PORTENCROSS Castle has been standing four-square on its rock on the Ayrshire coast for more than 600 years, 250 of them without a roof. It has been ''battered by abrasive, salt-laden winds'' (James Brown's letter, May 22) throughout that period and had its feet in the sea a few times too but has survived remarkably well.
The Portencross Association is completely aware of the urgent need for the building to have a functional roof of some sort to keep out the rain, which appears to be the main enemy, and ongoing repairs to preserve it, hopefully for another 600 years, as a stable ruin.
As far as using public money for this work is concerned, if the public want to see the building preserved as a ruin, which seems to us to be overwhelmingly the case, then why shouldn't their money be used for this? It will be a very wealthy private buyer who does not try to access public money in the form of grants to restore the castle for his own purposes.
The thing about Portencross Castle is that most of us look at it and imagine that we would love to live in it. It is a wonderful option for one household but it is an exclusive option and, by the nature of things, even the most altruistic private owner would be transitory.
It would take a very magnanimous owner to allow the public access over the castle rock and harbour as has been the situation for generations and have the opportunity to ''bring their imagination,'' which James Brown seems to scorn.
Incidentally, it is kind of Mr Brown to have ''the welfare and best interests of the people of Portencross foremost in [his] heart''. We are a small individualistic community here, but we too are passionate about the place and we can think for ourselves, thank you.
If James Brown is seeking support for his wealth-generating plans, perhaps he should be more explicit about them.
Ann McLachlan,
Secretary, Portencross Association,
Auldhill Cottage,
Portencross, West Kilbride. May 22.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article