tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-87749286757768767452024-02-08T03:09:23.222+00:00New Forest Association News PageBrian R Tarnoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12963403837782148443noreply@blogger.comBlogger74125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8774928675776876745.post-52946336721099574602016-12-04T13:26:00.000+00:002016-12-04T13:26:15.052+00:00"Look, Don't Pick" - The Arguments<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3fF-0slZ0detyKYPrE9b64QQQ-WdE8bEBr2d92fm2P6Wz_2uUQKC_opFMkQ8Tl2FlNPRpvqfi9SCvx_OeZAuMX4PmkNLeenWGlK1NwWSCEbj8lOrzxZAQlgyWjVVrhyRWJRHG5lvIdK9l/s1600/DSCF2549.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3fF-0slZ0detyKYPrE9b64QQQ-WdE8bEBr2d92fm2P6Wz_2uUQKC_opFMkQ8Tl2FlNPRpvqfi9SCvx_OeZAuMX4PmkNLeenWGlK1NwWSCEbj8lOrzxZAQlgyWjVVrhyRWJRHG5lvIdK9l/s320/DSCF2549.JPG" width="320" /></a></div>
Over the months since the Forestry Commission announced their "Look, Don't Pick" Policy for Fungi on The New Forest SSSI on the Crown Lands under their stewardship, we've heard a number of arguments against this move. <a href="http://newforestassociationnews.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/the-forestry-commissions-new-forest.html" target="_blank">The NFA support the Forestry Commission's policy</a> as an important step to honouring the protections the habitat of the New Forest has, and ought to have in practice. In that spirit we offer our rebuttals below:<br />
<br />
<h3>
<b><i>Foraging is wonderful and magically connects people to nature.</i></b></h3>
Fine, just not fungi + here, please.<br />
<br />
The New Forest is amongst the most highly protected habitat we have. Would you challenge the existing prohibitions on fungi foraging on Wildlife Trust or National Trust land? The New Forest SSSI has the status of a National Nature Reserve. <br />
<br />
We could quibble that you shouldn't need to ingest nature to enjoy and appreciate it, but then again Chris Packham once said he started his journey eating <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/shortcuts/2016/may/30/chris-packham-children-eat-tadpoles-springwatch-presenter-children-nature" target="_blank">tadpoles</a> he'd found. No accounting for tastes. Foraging can foster a relationship for many with nature, but this is a protected habitat, we're just asking those who actually care about nature, to respect its protection and find their fungi elsewhere. <br />
<br />
<h3>
<i><b>We've done this for thousands of years</b></i><b> (Entitlement vs loss of habitat)</b></h3>
You speak of what's been done for "thousands of years", that includes loads of behaviours that are no longer appropriate in the face of unprecedented population growth, habitat loss and climate change. Butterfly collectors once showed their appreciation of Lepidoptera by popping them in killing jars then mounting them on pins. <br />
<br />
More than one in ten UK species is now threatened with extinction. The house is burning, and you're concerned with raiding the larder.<br />
<br />
<h3>
<i><b>Where is your proof of the so-called gangs?</b></i><b> (Denial)</b></h3>
They and their effects have been seen by the Forestry Commission Keepers and Ecologists, the National Trust Rangers, the Hampshire Fungi Recording Group, other local surveyors, and many of our members. Last Autumn the Forestry Commission intercepted 140 groups and/or individuals as part of their "disruption" campaign, seizing and destroying amounts over the then "personal" limit.<br />
<br />
You'll forgive us if those of us out walking don't whip out our cameras and ask strangers engaged in illegal activities to pose nicely to satisfy your curiosity. Or that we haven't photographed every square fungi populated inch of the Forest ahead of time so that when it is subsequently stripped of fungi we could provide a before and after (hopefully recorded at exactly the same angle for the before and after). The experiences and observations of many individuals, seem to count for nothing to those in denial. <br />
<br />
If you are that sceptical would a photo of a group of people holding bags in a wood convince you of anything? Or before and after pictures? If the FC put wildlife monitoring cameras by some patches of rare fungi, that would be rightly deemed too big brother (although police have said a private land owner doing this to catch similar acts would be perfectly legal).<br />
<br />
<h3>
<i><b>You are criminalising ordinary people.</b></i> </h3>
Similar bans already exist, the inclusive language of the Epping Forest byelaws have allowed the Keepers employed by the Corporation of the City of London to enforce its policy against fungi forage. Meanwhile the CROW Act which opened up larger areas of countryside to Ramblers has an overarching ban on foraging on the nationwide network of Rights of Way, and the Right to Roam areas.<br />
<br />
