ICOMOS-UK has just tweeted: “where should the line be drawn when it comes to building, for example, a wind farm next to a heritage site? Comprise seems to be the key. Food for thought from @SeaChangeConf and @HistoricEngland“.

.
This intrigued us as we’ve often discussed the question, mostly arguing that wind farms should be built well away from heritage sites. We’ve not been alone. In 2015 Kate Mavor, when soon to be English Heritage Chief Executive, expressed similat concerns that too many wind farms were desecrating historic landscapes.
.
Still, as the planet warms we find the idea of compromise on wind farms persuasive. After all, they may do damage but mostly it’s not physical damage, it’s damage to the sense of place alone, and crucially it’s not permanent.
.
Compare the Stonehenge “short tunnel”, currently being promoted by English Heritage. There, the damage IS physical and IS permanent, yet just as the 4th Century Egyptian monks who sacked the temples proclaimed “There is no such thing as robbery for those who truly possess Christ“, English Heritage is claiming “the damage is justified because we know it is.”
.

4th Century certainty on display in Wiltshire?