38th Welsh Division Memorial

[LarsA]

On iphone, I can't see if there is a report button for offensive and inflammable posts. In the absence of such, I sincerely hope that the mod team take appropriate action!

ATB,

Lars

[caulkheader]

One last point; perhaps Tom T-M can tell us what gives him the right to be the arbiter of what constitutes "taste and common sense" ?

TR

Well I for one agree with him, but have some sympathy for the welsh wfa who must feel being in rock/hard place situation.

[towisuk]

"It used to be accepted that Patriotism was the last refuge of a scoundrel(*), but nowadays it seems to be "Health & Safety" and "Freedom of Information". Much of what precedes this is nothing short of sycophantic drivel."

And there we have it! not only are we members who have genuine concerns about safety at memorials etc, we are by implication of the above..... posted by a member...."scoundrels".....

Mods please note....

Tom

[Bernard_Lewis]

We only have to look at the daily papers to see coverage of what seem to be 'silly' claims for personal injury etc. The abundance of 'no win-no fee' lawyers make it fairly easy for those who think they have suffered an injury to lodge a claim and cause bodies (large or small) no end of administrative, legal or financial trouble. I'm sure the South Wales WFA branch has little financial or legal muscle and have to take sensible precautions to limit risk.

On a different tack, many years ago I was a member of another body which had entered into a contract in good faith which it later found it was unable to honour. The subsequent legal wranglings saw the top three officials of the body dragged through a legal process where there was a real risk that they would lose their houses and other possessions (one official was told that his baby grand piano, once seized, had been earmarked for the home of one of the litigants). It was a different legal issue but liability claims can cause the same problems. Its like a runaway train...

Finally, has any complainer bothered to berate the CWGC for 'selling' the dragon trustees a standard 'monstrosity' rather than just kicking those who are trying to make the place accessible for all?

For the record I don't attend branch meetings at Cardiff - its 40+ miles away....

Bernard

[SiegeGunner]

Compared with this rampant insanity, the metal staircase at Mametz Wood suddenly looks eminently sensible .... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2558461/Rampant-lunacy-Council-pays-40-000-fit-10-level-60m-eyesore-home-disabled-girl-needed-simple-ramp.html

Yesterday afternoon, I picked and stumbled my way up a steep slope with simple steps consisting of railway sleepers set on their sides, retaining an earth and chalk infill that was churned to a treacherous, glutinous muddy consistency worthy of the Somme. The slope leads to an unfenced open clifftop with a history of deliberate and accidental falls. There were no health & safety professionals in attendance and no litigation lawyers hovering. I'm not exactly sure where the land boundary falls, but this site belongs to either the National Trust or the local council. Put simply, there would be no public access to open-air landscape and heritage sites if their owners were exposed to unlimited liability and litigation or prosecution.

[philipdavies48]

Thanks to all those who have posted positively and supportively of the refurbishment of the 38th (Welsh) Division memorial site. The SWWFA as someone pointed out was between a rock and a hard place and many people will go to visit the memorial in the next five years. There will be a "small" service of remembrance and commemoration in July 2016. To all the disclaimers judge the site then when the landscaping and planting have also been in place and begun to mature. Remember what David Jones wrote in his poem "In Parenthesis" describing his experience in the wood in July 1916 when he was wounded. After dumping his kit piece by piece until he was only left with his rifle he decided to "leave it for the Cooks Tourist" - what a peceptive comment. Yes there are lots of people who wish to visit this iconic spot and we should and are proud to help facilitate this.

I am led to believe that the Dragon is due to be returned (weather permitting) on March 17th.

[Seadog]

Can we get away from this "Cooks tourist" description of those who for whatever reason visit the battlefields. It seems to me a very disparaging description and one which certainly did not apply to the Welsh gentleman and his wife that I had the pleasure to take to this place, for his father fought here and forever remembered with pride being a member of the Welsh Division. The gentleman was very emotional when I took him into the wood where the Welsh lost so many. If anyone has a right to visit this place it was him having grown up with the stories his father told him so a little more understanding of why people take the trouble and expense to visit the Western Front would be in order in my view.

Regards

Norman

[Tom Tulloch-Marshall]

... perhaps Tom T-M can tell us what gives him the right to be the arbiter of what constitutes "taste and common sense" ? ...

Terry - I have not claimed to be the arbiter of either, however I will lay claim to having a modicum of common sense, - a faculty which is clearly deficient in the construction at Mametz, and elsewhere in this discussion.

... My hackles instinctively rise when I hear stuff like 'were declared unsafe by Health and Safety' and 'could have resulted in a serious accident raising the question of liability', but I won't challenge you to produce the report of someone with professional/official standing in the H&S field in France, or the opinion of a properly-qualified legal expert re liability.