This is a SSSI, the FC already had the right to authorise picking of fungi under the consents they have from Natural England. Their byelaws ban removal of a range of things that are not currently enforced, and it is only a trick of taxonomy that fungi are excluded (FC byelaws prohibit: dig up, remove, cut or injure any tree, shrub or plant, whether living or not, or remove the seeds therefrom, or dig up or remove any soil, turf, leafmould, moss, peat, gravel, slag, sands or minerals of any kind). It is as much a policy decision to choose not to enforce all the elements of the byelaws as to restrict fungi foraging under their SSSI consents and the precautionary principle to protect the entire habitat.<br />
<br />
The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 is the legislative instrument that defines the protections for wild animals and plants and defines Sites of Special Scientific Interest along with their extra protections and the statutory obligations of their landowners. Rare species found on the Schedule 8 list, often referred to as the Red Band or Red List Species, are protected from being picked, uprooted or destroyed (section 13 subsection 1), and further from being sold, transported for sale, or even advertised for sale (subsection 2). These are arrestable offences, the CPS guidance for prosecutions :<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">Most offences are punishable on summary conviction by six month's imprisonment and/or by a maximum fine of £5,000 (level 5). Where an offence is committed in respect of more than one bird, nest, egg etc the maximum fine shall be determined as if the person had been convicted of a separate offence in respect of each such item.
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
In addition to offences being multiplied by number of items taken, the law also gives power of forfeiture: <br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">Under s.21 (6) b a court may in the same circumstances order the forfeiture of any vehicle, animal, weapon or other thing used to commit the offence found in the offender's possession. Forfeiture of a vehicle is often likely to be an effective means of deterring repeat offences relating, for example, to rare birds and eggs as well as of incapacitating an offender's future ability to conduct such activities. ....
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
The section 13 protections apply ANYWHERE in the Wild, not just SSSI. The Red List includes fungi species such as the tasty, targeted and allegedly medicinal Hericium erinaceus (bearded tooth).<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3AHericium_erinaceum_on_an_old_tree_in_Shave_Wood%2C_New_Forest_-_geograph.org.uk_-_254892.jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" title="Jim Champion [CC BY-SA 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], Hericium erinaceus on an old tree in Shave Wood, New Forest, via Wikimedia Commons"><img alt="Hericium erinaceum on an old tree in Shave Wood, New Forest - geograph.org.uk - 254892" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/44/Hericium_erinaceum_on_an_old_tree_in_Shave_Wood%2C_New_Forest_-_geograph.org.uk_-_254892.jpg" width="256" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Hericium erinaceus in the New Forest</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
On SSSI's intentionally or recklessly destroying or damaging flora or fauna by reason of which land is of special interest is an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 Section 28 (P). The New Forest is one of the few SSSI which have fungi as one of these notified features of special interest. Whether or not the fungi harvested is one of the notified species, the ancillary consequences of the activity of foraging, including trampling and disturbance may be covered by this as well. Hefty penalties invoked here may give prosecutions considerable bite. Damage to SSSI could be prosecuted, and yield realistically punitive fines (£10k-20k). Of course the burden of proof is less straightforward than the section 13 offences, but I'm describing this to show the extent to which some fungi foraging activities were already criminal, and the legal basis which obligates the Forestry Commission to protect the notified features of the SSSI it manages.<br />
<br />
<h3>
<b><i>This is Common Land - don't we have the right to forage from it as part of rights of Common?</i></b></h3>
The Crown Lands are not actually registered commons as applies under the Commons Registrations Act, and so would not implicitly include any rights that may be extended to registered commons either under that act or in common law.<br />
<br />
The modern legal framework for the Forest rights as applied to the New Forest are in the New Forest Acts which clearly defines rights of Common for the Crown Lands, these 1) don't include Foraging 2) can only can be claimed by those occupying land with registered rights attached.<br />
<br />
<h3>
<b><i>The ban is not scientific, because we have studies that show that harvesting fruiting bodies doesn't have a detrimental effect.</i> (Selective research)</b></h3>
Compared to botany, mycology is positively medieval. Not enough is known. We're only just now coming to appreciate the complexity of the relationship between mycorrhizal fungi and the trees they service symbiotically.<br />
<br />
