Forum Replies Created
What sanctions would you favour against illegal hoardings?
Thats right I’m from the Garden of Ireland, Jack White’s was a great roadside Inn until she ran it into the ground by not respecting the heritage of the place and letting things (like cleaning the kitchen) get too close to the core attraction.
Thankfully its now under new management and the threat has been removed, its a win win situation for the commuters of Wicklow who can stop and enjoy the place anytime they want with the same ambience as before.
Sometimes you have to Sue to protect the common good, sad really 🙁
It’s not a matter of ranking Archer’s and the Wiggins Teape buildings above Tara – it’s about ranking them ahead of a narrow strip of land hundreds and hundreds of metres away from the Hill of Tara.
Do I value architecturally brilliant buildings above “cultural landscapes”? Yip, guilty as charged. Give me something concrete (pun intended!) ahead of airy fairy landscapes any day of the week
Ha ha, you are very funny Sue and could I ask is that Sue for Susan or Sue for litigation?
Rory Thanks for that little nugget of information I will try and locate it
@Rory W wrote:
been gathered for a few year appearently
Rory what’s your definition of a few?
Tara on the basis of threat and cultural importance,
Croagh Patrick on the basis of Cultural significance and Glencar’s mining ambitions
The Burran on the basis of unique habitat and to ensure any visitor centre is done on best pronciples and not as a cash cow
The people in the WHC section of Unesco are concerned that any site of significance could fail to be protected.
Mount Nimba is a good example of how the process works.
Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve
Guinea RÃ©gion de Lola
N7 36 11.5 W8 23 27.5
Date of Inscription: 1981
Criteria: N (ii) (iv)
Located on the borders of Guinea, Liberia and CÃ´te d’Ivoire, Mount Nimba rises above the surrounding savannah. Its slopes are covered by dense forest at the foot of grassy mountain pastures. They harbour an especially rich flora and fauna, with endemic species such as the viviparous toad and chimpanzees that use stones as tools.
Inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger: 1992
Threats to the Site:
The Reserve was inscribed on the List of the World Heritage in Danger as a result of two factors: a proposed iron-ore mining concession to an international consortium and the arrival of a large number of refugees to areas in and around the Guinean part of the site. The granting of the concession was announced in 1992 and included portions of the WH site.
When the WH Committee expressed its concern about the mining venture, it was informed by the State Party that there had been an error in the definition of the boundary of Mount Nimba Nature Reserve at the time of the nomination of the site to the World Heritage List and that the area proposed for the mining project was not considered as part of the WH site. An expert mission in May 1993 recommended a corrected and revised boundary which would ensure the site’s integrity and incorporate an area of 17,749 ha. This recommendation was adopted by the Government of Guinea in late November 1993 and subsequently registered by the World Heritage Committee at its seventeenth session.
In response to the concern expressed by the World Heritage Committee regarding the impact of the mining project, the influx of refugees as well as other threats to the site, the Guinean Ministry for Energy and Environment has established a Management Centre, “Centre de Gestion de l’Environnement des Monts Nimba (CEGEN)”, responsible for all environmental and legal questions, for the monitoring of the water quality in the region and integrated rural development and socio-economic studies.
Report of the 5th Session of the Committee
Report of the 6th Session of the Committee
Justification for inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger, 1992: Report of the 16th Session of the Committee
State of Conservation Report: 1999
State of Conservation Report: 1998
Advisory Body Evaluation
Natural site datasheet from WCMC
@Graham Hickey wrote:
It’s always reminded me of a Lego brick that came with a train station set – had that exact symbol on it 🙂 😮
Was that the Citywest set?
I agree Beweleys without toast and rashers isn’t really Beweleys. Where is all this political correctness taking us what will be next a fat tax?
it does seem strange that the Skelligs are a World Heritage Site but Tara is not, Tara is definitely much more of a cultural icon.
@Graham Hickey wrote:
A full programme of works needs to be carried out, even the possibility of revealing Gardiner’s Georgian brick ought to be investigated with the help of the CC.
What are the chances that the brick would be in decent condition?
Boyler here is the list:
As you can see there is a bias towards Natural Heritage and Pre-Rennaisance architecture with only 788 properties afforded this designation on Earth.
Those are correct
Clonmacnoise is a canidate World Heritage Site as well
Eejit would be hiberno-english
Maybe that suits certain people?
I thought this was an original idea but
http://www.justice.ie/80256E010039C5AF/vWeb/fl … Report.pdf would indicate otherwise
Thanks I didn’t expect such a comprehensive answer
@Thomond Park wrote:
Is there a right way to over-spend public money?
An NRA Tribunal would be good 😀
Try driving from Bray to Parkwest everyday and include a tram system crossing a roundabout.
It says a lot about this country that logistics are considered a higher priority than moving people and at 305 points it would appear that moving goods is not considered too important either.