Stonhenge-EJB.JPG (655840 bytes)

Title.jpg (20041 bytes)


Stonhenge-EJB.JPG (655840 bytes)

When approached, this was the reply of the Pagan Federation Sacred Sites Officer :

“I've been part of the Highways Agency public liaison meetings over the Stonehenge proposals representing the PF and I'm also liaising with the Stonhenge Alliance to which the PF belongs. I've also been to other meetings as a PF rep. e.g. the Council for British Archaeology symposium on the A303 Stonehenge proposals in London and the official launch of the scheme in Salisbury. 

The PF attitude has always been that Stonehenge deserves the best possible scheme which will protect the integrity of the archaeology in the World Heritage Site and respect its spiritual and religious importance to Pagans. The PF opposed the short cut-and-cover tunnel and I argued vociferously for a long bored tunnel which would avoid damage to the archaeology and hence to the sacred landscape. EH and the Highways Agency now seem to be suggesting that they always wanted a bored tunnel which is tosh. One of the problems with the short bored tunnel is the proximity of the portals at either end to important parts of the Stonehenge landsape, for example the barrow group at the western end. By the way the geophysical archaeological survey that has been carried out along the proposed road corridor was apparently badly designed and unlikely to find exactly the sorts of features that might be expected.

So the PF officially does not think that the current published road proposals are good enough. They will cause unacceptable destruction of archaeologial layers in the western half of the World Heritage Site and rather than reuniting the ancient landscape as claimed by EH this further divide it and disrupt the sacred landscape and setting of Stonehenge.

The Stonehenge Alliance have recently sent a letter of objection the wording of which I was consulted about to the Secretary of State calling for a Public Inquiry. The PF has also sent a letter to the Secretary of State objecting to the Draft Orders and also calling for a Public Inquiry.”


Back to Stonehenge Project page

Back to Home page