17th March 2009, 06:09 PM
</lurk>
Never thought I'd post here over something like this. Of course, as a new poster no-one knows me so feel free to disregard my opinions :-)
Ok, I live locally to this Field School. Actually I grew up in the village of Graveney (1/2 mile to one side of this land) and now live in Faversham (1/2 a mile the other side). I used to walk to school along a foot path past this field 20 years ago and now walk my terrier the other way down the same footpath.
Disclaimers:
* I am a nodding acquaintance of the guy who runs this Dog Training School and you'll have a hard time finding a nicer or better qualified guy. See: http://www.meadowdogs.co.uk/rh_personal.shtml
* No money has ever changed hands between him and myself in either direction.
* I don't know anything about Paul Wilkinson other than that which I saw years ago when he was involved with a Time Team episode at Syndale in Faversham.
* I'm in no way a professional archaeologist or expert on planning law but I have an amateur interest in local history and archaeology.
Here are some local facts as I see them, feel free to correct me if you know better.
* The Field School is a commercial enterprise.
* The Field School is now, as it always has been, surrounded on all four sides (bar access tracks) by commercially owned land; either light industry or agricultural.
* Behind the Field School is a stable yard with full planning permission for use as horse stabling: it's been a stable yard for more than 20 years that I know of.
* Behind the stable yard is a paddock with full planning permission for use as part of a stable.
* Behind the paddock is a footpath where I walk my dog.
* More than 6 months ago the dog trainer's lease was up on his old premiss and he was forced to move.
* The owner of the stables allowed him to set up temporarily in one corner of the paddock as he was desperately looking for a new home and was trying to stay in business (and pay his staff).
* The corner of the paddock is completely fenced in and I've only ever seen dogs in that area.
* The dog training has been going on there for 6 months and I'm told there hasn't been a single complaint.
* It was going so well there that the owner of the stables and the dog school both decided to formalise things; all the neighbours gave verbal consent when asked.
That much I knew before I saw this thread but now I see the Field School seems to be running some kind of astroturfing campaign I had to say something.
My personal opinion is that members of the archaeological community should be careful when getting involved in planning applications that involve archaeological sites, let alone ones that are purely disputes between commercial enterprises. Also, since the land in questions has been commercially used for agriculture, horse stabling and dog training in the past I fail to see how the formal change of use threatens the existence of the field school in any way.
Cheers,
Andy.
<lurk>
Never thought I'd post here over something like this. Of course, as a new poster no-one knows me so feel free to disregard my opinions :-)
Ok, I live locally to this Field School. Actually I grew up in the village of Graveney (1/2 mile to one side of this land) and now live in Faversham (1/2 a mile the other side). I used to walk to school along a foot path past this field 20 years ago and now walk my terrier the other way down the same footpath.
Disclaimers:
* I am a nodding acquaintance of the guy who runs this Dog Training School and you'll have a hard time finding a nicer or better qualified guy. See: http://www.meadowdogs.co.uk/rh_personal.shtml
* No money has ever changed hands between him and myself in either direction.
* I don't know anything about Paul Wilkinson other than that which I saw years ago when he was involved with a Time Team episode at Syndale in Faversham.
* I'm in no way a professional archaeologist or expert on planning law but I have an amateur interest in local history and archaeology.
Here are some local facts as I see them, feel free to correct me if you know better.
* The Field School is a commercial enterprise.
* The Field School is now, as it always has been, surrounded on all four sides (bar access tracks) by commercially owned land; either light industry or agricultural.
* Behind the Field School is a stable yard with full planning permission for use as horse stabling: it's been a stable yard for more than 20 years that I know of.
* Behind the stable yard is a paddock with full planning permission for use as part of a stable.
* Behind the paddock is a footpath where I walk my dog.
* More than 6 months ago the dog trainer's lease was up on his old premiss and he was forced to move.
* The owner of the stables allowed him to set up temporarily in one corner of the paddock as he was desperately looking for a new home and was trying to stay in business (and pay his staff).
* The corner of the paddock is completely fenced in and I've only ever seen dogs in that area.
* The dog training has been going on there for 6 months and I'm told there hasn't been a single complaint.
* It was going so well there that the owner of the stables and the dog school both decided to formalise things; all the neighbours gave verbal consent when asked.
That much I knew before I saw this thread but now I see the Field School seems to be running some kind of astroturfing campaign I had to say something.
My personal opinion is that members of the archaeological community should be careful when getting involved in planning applications that involve archaeological sites, let alone ones that are purely disputes between commercial enterprises. Also, since the land in questions has been commercially used for agriculture, horse stabling and dog training in the past I fail to see how the formal change of use threatens the existence of the field school in any way.
Cheers,
Andy.
<lurk>