Historic structure in cultural heritage site rejected as natural feature

bilde2910bilde2910 Posts: 67 ✭✭✭

There have been two attempts to submit this structure, but it keeps getting rejected as a natural feature by reviewers. The nomination was made in the local language, but is translated below for your convenience.

The nomination is a man-made channel that was excavated and fortified with 2 meter thick stone walls, almost 300 years ago. It is located at a cultural heritage site of what was formerly one of the most important naval bases in the country, but opened to the public as a tourist attraction/park around 20 years ago. The channel was excavated to supply ships with materials, weapons and ammunition before embarking on their journey.

It is my understanding that the "natural feature" rejection reason is to be used for sites that are naturally occurring (waterfalls, lakes, hills, trees, etc.), and for certain types of man-made structures that are made to mimic nature, e.g. parks, unless there is signage for the nomination, in which case the signage is to be submitted instead. It should be clear from both the photo and description of this nomination that it is entirely man made, such as the presence of thick stone walls, wooden docking on either side of the channel, and it being perfectly rectangular in shape.

The site itself is assigned an entry in the national register of cultural heritage sites (https://kulturminnesok.no/minne?queryString=https://data.kulturminne.no/askeladden/lokalitet/114218) with ID 114218, with the channel itself being registered as #114218-33. This is only done for sites that have cultural and historical significance. The cultural heritage ID is specifically mentioned in the supporting description of my nomination to legitimize this claim.

---

Description of nomination in the national cultural heritage registry

The canal excavated and surrounded with piles in the period 1751-1755. It served several purposes: Excavated soil and clay were used for refilling to the sea and to the defense works, water was led away from the shipyard, transport of supplies to the provisions house, smaller vessels such as barges, shawls, rafts etc. were in storage here.

The canal was initially thought to lead all the way to the Provision House (0035 Vinkelbrakka), but numerous large stones were encountered during the excavation between the canal's current demarcation and 0035. Therefore, it was decided to leave this last stretch only as a pool, connected to the canal through wooden trenches. The outside pools, in turn, came into contact with the above via similar wooden channels.

Excavated channel with vertical natural stone walls, approx. 2 meters thick. The wall is surrounded by 8'' spun wall of pressure impregnated materials.

---

Title: Channel in Fredriksvern

Description: The channel in Fredriksvern was excavated from 1751-1755. This was done to make it easier to load items onto the ships. The ships were led into the channel and **** from the stone barracks, then known as "The walled armory".

Supporting info: Cultural heritage ID 114218-33. Very important historical heritage site. The channel is fully man-made, and almost 300 years old. The waypoint is placed at the edge of the channel, so that it is both representatively located for the POI, and also has safe pedestrian access.

Location: 58.995643, 10.037026

Main photo:


Comments

  • AScarletSabre-PGOAScarletSabre-PGO Posts: 741 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I understand it's a canal but it is a photograph of a landscape (a very nice photograph, mind you). Is there a sign or information board you can submit? What would be stopping somebody from taking a photograph from every other part of the canal and generating a theoretically infinite number Wayspots?

    Without a sign I don't know if it's a river that's had some walls added to it. I believe you but I just don't think the photograph helps the nomination. I hope that helps!

  • bilde2910bilde2910 Posts: 67 ✭✭✭

    Thank you for your feedback!

    Is there a sign or information board you can submit?

    Unfortunately there isn't - if there was, I'd definitely nominate it instead. Certain other buildings and structures on the site have small metal signs with only a QR code, as part of a "digital culture trail". Generally having those buildings passed haven't been an issue because they're very easily recognizable (as buildings). The signs in question would likely not meet criteria as there is no information on the sign itself.

    What would be stopping somebody from taking a photograph from every other part of the canal and generating a theoretically infinite number Wayspots?

    The size of the canal. It is only 175 meters long; its full size can be seen in the following satellite view. Any other nominations for the canal would be easily visible in duplicate view when reviewing.

    Without a sign I don't know if it's a river that's had some walls added to it. I believe you but I just don't think the photograph helps the nomination.

    I'm open to any suggestions to improve the photo! Sunny days are frequent here, so getting another shot wouldn't be too hard. For reference, this is the supporting photo:


  • TheFarix-PGOTheFarix-PGO Posts: 3,871 ✭✭✭✭✭

    "Natural feature" also includes any form of landscaping regardless of whether the landscaping was man-manipulated or not. For example, a man-made island is still ineligible as a natural feature, same with a man-made hill or mountain, man-made garden, or a row of tree that was clearly planted. A canal would be no different from any of these other things.

  • AScarletSabre-PGOAScarletSabre-PGO Posts: 741 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Actually, if it's a shipyard call it that. Maybe provide some antique photographs of ships using the channel because that may help. Seeing the new photographs, it's not a canal at all, because a canal would be much longer. Not sure if I can be of anymore help. With you new post and additional information I may be inclined to vote favourably on the nomination. Some reviewers are really fussy and picky so if you really think it's special then all I can say is to keep trying.

Sign In or Register to comment.