... It is a pizzy little hill and all it needs is a dozen or so open platform steps, banked by boards held in place by deep-driven spikes and floored with grippy stones.

On the first point, maybe you should have asked (for evidence).

On the second point, - exactly !

Would you be willing to accept responsibility and cost from any actions that would arise from injury incurred to a visitor(s) whilst ascending to the monument??

If so...... I'm sure the WFA and the other responsible groups would be willing to let you shoulder the burden of insurance....

As has already been pointed out - most of this is simply scaremongering. The 38th Div. site isn't a retail, commercial, or industrial site. There is no staff presence or other form of supervision, and no entry or attendance fees are charged. At most all that is required is signage notifying that entry onto the site is entirely at the risk of the public and that no liability is accepted. In fact at the moment the SWWFA (and the CWGC ?) do not seem to deem even this to be required, as witnessed by the current signage >

Note also that the current "officially designated" access to the memorial is via the south-westerly slope, which is currently grassed (see earlier posts). Makes a complete nonsense of the previous H&S arguments and claims.

With regards to previous claims that the SW approach is too narrow to allow it to be used to construct a more sympathetic means as access >

...yes widening it slightly may be difficult as some of those huge bushes have stems nearly three quarters of an inch thick.

Does it impinge on the view from the memorial towards Flatiron Copse Cemetery and The Hammerhead ?

That would be yes then ...

Is it obtrusive when viewed from the Flatiron Copse Cemetery and The Hammerhead side of the memorial ?

Yes again ...

I'm sorry, but its awful, - and the excuses, well they are just that - excuses.

Tom

[Hywyn]

Terry - I have not claimed to be the arbiter of either, however I will lay claim to having a modicum of common sense, - a faculty which is clearly deficient in the construction at Mametz, and elsewhere in this discussion.

People who are not of the same view as you lack common sense? They seem to have common courtesy though.

Where's that little notice you used to have in your signature. The one that said something along the lines that your posts might be delayed because you were in pre-mod.

Time it returned maybe.

Hywyn

[Tom Tulloch-Marshall]

... People who are not of the same view as you lack common sense? ...

... your posts might be delayed because you were in pre-mod. Time it returned maybe. ...

Ref your first point, - you simply have to read this topic to see that my opinion is not unique. Notwithstanding that I suppose that we are doomed to have to accept that the creators of this "addition" to the 38th Div. site are determined that what they have done is undeserving of aesthetic criticism. Obviously I strongly disagree with that, - I see it as being something of an abortion (in the broader sense of the word).

As for the need for it in the first place (these stairs); can I quote David Hughes, the Vice-Chairman of the South Wales Branch of the WFA, as reported in "Wales Online" (Appeal launched to repair Mametz Wood Welsh soldiers' memorial).

"“The stone work is fine and the dragon needs to be repainted. But what we are concerned about are the steps leading to the memorial and the surrounding vegetation. We’d like to remove the steps and put grass there instead.”" (my highlighting)

That is quite clear and concise, isn't it ?! -

I'd be interested to hear the views of the sculptor, David Peterson, with regards to this addition and it's effect upon his memorial. I suspect though that he would feel obliged to keep his views to himself in order to avoid affronting his sponsors, - which leads to your second point - your joining the appeal to the moderators to have my views suppressed because you 1) don't like them, and 2) have no meaningful response to the objection which has been raised against what has been done at this memorial site. An interesting rejoinder.

"It" is awful. There is no reason for it, and no excuse for it. I fully accept that an "access situation" had to be addressed, but what has resulted is perhaps as bad a "solution" as could have been achieved given the environs about the memorial.

Tom

[Hywyn]

I have read the topic and I have noted, and accept, that others agree with you.

They, however, do not reinforce their views with objectional put downs.

I have no problem with your views, just your delivery. If that was less confontational then your thread/posts would be far more effective as you are obviously very knowledgable.

There is nothing interesting about the rejoinder. I have previously had cause to bring it to your attention. Since then I ignore 99% of your posts. I read those where they touch on matters of interest to me.

Hywyn

[KIRKY]

something more like the steps at Devonshire Trench would have been suitable.

Tony

[Steven Broomfield]

Out of interest, is there any point this discussion continuing? The pros are pro, the antis are anti. Some of us vacillate, but I'm not convinced it's terribly edifying.

[Tom Tulloch-Marshall]

something more like the steps at Devonshire Trench would have been suitable.

Tony - quite. That sort of thing on the SW incline would have been ideal. Its a simple design to construct and the robustness of the foundations could be adjusted to suit the expected level of usage. The use of red gravel would also have been sympathetic to the rest of the memorial and the adjoining flat track could have been surfaced to suit the grass cutting machinery (etc). I suppose that that is now a "what might have been".

