Representation by Heritage Action (Heritage Action )
- Date submitted
- 5 January 2019
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
Heritage Action came into being, in the wake of the collapse of Silbury Hill in May 2000, as a grassroots organisation formed by a large number of “ordinary people caring for extraordinary places”.
For approaching 19 years its focus has been on the conservation of prehistoric sites in particular, by promoting greater public appreciation of heritage sites and highlighting the many threats they face.
This promotion of heritage protection is primarily achieved through the Heritage Journal, a blog which continues to publish daily, documenting sites in danger and aiming to broaden appreciation of ways to learn about and enjoy the prehistoric sites of Britain whilst minimising damage. A large number of archaeologists and heritage professionals have contributed articles and intelligence to the Heritage Journal’s daily output, and having built up followers across 175 countries the Heritage Action website has over 50,000 regular readers and in addition, enjoys a thriving Facebook community.
In January 2015, the Heritage Journal was recognised as among the ten best archaeology blogs from current UK history projects by Culture 24, a government funded arts and heritage charity listed as one of the Guardian’s top 100 essential websites. Favourably comparing the writing to a “slight Private Eye feel”, Culture 24 cited the Heritage Journal’s “no compromise” backlash against the government’s proposed tunnel at Stonehenge as one of a number of “various valiant initiatives to protect sites of historical value around the country”. In 2019 the Heritage Journal remains influential, having been numbered among the “Top 10 UK Archaeology Blogs and Websites to follow in 2019” by Feedspot.
In 2005, Heritage Action conceived a major first step strategy titled Achievable Stonehenge. This was a proposal to affordably improve the Stonehenge visitor experience irrespective of any long-term discussions about the future of the A303, by closing and grassing over a section of the A344 (between the junction with the A303 and the then existing car park), then decommissioning the pedestrian subway. Albeit never officially acknowledged Achievable Stonehenge received many endorsements, the greatest of which is perhaps that those affordable improvements promoted by Heritage Action’s Achievable Stonehenge campaign in 2005 now exist.
The opinion of Heritage Action in respect of the A303 road scheme remains unchanged: “No further damage within the World Heritage Site.” For any tunnel scheme to successfully complement the WHS it must have both entrances beyond the boundary. It is far better to leave the present road as it is than to introduce massive damage by tunnel entrances and associated infrastructure within the WHS, which is something UNESCO and ICOMOS have repeatedly highlighted.