Should be demolishing pillboxes?

[petercooman]

. They don't take up much space and would be hard to remove, so why bother.?

IanS

It's in the nature of man not to build next to something, or in front or behind something. We want it right there where something else is standing no matter the price or effort 

I say let them stay. I never took it for a problem around here. And i think animals (and less lucky people) enjoy the shelter they provide.

[Heedless Horseman]

I have always hated the gradual loss of WW2 pill boxes and tank traps from the Northumberland countryside. They might not be glamorous, but they are just as much part of our history as Hadrian's Wall...and a reminder of how 'local' WW2 could have become. If 'developers' or councils realy must hide them, bury them...but leave them in place for the future.

[Poggle]

One pillbox overlooking the beach at the bottom of our road was removed when the sea wall was rebuilt. Two mortar spigots were taken out too. Apart from that, two other local pillboxes were lost to coastal erosion. One still emerges at low tide. Sad to see it happening.

[DanJ]

Depends where they are, next to a bridge or some other strategic point that ain't going anywhere, leave them.  In the middle of a field not doing any harm, leave them.  In the way of progress, get rid; yes I know that's outrageous and people will start asking "who decides" and "where do you draw the line", but I really don't want to live in a country that's only looking back at its "heritage" not to it's future.

I also rather like finding the ones on the beaches slowly decaying in the salt water or sinking into the sand or shingle.  It sort of reminds me that time is moving on, WW2 is getting further away, it's not the defining point for the current generation of kids that it was for me.  Teach the history, show the artifacts and architecture, but stop living in the past, most of it was bloody awful.