I wonder who started the rumour....ART was it you?

https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/18268645.stonehenge-tunnel-scheme-scrapped/

This just in from Highways England:

"Good morning,

I’m sure you’ve seen the articles in the media (Salisbury Journal and Mail Online to name a couple) with the headline that the scheme is to be “scrapped”.  

I just wanted to let you know we have no information to suggest there is any truth in the rumour contained in the stories. Our official lines – which you are welcome to share - are":

"This is pure speculation. The A303 Stonehenge scheme is going through proper planning process and we are awaiting a final decision from the Secretary of State for Transport.

In the development of the A303 Stonehenge scheme, we have conducted a number of ground investigations, archaeological and ecological surveys. These have helped to inform the design and the procurement process.

The results, which we are continuing to analyse, are in line with our expectations. 

Kind regards"

Marcia Daniels

Senior Communication and Engagement Manager A303 Amesbury to Berwick Down (Stonehenge)

And here's what John Glen MP has to say about these rumours: https://www.johnglen.org.uk/ 

City MP John Glen, who has championed the tunnel scheme, said: “Large, strategic infrastructure projects like this are always subject to ongoing controversy and rumour until the final decision is made by the government.   I am obviously aware of media speculation on the project in recent months, but this is a decision for the Secretary of State for Transport to take, not a choice devolved to the Westminster rumour mill.  The Planning Inspectorate made their recommendation to Grant Shapps on January 2, beginning a three-month period in which to issue a final decision on the project. We await his decision.  I appreciate that there is considerable cost accompanying the project but I have always been clear that the alternatives to what have been proposed do not stack up.   Mr Glen added:  The ‘surface’ options following close to the current route are the most archaeologically and environmentally damaging to the World Heritage site, while options deviating the road much further south near to Salisbury will obviously not produce the journey time reductions required of the project.“Ultimately, however, this is not a decision for the local MP or city minister, and we all need to wait to see what conclusion is reached.”  

What about local people?!

"Campaign group the Stonehenge Alliance has gathered around 50,000 signatures for its petition calling for “no further damage” to be done to the archaeological landscape in which the Neolithic stone circle stands".   A fifth of the signatories are from more than 100 countries outside the UK, which organisers say underlines international concern over the project

STAG says:  of the 50,000 signatures - 5% of those live in other countries most of whom probably don't even know where Stonehenge is, far less the World Heritage Site!   Trust SHA to put their slant on this.....it only proves that they manipulated the voting public!
and STONEHENGE ALLIANCE COULDN'T GIVE A TOSS ABOUT LOCAL PEOPLE!

"The road, which currently passes the stones, often suffers from severe congestion as it is a popular route for motorists travelling between London and the South West."

STAG says: and this results in motorists rat running through local villages resulting in poor air quality, damage to property, traffic on narrow unsuitable routes, danger to local people i.e. mothers with children, the elderly and infirm, cyclists, horse riders and walkers
and STONEHENGE ALLIANCE COULDN'T GIVE A TOSS ABOUT LOCAL PEOPLE!

However, Blackadder actor and Time Team presenter Sir Tony Robinson has said the impact on the site would be "dire".   "It's a complete farce to expect to solve congestion and preserve the site by building a huge new expressway there,"

STAG says: You could drive a bus through the inaccuracies and out of date information in Stonehenge Alliance's argument.   They told The Inspectorate as recent as last year that.... "the traffic on the Stonehenge section of the A303 has not increased since 2004!!!".

and STONEHENGE ALLIANCE COULDN'T GIVE A TOSS ABOUT LOCAL PEOPLE

You can read the truth and the future of the WHS going forward on this web site: https://highwaysengland.co.uk/a303-stonehenge-benefits/

And this is unfortunate..... here's what the local Lib Dem candidate is saying....perhaps he should have done further research before taking to Twitter.....he may just have shot himself in the foot! 

Calling all budding archaeologists....

Young, old, or even decrepit!!!

So!.....au contraire to what http://stonehengealliance.org.uk/ would have us think regarding - as they see it.... "the desecration of the Stonehenge World Heritage Site" (WHS) and the misinformation they put out on their website - explained in my last post, we have the facts, and their assertions about the WHS going forward couldn't be further from the truth.   