Devonshire Cemetery

Tom

[Terry Powell]

Well, having read all the diatribe thrown at the Mametz memorial by TTM, it's ok suggesting alternatives after the fact. This always seems to be the case. Seargant Major seems to have done a fine job of justifying the measures implemented. Yes, we could have a large-scale feature put there with a grand wall an posts, chains inform ]ation panels, souvenir shops, why but with a duty of care and public liability awareness we have to meet health and safety head on, and this is what we have done. Planting is our next project for whiich we need to raise funds but it will materialise in the course of time. TTM may want to go and pick up some of the litter created by the touring fraternity. Perhaps he can help to raise some funds for its upkeep instead of running it down. And maybe he can provide some daffodils in time for St. David's Day. To quote Abraham Lincoln.......... pleasing all the people etc, etc., you know the rest.

[Chris_Baker]

I ask this in all seriousness. There may be others individuals or organisations in the same boat. I can think of several memorials and sites to which it might apply (not staircase cases, but other battlefield features). The replacement of the staircase is said to have been triggered by a view that there is a risk of legal claims should anyone suffer an accident at the site. I have two questions: perhaps only South Wales WFA (which I presume is represented by at least two members who have posted above) can answer them.

Q1 is about why. Has this action been taken based on a layman's view of the risk, or has a professional risk assessment been carried out, and if so by who?

Q2 is about who. The 'someone' who is at legal risk is presumably the owner of the site. Is that the WFA branch? And is that a legal entity? Or is the site owned by named individuals?

[Terry Powell]

Referring to previous comments the original steps were unsafe and needed urgent replacement and uderpinning was ruled out so a new stairs was put in place. Hopefully, these will satisfy H & S which is a legal rquirement, never mind the appearance which seems to assume a more important level in some people's minds. WE have at least 2 professional Civil Engineers in the Branch who seem to know what they are talking about. As for myself, I spent quite a number of years in H & S and risk assessing in a Higher Educational environment and also have a high level of Design experience. Regarding the dragon,it surely has a degree of risk (with pointy bits, etc.,) but children should be under the supervision of teachers or parents and anyway, it would be foolish to try to climb it. As for putting a barrier up near Flatiron this is nonsense. Without some element of risk we might as well stay in bed. We can still enjoy a view from the memorial sitting on the lone bench which commands a fine panorama of the Wood. Better if some one would like to volunteer to remove the trees above the memorial site and give the ones below a trim, we in the South Wales branch would be grateful. Perhaps some of the moaners would be kind enough to be permanent resident there and keep an eye on it. Lastly, we will be celebrating the actual centenary in July 1916 and are drawing up plans for events at the memorial over that weekend. They may want to join in.

Terry (Phil's predecessor)

[Chris_Baker]

Thank you, Terry.

[Tom Tulloch-Marshall]

Well, having read all the diatribe thrown at the Mametz memorial by TTM, it's ok suggesting alternatives after the fact. This always seems to be the case. Seargant Major seems to have done a fine job of justifying the measures implemented. Yes, we could have a large-scale feature put there with a grand wall an posts, chains inform ]ation panels, souvenir shops, why but with a duty of care and public liability awareness we have to meet health and safety head on, and this is what we have done. Planting is our next project for whiich we need to raise funds but it will materialise in the course of time. TTM may want to go and pick up some of the litter created by the touring fraternity. Perhaps he can help to raise some funds for its upkeep instead of running it down. And maybe he can provide some daffodils in time for St. David's Day. To quote Abraham Lincoln.......... pleasing all the people etc, etc., you know the rest.

" it's ok suggesting alternatives after the fact."

And how, exactly, could I be expected to comment on this abortion before the fact. Do you think that I (and others) may be clairvoyant ? Could I / we be expected to guess in advance that you were intending to commit this crime against common sense and good taste ?

"Seargant Major seems to have ..."

I thought you were Seargant (sic) Major ? - No, wait, you are Sarntmajor - is there a Sergeant Major ? What is all this stupid made-up name nonsense ? Don't you have proper names in Wales ? Who are you ????????????

"Yes, we could have a large-scale feature put there with a grand wall an posts, chains inform ]ation panels, souvenir shops, why but with a duty of care and public liability awareness we have to meet health and safety head on, and this is what we have done."

You've lost me completely. What are you talking about ? Is some point intended there ?

"TTM may want to go and pick up some of the litter created by the touring fraternity."

Again, what are you talking about - what point are you trying to make ? Do you want to come down to my village and pick some litter off the streets - but why on earth would I expect you to do that ?

" Perhaps he can help to raise some funds for its upkeep"

No. Its your staircase - you pay for its upkeep.

"And maybe he can provide some daffodils in time for St. David's Day"

Again - why, and no.

