I think they were just winterkjm's musings on any potential sites rather than specific nominations.

ok thank you.

I was just wondering if anyone (though I am guessing Solivagant may be my best hope of an answer) knows anything about the first two iterations of the UK tentative list?

They look a little odd, most sites were proposed and then taken off again very quickly (all within a year).
I know the UK withdrew from UNESCO in 1985 and rejoined again in 1997, but these dates don't seem to shed any light on the t-list hokey cokey.
They also don't line up with changes of governments (though the rejoining of UNESCO was a result of Labour being elected in 1997).

I was particularly interested in the decision relating to Stourhead and Lacock. Both were added to T-list 1995 removed from T-list 1996 and both of which we visited at the weekend.

To my eye the are better than a fair few UK sites that are actually inscribed, so I was just wondering what happened to them.

My guess was that Stourhead wasn't pursued as it is similar to the already inscribed Studley Royal Park, but I can't see any particular reasons why Lacock was dropped so quickly.

I am not sure where the information that Stourhead/Lacock were put on the UK T List in 1995 came from. This info on our Web site is incorrect!
In fact UK proposed T Lists in 1986 and 1999. The history of these is included in the 2011 document reporting on the review of UK's T List – see Annex C here - https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment _data/file/78234/Review-WH-Tentative-List-Report_March2011.pdf

It states that Lacock and Stourhead were placed on the 1986 T List and that neither was on the 1999 T List. Their inclusion in 1986 is confirmed here (The T List itself is dated Nov 1985 and consists of 36 sites. Stourhead - 10, Lacock -16. Nb The List is followed by fuller descriptions of each entry).
http://whc.unesco.org/archive/1986/cc-86-conf003-2e.pdf

Interestingly UK left UNESCO at end of 1985 (1 years notice was required – given Dec 1984) – so it was still a member of UNESCO if, as seems possible, it actually "submitted" its list before end of 1985 but was not when it was included in the 1986 WHC papers! It rejoined on July 1 1997. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_states_of_UNESCO and Note j).
Yet it inscribed sites in 1986/7 and 8 (Including Studley) and restarted doing so in 1995 with Gough and Edinburgh!

Can we find anything about Lacock/Stourhead in the years 1986 to 1999???
So far – no!!
Both are owned by the National Trust. One wouldn't have thought that it would have been "anti" UNESCO inscription?
It is also worth noting that they were not even considered for 2011. As I remember the 2011 exercise, proposals were "invited" so no one even thought it worth doing so for them.

I'll change it, at least the start date!

Thanks for that Solivagant, especially the DCMS review paper provides some interesting reading, and yep it seems the dates we have aren't accurate.

Interesting that it is only Lacock Abbey that was on the T-List, I guess that is more focused, however the village itself is also National Trust owned and administered. Perhaps there was a view of it being more coherent as just the Abbey, but even that is muddled from being a medieval convent/ Tudor house/ home of scientific invention.
To my eye the village it is certainly of equivalent value to inscribed places like Holasovice, Yangdon, Gammelstad etc...

I should have mentioned that I checked that.
In fact - although Annex c of the 2011 document calls it simply "Lacock Abbey" the 1986 T List (and especially the full description) indicates that it was the full village which was on the T List (Proposed justification - "One of the most homogeneous and architecturally distinguished villages in England") - and I agree with you that the it is certainly the "quintessential" English village which would stand comparison with any other vernacular village across Europe

This was circulating a little last night and this morning:

UK to 'QUIT' Unesco

At the moment I would take this with a pinch of salt. It feels a little like a politician laying some groundwork for a future promotion (probably with an eye on the Prime Minister's office) in a cabinet where rumours of "imminent collapse" swell up every couple of weeks.

Time will tell if anything comes of it, I have no doubt that Ms Mordaunt probably isn't a fan of UNESCO, but whether it actually comes to anything I'm not really convinced.

Also it doesn't seem to have stopped the USA from putting sites forward, so for us in the very narrow world of WHS hunting and intrigue, I doubt it will have much impact if it does come to pass.

Not strict;y withing the boundaries of the WHS but the road behind Harlech Castle is trying to claim the prize as the world's steepest road.

It did lead me to look at the boundary map for the Gwynedd Castles which impressively are drawn in with felt tip pens!

Not sure if Squiffy is active on the forum, but just wanted to say I am really enjoying your reviews of UK WHS :)

The Flow Country (T List)
First - it seems worth providing a link in this Country topic to the discussions about this active UK T List site (2022??) which we had under the 2019 Meet up topic. They contain links to relevant documentation and status etc as of Jun 2019 - https://www.worldheritagesite.org/forums/index.php?action=vthread&forum=3&topic=2198&page=5#msg21942

Second - I note that the location designated for UK's first "Vertical Take off" Space Port sits within the "Caithness and Sutherland Peatlands Special Area of Conservation (SAC)"!!! This wouldn't exactly seem to be a "plus point" which would please IUCN!!! The consultation document for the Flow Country Nomination even states that "the SAC doesn't contain all of the potentially important areas of blanket bog in the Flow Country, and the core area of the WHS would most likely be bigger than the SAC". Construction is due to start imminently with the first launch of small satellites currently scheduled for the "early 20s" - planned dates slip of course!. I have been unable to discover the exact location but it appears to be NNW of the village of Talmine. The footprint doesn't exactly look to be "large" based on this artist's impression - but that doesn't even show any new approach road (surely there will be rather large vehicles needing to deliver parts of rockets etc?) so it may be somewhat lacking in detail. Whatever - it is the sort of development which IUCN tends to find "problematic". We will see.