Of course, Stonehenge Alliance have already publicly stated that they "do not have any common ground" between Highways England, the A303 Project and themselves.   They use these scare mongering tactics and talk about desecration of the WHS, destruction of as yet undiscovered archaeology, and blatantly ignore the obvious issues relating to rat running, poor air quality, and continue with their theory that a longer tunnel will do the trick.   So for the next 15 years or so....and some have waited 30 years, we have to suffer further destruction to our village roads and homes, danger to residents while tens of thousands use the village as a rat run until a longer tunnel is yet again considered, deliberated, and more consultations take place at further huge costs.....Will Stonehenge Alliance come up with any money for this.....I think not!!!

Members of STAG attended the by-monthly Community Forum last Wednesday and in attendance were two archaeological consultants:    Neil MacNab and Leonora O’Brien outlined what archaeological investigation has taken place to date, and what is planned as part of the Public Archaeological Community Engagement (PACE) program which will run from Autumn 2020.   The PACE is in the early stages of planning and community forum members will have an opportunity to input in the coming months.  Should the Project go ahead - (decision to be announced 2nd April)  Neil and Leonora confirmed that the archaeological works will not be limited to any particular time period and there will be security on site.   The plan going forward, both during the build and after completion is to "Open up the WHS to all"!   
It is Highways England's https://highwaysengland.co.uk/a303-stonehenge-home/ plan to look at the broader picture i.e. a broad spectrum, not merely neolithic.   During the build there will be archaeologists in attendance at all times and anything found of interest - be it..... bone, flint, artifacts such as the capsule from Quatermass and the Pit, long buried dog bones, old aircraft engines or even skulls of long dead archaeologists, will be examined, recorded, catalogued, and consigned to their appropriate niche.  Those of interest will be carefully taken to a place of safety for further erudite examination!   
It is H E's intention, that in the future, these artifacts will be included into perhaps a 
pop-up museum that could be transported around the area, into villages and schools and where there could be presentations in public places so that we can all share the experience.   
That's not all.....the title of this post is "calling all budding archaeologists".....It is planned that local people, schools and anyone with an interest in the WHS can have their chance to get their wellies on and perhaps attend a supervised dig where anything found will be part of an educational experience and therefore, finding a more structured balance toward the archaeology of the WHS; available to all, and a place of learning for all.

At the recent Forum the "Terms of Reference" were updated by HE: 

A303 Stonehenge scheme Community Forum 

Terms of Reference: what it’s for, what it will do, and how....
Purpose

The Community Forum will provide a way for Highways England to engage with communities local to the A303 Stonehenge scheme. It will be a forum for local bodies/groups to get up-to-date information about the scheme, feed back into the scheme about any local issues, and understand how the scheme will progress. The forum will help local communities, via their group representatives:

• Find out accurate, up-to-date information about the scheme, through the consultation and planning stages and during construction. This could include information about the Development Consent Order (DCO) process, what local communities can expect in terms of traffic and environmental benefits and how delivery will be managed
• Ask questions of the project team, bringing their constituents’, members’ or stakeholders’ questions to the forum
• Understand what the scheme means for them and how it will progress over the years

 https://www.facebook.com/search/top/?q=a303%20stonehenge%20community&epa=SEARCH_BOX

Like for Like??!!

This caught my eye and gave me the laugh I craved right now:

New post on The Heritage Journal

 https://heritageaction.wordpress.com/2020/02/05/stonehenge-yowling-moggy-nos-37-38/

Presumably the folk who write for Heritage Journal think it's right to compare the congestion on a 7 mile stretch of the A303 - part dual carriageway that filters down to single carriageway with that in London plus the other cities on their graph??!!
Would they not have been better to make a like for like comparison with....say the A31 at Ringwood in Hampshire? 
This is their reply to my comment on their piece :

New comment on The Heritage Journal

heritageaction commented on Stonehenge yowling moggy Nos 37 & 38!. in response to Janice Hassett: As one can clearly see…these are all major cities in the UK which would be expected to have congestion especially at peak times. The A303 at Stonehenge is not however, part of a city and this 7 miles section is over capacity by 80%. I rest my case! "1. Whether a road is rural or urban is irrelevant when assessing the economic cost of congestion so your point is invalid as you’ve misunderstood the point. 2. An overcapacity of 70% is dwarfed by the many hundreds of percentage over capacity suffered by many hundreds of other roads so your point makes the valid point that the money would be far better spent in many other places. You’re now welcome to rest your case!!"