improve over time.
Thanks Kevin. The one thing that stood out in those links was the way EH so comprehensively nailed the fact that increased access hours would mean increased risks of damage. That really ought to be that on that subject.
Not sure why you feel there can be no major change for ten years. That would mean another ten years of people holding beer cans jumping around on the stones. I sincerely hope not. The real truth is that vastly too many people turn up to enable EH to fulfill its duty of care and that problem can’t be solved by disparate groups coming together and finding common ground and loudly forgiving each other for what Mrs T. did before many of them were born. T’is blather! EH would do better admitting to everyone what has been evident to them for years – that irrespective of historic resentments there will always be some elements within huge crowds that can’t be prior-identified or controlled in the way Stonehenge deserves and it is not in Stonehenge’s interest to pretend otherwise.
People behave on organised visits and at Winter Solstice because there are rules and they can be enforced. Why should worse behaviour be tolerated in the Summer?
E/H will be happy to confirm they do NOT do minutes at the r/t.
Operational Planning Meeting Solstice Access 2009?? its now 2011 and this years opmsa report highlights the insane ability of e/h to NOT understand the word “Reasonable” in the heath and safety advice they are obliged to refer to.
as for the winter access, its NOT organized by e/h and the main reason there is (generally) no problem is because there is plenty of room for the people attending throughout that short access period.
The summer solstice is organized by e/h and due to the restricted hours of access its overcrowded because e/h FAIL to understand they are OBLIGED to provide PROPER access.ITS THEIR JOB. However they do love to winge about heath and safety and what a nuisance the public are!, if they get their way e/h would close Stonehenge to to EVERYONE except Paying tourists.
And they would NOT getaway with that as it would plainly restart large protests AT Stonehenge. There are some who believe that is e/h’s intention as they would love to see a resumption of the brutality visited on pilgrims pre 2000.
It looks now as if everything has been said that needs to be so we’ll leave it there. Good luck with your quest to get EH to be more “Reasonable” over health and safety and indeed to loosen up on their irritating monument protection duty. I’m sure they’ll note what you say.
By Jove you’ve finally got it!
There seems to be a clash of cultures here and nobody can see what to me seems as clear as day.A field for the folk who wish to celebrate solstice in