Referring to previous comments the original steps were unsafe and needed urgent replacement and uderpinning was ruled out so a new stairs was put in place. Hopefully, these will satisfy H & S which is a legal rquirement, never mind the appearance which seems to assume a more important level in some people's minds. WE have at least 2 professional Civil Engineers in the Branch who seem to know what they are talking about. As for myself, I spent quite a number of years in H & S and risk assessing in a Higher Educational environment and also have a high level of Design experience. Regarding the dragon,it surely has a degree of risk (with pointy bits, etc.,) but children should be under the supervision of teachers or parents and anyway, it would be foolish to try to climb it. As for putting a barrier up near Flatiron this is nonsense. Without some element of risk we might as well stay in bed. We can still enjoy a view from the memorial sitting on the lone bench which commands a fine panorama of the Wood. Better if some one would like to volunteer to remove the trees above the memorial site and give the ones below a trim, we in the South Wales branch would be grateful. Perhaps some of the moaners would be kind enough to be permanent resident there and keep an eye on it. Lastly, we will be celebrating the actual centenary in July 1916 and are drawing up plans for events at the memorial over that weekend. They may want to join in.

Terry (Phil's predecessor)

"... so a new stairs was put in place. Hopefully, these will satisfy H & S which is a legal rquirement, never mind the appearance which seems to assume a more important level in some people's minds."

It is not a requirement that constructions which comply with any relevant H&S requirements should be ugly, overbearing, and over-engineered.

" WE have at least 2 professional Civil Engineers in the Branch who seem to know what they are talking about."

The "engineering" of this structure has never been questioned. If anything it is significantly over-engineered. It is the overall architectural integrity which is being questioned. Taking the site as a whole, it is now something of a visual train crash.

"but children should be under the supervision of teachers or parents and anyway, it would be foolish to try to climb it."

Exactly - Eureka ! - The visitor's wellbeing is their own responsibility - at last, some common sense !

"Without some element of risk we might as well stay in bed."

Again - Eureka !

"Perhaps some of the moaners would be kind enough to be permanent resident there and keep an eye on it."

What sort of remuneration package are you offering ?

Tom

[Tom Tulloch-Marshall]

Q1 is about why. Has this action been taken based on a layman's view of the risk, or has a professional risk assessment been carried out, and if so by who?

Q2 is about who. The 'someone' who is at legal risk is presumably the owner of the site. Is that the WFA branch? And is that a legal entity? Or is the site owned by named individuals?

Are those two questions (post #66) going to be answered ?

Tom

[Garron]

Tom, you don't like it, we get that point.

What is up with this crusade you've going on? and what right do you have to demand answers?

It is what it is, don't like it don't go there, its as easy as that.

Gaz

[Ghazala]

There are things on here that are just downright rude. My advice to my Welsh friends is to ignore this thread from now on.

[Tom Tulloch-Marshall]

... what right do you have to demand answers?

... My advice to my Welsh friends is to ignore this thread from now on.

Given the "answers" given and statements made by some respondents, I have as much right as anybody to ask questions and expect (reasonable) answers. What is striking is the refusal to adequately address the issues raised and the tacit insistence that what is clearly not a good development actually is !

"Don't go there" isn't an answer.

Tom

[SiegeGunner]

The steps at Devonshire Cemetery are certainly the sort of low-impact solution that seems infinitely more appropriate to the rural setting of the Dragon memorial. I discern in the posts by members who have represented the position of the SWWFA a strongly 'public sector' and 'management' approach to this issue .... we hear that the site is maintained (presumably under contract) by the CWGC, that 'health & safety' and 'liability' are major drivers of this 'development', and that the membership of the branch includes civil engineers and people with experience of H&S and risk assessment in the educational sector.

I am more familiar with other sites on the Somme that are maintained largely by volunteer supporters who spend their holidays maintaining/repairing/upgrading access and other basic facilities, cutting back encroaching bushes and undergrowth, and similar 'hands-on' works. It seems to me that the question of access at Mametz Wood has been over-assessed, over-managed and sub-contracted, leading to the predictable result that we now see in Tom T-M's photos .... a factory-made, metallic, urban municipal 'solution' to a simple rural problem.

I am sympathetic to improving road access to the memorial from the Mametz village side, but I wonder whether the idea of upgrading the road/track up to and beyond Flatiron Copse has been thought right through. This is not a heavy traffic area, but if there is a continuous (presumably) single-track road passable by ordinary saloon cars, it will inevitably be used as a short-cut by some people who will not want to stop at the Dragon memorial, giving rise to a 'passing traffic' issue at the turning/parking area that hardly exists at the moment, when for much of the time the track from Flatiron Copse is only passable to farm traffic and 4x4s.

[KIRKY]

Good point re using road as a cut through would be used more by locals than visitors. would create more H&S issues than the steps themselves!

Hope the steps at Mametz will not be repeated at The Butte de Warlencourt!

tony