Stonehenge: Campaigners lose court challenge to tunnel plans

The High Court in London on Monday rejected a bid to stop the construction of a controversial road tunnel near the prehistoric megalithic stone circle Stonehenge in southwest England.

The case pitted British campaigners — and to some extent UNESCO, which named Stonehenge a World Heritage Site in 1986 — against the government, the National Highways agency and the National Trust, a charity that maintains British sites of natural beauty and historical significance.

The Save Stonehenge World Heritage Site group and a private individual who owns land near the proposed construction site, Andy Rhind-Tutt, had argued that plans to build the tunnel, particularly the western section nearer Stonehenge, could cause "permanent and irreversible damage to the site."

The government had initially approved similar plans in 2020, but an appeal against them was successful at the same court, the highest for such issues in England and Wales, in 2021.

Last year, the project was reactivated by the government and at the second attempt the challenge in court failed.

Judge David Holgate largely dismissed the campaigners' claims in Monday's ruling, calling many of them "unarguable."

Holgate said that ministers had "rightly focused on the relevant policies" when making the plans, and that the campaigners' evidence "provides no basis to undermine that conclusion."

What do the proponents argue?

The government and National Highways argue that the tunnel is necessary to relieve traffic on the stretch of the A303 trunk road around the Stonehenge, Amesbury and Salisbury areas.

The busy road is a major route connecting the southwest of England to London. Parts of it follow the route of a road originally constructed by the Romans and it is still often referred to as the Fosse Way.

Much of the A303 is a broad dual carriageway. But the hilly and twisty segment around Stonehenge reverts to a single-lane segment. It's a recognized accident and traffic black spot, with roughly double the average accident rates for a road of its kind, according to National Highways.

Proponents also argue that the tunnel will reduce noise and visual pollution for the roughly 1 million annual visitors at Stonehenge, by moving the vehicles out of sight.

The 3.3-kilometer (roughly 2-mile) tunnel is expected to cost around 1.7 billion pounds (roughly €2 billion or $2.1 billion)

What do the opponents argue?

The Save Stonehenge World Heritage Site Alliance, a company formed to pool resources of opponents to the plan, argues that the tunnel could imperil Stonehenge or other areas of historical significance in the area. It said it intends to appeal the decision.

"While this judgement is a huge blow and exposes the site to National Highway's state-sponsored vandalism, we will continue the fight. In the dying days of this Conservative Government, which has inflicted so much damage on the country, we cannot let it destroy our heritage as well." John Adams, the group's chairman, said.

They also say the construction will alter the topography and the local views of the monument.

It proposed a bypass for the area and the city of Salisbury as an alternative that it said would negate the issue.

But Judge Holgate found that this would in turn pose risks for protected conservation areas or areas of natural beauty in the southwest of England.

"South Wiltshire needs a decent road network, Salisbury needs a bypass and surprise surprise, if that happens a Stonehenge Tunnel wouldn't be required," Andy Rhind-Tutt wrote after Monday's verdict. He advised Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and Transport Secretary Danny Kruger to "save the money ... and use it wisely instead."

UNESCO following case closely too

UNESCO said last year, amid the hearing, that it was "profoundly regrettable" that the British government had re-issued planning permission applications for the scheme "without introducing changes consistent with previous Committee decisions and the advice of the 2022 Advisory mission."

It argued that this "constitutes a potential threat to the OUV of the property," a reference to "Outstanding Universal Value," a criteria for selecting World Heritage Sites.

It has, however, welcomed some other development and conservation projects around Stonehenge.

Druids, Romans, Anglo-Saxons all present in area, several other historical sites surround Stonehenge

The area around Stonehenge in South Wiltshire appears to have been of considerable significance to druids in neolithic Britain.

In very close proximity to Stonehenge, there also lies the less renowned Avebury Ring stone circle, the West Kennett Long Barrow, which is thought to be even older than Stonehenge, and the artificially constructed chalk mound Silbury Hill, the tallest prehistoric human-made mound in Europe whose purpose is still debated.

Later, Romans were present in the area in numbers. And Wilton near Salisbury was also a site of considerable significance during the Anglo-Saxon era and the 9th century amid the rein of King Alfred the Great of Wessex. He was the first king to also call himself King of the Anglo-Saxons and is seen by some as either the first king of England, or the monarch who enabled that title to later come into being.

Some have also questioned what other potentially undiscovered relics or archaeological material might be endangered by the tunnel's construction.

Wiltshire-born antiquities historian Tom Holland, a co-founder of the Save Stonehenge Alliance who in 2020 presented a 50,000-signature petition to then-Prime Minister Boris Johnson when the plans were first launched, also lamented the ruling.

"A devastating loss, not just for everyone who has campaigned against hte Government's pig-headed plans for the Stonehenge landscape, but for Britain, for the world, and for subsequent generations," Holland wrote, before adding, "the fight, however, goes on."

Read the original article here