British bunker destroyed at Poperinge

[Cnock]

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

two weeks ago this British bunker was destroyed at Poperinge, noticed by nobody,

and in the mean time fake trenches, etc. are constructed for the visitors in 2014

Cnock

[Seadog]

I thought that these structures were protected, obviously not. So what is to stop the destruction of the others on the Salient?,

Regards

Norman

[jay dubaya]

I too thought they were protected. Any chance of a translation of the article?

Jon

[AOK4]

Very few bunkers are protected. At some point the province made a good effort at trying to make an inventory of all relics, but nothing much was done with that...

[Pighills]

I'm sorry, I can't see anything on that link apart from imageshack asking me to sign in or open an account and lots of random photos of everything but bunkers.

Can you post another link please?

[Cnock]

as AOK4 says, on an inventory but not protected,

but this should be enough for local authorities to prevent demolishing of the bunker, it seems like they were all sleeping

some months ago a German bunker at Geluveld was destroyed (see page 307, book "Halfweg Menin Road en Ypernstrasse" - Jan Vancoiliie ) and there was no reaction

regards,

Cnock

[Seadog]

So what can be done Eddie? there must be sanctions available to use against those who wantonly destroy important reminders of the conflict in Flanders Fields. Surely Belgium can do better than “sorry we did not know it was being knocked down”. Like for instance contacting all those on whose land these structures stand and clearly spelling-out the ramifications of any attempt to alter or destroy them, I would suggest that a visit from the appropriate official should be the starting point for this. Do you know what if any action is to be taken against the perpetrator in the case you detail?

Regards

Norman

[slick63]

Incredible that the land owners can get away with this, the Belgian authorities really need to up their game.

[Seadog]

My own opinion is that bearing in mind the number of tourists coming to Flanders and certainly in the next few years in ever-increasing numbers it would be ridiculous if the Belgian authorities did nothing to officially protect these irreplaceable structures both Allied and German. Members will correct me if I am wrong but the situation we are discussing seems to me to have parallels with that pertaining when the “Diggers” group took the responsibility to make a proper investigation of the Boezinge industrial development site due to the lack of any official formal organization to undertake the considerable work involved. The Belgian authorities would be well advised to act in order to protect the very reason why so many visitors come in the first place and of course bring a considerable amount of revenue to the area.

Regards

Norman

[slick63]

. The Belgian authorities would be well advised to act in order to protect the very reason why so many visitors come in the first place and of course bring a considerable amount of revenue to the area.

Regards

Norman

My thoughts exactly Norman, whilst the authorities may not take on board the historical importance of these structures, they may understand the old saying 'Money talks'.

Then again, and call me cynical, but maybe they think they can get more revenue out of Great War 'theme parks'.

[Peter and Ellen]

I am not surprised to read of this destruction in and around Pops.

Those who saw the Cells, for those to be "Shot at Dawn" in the Townhall courtyard, in their reasonably original condition, will be very disappointed with what they did in their restoration project last year. No thought was given to what they destroyed in those cells when they renovated them. Then, they moved the excecution location from one side of the courtyard to the other and made it look a bit like Disneyland. Very sad.

Peter

[Seadog]

The solution to this particular problem is firmly in the hands of the Belgians themselves. If they think that the remaining structures such as the one seen here are important enough for them as a Country to ensure their preservation then it will require those who think this way to "stand up and be counted" and use all the official procedures available to them to bring about proper legal and enforceable protection for the sites affected. I would have thought that the civic authorities of Ypres in particular with both the IFF Museum and the considerable amount of cash that pours into the town and its traders coffers through battlefield tourism would do all that is possible to bring this situation to an acceptable and sensible conclusion.

Norman

[pylon1357]

I may incur the wrath of the forum, in my following thoughts but here I go.(Bare in Mind, I am unsure of the liabilities in this location)

If the structure was on my land, in poor condition, an eyesore if you will. A dangerous place to be in, I would level it as well. People, unwanted guests, the curious, kids hang out, whatever. They come onto my land uninvited and get hurt because of the structure being unstable, what happens then? As they were hurt on my land, I am ultimately responsible for that. No thank you. The building would be gone. If it were a protected structure, that would different as I would have no control over the structure and I could not be held accountable for any liabilities.

