Cherry Picking in a World Heritage Site

‘Cherry picking’ can create a variety of images – but for me, as a boy, it was removing cherries from an otherwise less than interesting cake.

Today the government appears to be attempting the same routine at Avebury; but it has been spotted, we hope in good time.

The designation of Stonehenge and Avebury as a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1986 emphasised the unity of the monuments within a cultural landscape, the whole being recognised as of Outstanding Universal Value to mankind. All Local Plans and Planning Inquiries since then have underlined this wholeness until last spring, at the A303 Stonehenge Inquiry, when the Department for Transport and English Heritage attempted to construct a hierarchy of importance: first the Scheduled monuments, and then the surrounding landscape – in an attempt to justify their intrusive but ‘affordable’ road proposals.

This watering-down of values for the Stonehenge landscape was strongly opposed by the Avebury Society and, more important, by the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS-UK), UNESCO’s adviser on our cultural World Heritage Sites. Unfortunately, in recommending implementation of the road improvement, the Stonehenge Inquiry Inspector failed to see through the cherry picking argument, and disregarded planning case history. But his recommendation cannot be challenged in law unless the Minister finally accepts his report and decides to go ahead with the scheme, following the A303 options review now in progress.

To concentrate, however, on Avebury. We now have a revised World Heritage Site Management Plan which is largely an excellent piece of work and to be welcomed. BUT – and the but is – that the cherry picking concept has appeared in the text, insisted upon by the DCMS and English Heritage against the views expressed by local Steering Committee members.

Cynics might think that this change in the text from our earlier plan is an attempt by Government to reinforce its position at Stonehenge. However, it only takes a moment to imagine what threats this approach creates for Avebury. This is a complete departure from the vigorous thinking applied at the designation of the World Heritage Site which aimed fully to protect the cultural landscape surrounding and including the known and visible monuments, as well as securing the future of the yet to be discovered sites and their stories. (Survey work since 1998 has resulted in a 20 per cent increase in the number of archaeological records.) It was the cake that was designated, not just the cherries.

So far, the Avebury Society and the Parish Council have alerted others and produced a background note on the situation. Encouraging responses to our letter have been received from UNESCO and The National Trust.

And of course there is a wider concern. Can you spot the cherry in the Department for Culture, Media and Sport’s current cake? You’ve got it – the Olympics! Money for our World Heritage Sites is likely to come a poor third.                                                      

                                                                                                            Ewart Holmes