There’s talk that the tunnel scheme might get canceled. We’ll know soon. If it happens, will the pro-tunnel lobby express regret? It’s ticklish for pro-conservation bodies to express regret that massive new damage won’t happen.

All those claims that it will be a good thing! Would they say “actually, we’re glad it’s not happening”? Take just one of their tunnel benefits: “re-uniting the landscape”. Will they admit it was a false benefit and they’re glad it’s not happening?

Here’s a green bridge over the Trans Canadian Highway in Banff. Not exactly a looker, but it does its job of ensuring grizzly bears can cross over, thereby ensuring their genetic variation. So on balance well worth the investment.

.

.

Compare and contrast the green bridges over the proposed new motorway in the Stonehenge World Heritage site. Far less of a looker, more like a Georgian garden feature imposed on a prehistoric landscape.

.

.

It’s not for grizzly bears it’s just for the tiny, tiny proportion of people who want to cross on foot or bicycle. What is wrong with a pedestrian tunnel for them? In other words, it’s not a needed green bridge, it’s a vanity green bridge to fit in with the “uniting the landscape” claim. If it’s canceled let’s see if they have the neck to say they regret that it won’t be built!