[hazelclark]

I may incur the wrath of the forum, in my following thoughts but here I go.(Bare in Mind, I am unsure of the liabilities in this location)

If the structure was on my land, in poor condition, an eyesore if you will. A dangerous place to be in, I would level it as well. People, unwanted guests, the curious, kids hang out, whatever. They come onto my land uninvited and get hurt because of the structure being unstable, what happens then? As they were hurt on my land, I am ultimately responsible for that. No thank you. The building would be gone. If it were a protected structure, that would different as I would have no control over the structure and I could not be held accountable for any liabilities.

Actually, I've been thinking about this and I agree with you. We are having my son's wedding on our property on Saturday and have had to take out insurance (which costs $600.00 for two days) in case someone trips and breaks a leg or is bitten by a rattlesnake or eaten by a bear,and then sues us. You are very right about the liability However, having said that, I understand the sentiments of those who would like to see bunkers etc. preserved. Nevertheless, I don't think the onus should be on the landowner to preserve it, unless he so desires, and can afford the renovations and necessary insurance, as well as the loss of privacy.

Hazel

[chrislock]

Even bunkers on local authority or state owned land suffer the march of development. The German WW2 bunker located just before Ypres railway station which knocked out a Polish Stuart Light Tank before itself being knocked out by return fire and accompanying Polish infantrymen on Sept 6th 1944 is also now being destroyed.

Shame really as it is one of the few confirmed structures as bearing battle damage suffered during the liberation of Ypres in 1944.

[Seadog]

I may incur the wrath of the forum, in my following thoughts but here I go.(Bare in Mind, I am unsure of the liabilities in this location)

If the structure was on my land, in poor condition, an eyesore if you will. A dangerous place to be in, I would level it as well. People, unwanted guests, the curious, kids hang out, whatever. They come onto my land uninvited and get hurt because of the structure being unstable, what happens then? As they were hurt on my land, I am ultimately responsible for that. No thank you. The building would be gone. If it were a protected structure, that would different as I would have no control over the structure and I could not be held accountable for any liabilities.

There is no easy way to put this put this but the above seems to be complete conjecture unless of course you have evidence to support the comments made in relation to this particular structure. The position is that if this structure can be demolished with complete impunity by the landowner and apparently without anyone feeling concerned enough to at least report this fact to the authorities whilst it was happening or indeed before it was destroyed then no WW1 structure on private land is safe in Belgium.

Forgive me for stating the obvious but the battlefield in Flanders is unique because of the high water table the Germans in particular defended the line by building pillboxes and keeping their troops to the rear ready to be moved up should the occasion arise. So if these unprotected structures are destroyed then unique and major reminders of just what happened in these fields will be lost forever and to arbitrarily remove them is in my view is not only thoughtless but wanton vandalism.

Norman

Added: Chris so just what are you and other concerned parties doing to halt such destruction and just what is the attitude of the good Burghers of Ypres and IFF museum in all of this.

[mebu]

Sad to see another one gone. There's been several British bunkers destroyed in the area over the last year or so (Wittepoort farm, near Birr crossroads, and Tuff's farm, Pilkem ridge, in addition to German ones.

The one in the report is - or was - Ebro Farm, comprising a pre-cast Arques pattern bunker either side of an in-situ one. Believed locally to have been a telephone centre (I see one of the chapter headings is titled telefoonpost) but I'm not too sure, this was a corps HQ and is simply marked Concrete Shelter on map. Until recently it was used to house cattle. The farmer must have really wanted it removed because it would have been an expensive operation.

This is a situation which will continue as it has done over the last 90 years, every year sees vestiges removed.

At the risk of making this look like an advertisement.....this is why I have logged every remaining (?) British construction still standing, results due out by publisher in march next year.

Peter

[chrislock]

Hi Norman.

This is what several of us concerned ex-pats and others are currently doing in Ypres today but we cannot fight on behalf of everything which springs up over here:

www.militaryupkeep.com

The German WW2 bunker information which I have previously mentioned has been passed onto the Polish Embassy for their attention. Hope this is to your satisfaction??

Chris

[hooge1]

What a historic loss; looks to be this bunker here anyone know the history behind it?

Regards

Nick

[mebu]

Nick, yes it is that one, Ebro Farm, there's a bit about it 2 posts up. ( I should have added that it dates from mid 1918, and does show signs of artillery damage)

Peter

[Seadog]

Hi Norman.

This is what several of us concerned ex-pats and others are currently doing in Ypres today but we cannot fight on behalf of everything which springs up over here:

www.militaryupkeep.com

The German WW2 bunker information which I have previously mentioned has been passed onto the Polish Embassy for their attention. Hope this is to your satisfaction??

Chris

It is good that people like yourself are doing what you can but do you know what the attitude of the local Ypres politicians is to the destruction of some of the very structures which make the Flanders battlefield unique plus what are the IFF doing about this as they must have some "clout" in both Ypres and the surrounding area. Finally (good I hear you cry) the last time I was in the Salient this bunker and its surrounds were maintained in good condition, Is this because of the attitude of the landowner or indeed other factors and if this is maintained why not all the others which are no less important in my opinion.

The Zandvoorte German Bunker

Regards

Norman

[peterhogg]

This was on private land and the owner was entitled and free to do whatever he wished with it, without some outsider telling him what he can or cannot do with his own property. Isn't that the reason we fought the war, etc,, etc blah, blah blah.

It's sad, but the war is now almost a century past and fading from memory. And if the Belgians were really interested they would have taken steps to preserve the thing decades ago. They're not, so that's the end of it. And to be honest, I'd rather see it vanish then have some government authority take it over and make it another cheap poster child for the centenary, all tarted up as another dreary and cynical "peace museum" funded with E.U. slush.

I agree, it is sad to see it vanish. My preference has always been the Somme region to Belgium. Ypres and environs is little more than an industrial park with a scrap of grass here and there. All i can add is that thank God for the CWGC because without it folks, you'd see nothing over there.

[Seadog]

Thought you might like to see what that "scrap of grass" is covered with. I wonder does your comment still apply if there is an ancient site such as Iron Age or Roman etc on your private land and would it still be acceptable if these were destroyed after all they would certainly be beyond human memory would they not?.

[peterhogg]

Thought you might like to see what that "scrap of grass" is covered with. I wonder does your comment still apply if there is an ancient site such as Iron Age or Roman etc on your private land and would it still be acceptable if these were destroyed after all they would certainly be beyond human memory would they not?.

Yeah, bin there many times, and thanks for literally illustrating my point: Thank God for the CWGC.

And I think it hardly controversial to note how dramatically the area around Ypres has changed, in the last 10, 20, 30 years in the times i have been to the area., to the detriment of so many locations of interest, areas I would personally feel were almost sacred. Modern structures and roads have obliterated huge areas of interest. I contrast that with the Somme region which, notwithstanding development, is still an area where one can take can appreciate the landscape as it appeared, generally, back in 1916. Even then, look how many sites of interest, such as mine craters have vanished--compare old tour books, for example.

In Ypres, you experience the harsh reality of the passage of time. Yet, there is an irony, is there not, to foreigners telling a Belgian land owner what he can or cannot do with his or her land? In the absence of the site being found to be a Heritage site by UNESCO or the EU, the fellow had every right to take it down, if he so wished You and I may be aghast, but then again, we probably think on the Great War much more than the landowner. Pity.

[Cnock]

Hi,

In my hometown an original 14th Century barn was destroyed without any hesitation or regret, only to build new villa's

what would they bother about nearly 100 years of concrete?

may be a question of mentality and money

I came in places far from touristic WWI paths where the owner didn't want me to take pictures, because he was already planning to destroy the bunker on his farmyard and didn't want any evidence left

regards,

Cnock