There are only have a handful of studies on a few species, some not in comparable locations/habitats, that show negligible effect on individual fungi organisms of picking fruiting bodies, but not much on the long term viability of a given species and genetic diversity over time given the disruption to dispersal mechanisms. <br />
<br />
These studies do not consider the knock on effects on the rest of the ecosystem, putting aside the fruiting bodies as a food source, at least 600 (likely over 1000) species of invertebrate are reliant on them for their life-cycle (many are species specific). Committed eggs don't have the luxury of jumping to unpicked neighbours. There are no studies showing ancillary effects on the rest of the ecosystem, therefore no substantial body of evidence for sustainability. <br />
<br />
Furthermore, the "sustainability" argument shouldn't even apply on a SSSI with fungi as one of its notified features. An attitude that recognises only supporting science in isolation, claims an absent weight of evidence, and ignores the bigger picture, is utterly self-serving.<br />
<br />
<h3>
<i><b>Europe is a free for all.</b></i> </h3>
<br />
This is simply not true. France and Spain have no go areas. There are licensing schemes in Italy and Poland and other eastern European Countries. It is unlikely you would be allowed to pick fungi at all in Poland's National Parks which include Strict Protection Zones, no go areas for any human interaction -- reasons given include fungi conservation along with other habitat considerations, some parks even have buffer zones excluding people from an area outside the park. Other European countries have similarly strict regimes if they have signed up to the level of habitat protection promoted by the <a href="http://www.nationalparks.gov.uk/students/whatisanationalpark/nationalparksareprotectedareas/iucncategories" target="_blank">IUCN</a> and the Biosphere initiative.<br />
<br />
Just because European cultures supposedly favour a tradition of fungi forage doesn't mean they are blind to the need for conservation. The Crown Lands of the New Forest have the highest levels of habitat and landscape protections and designations available in UK law.<br />
<br />
<h3>
<span style="font-weight: normal;">And Finally, that old, ahem, chestnut:</span> <i><b>It's just like picking Blackberries!</b></i></h3>
NO IT ISN'T (sorry for shouting):<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>Blackberry population is much greater and currently sustainable. </li>
<li>Blackberry pickers take only the fruit, not the entire visible portion of the plant. In the protected landscape of a National Park the autumn display of fungi should be left for all to see.</li>
<li>Blackberry fruits are only harvested by pickers when they are ripe, they may be eaten by wildlife before this, and when pickers miss the optimal ripeness opportunity, after. Fungi are being removed when they are seen, not left for an optimal ripening. If picked when still at "button" stage, they have not released spores.</li>
<li>The seeds in blackberry fruit are part of its distribution mechanism, the amount left unpicked, and fed upon by wildlife sustainably spreads the next generation. Fungi fruiting bodies contain spores that go unreleased if they are picked, and may contain insect eggs, interrupting both distribution mechanisms, depleting the next generation of invertebrates.</li>
<li>Blackberries tend to conveniently, for pickers, grow on the sunny side of rides and paths, much blackberry picking is done from here, an inherently more robust location, without, or with much less disturbance to undergrowth. Fungi are spread throughout the woodland floor. The trampling damage by harvesters alone is of grave concern, and contributes to potentially damaging operations which are restricted on SSSI.</li>
<li>The fruiting mechanism in plants is much better understood. While there are studies that allege sustainability of picking based on individual mycellium continuing to produce the fruiting bodies, there is no body of work to show the extent to which this may stress the mycellium, or degree to which the organisms other ecosystem functions are altered by the energy and nutrient that must be expended in that process.</li>
</ul>
<br />
So again, NO IT ISN'T!!! (sorry for shouting, again). To be glib (but no less right): no one is worried about the decline of the blackberry, get back to us if this changes.<br />
<br />
If you are using the blackberry analogy, you are either willfully ignorant, or presume your audience is gullible. You should drop that line of argument, it makes you sound like an idiot or a con man.<br />
<br />
Limited apologies if you feel we've oversimplified the case against (done for style, and attempted brevity). We'll welcome nuanced discussion, and well founded arguments, should they arise.<br />
<br />
<br />Brian R Tarnoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12963403837782148443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8774928675776876745.post-50728169571793860202016-12-04T10:28:00.000+00:002016-12-04T10:28:31.392+00:00The Wild Trout Trust and New Forest River Restorations<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.wildtrout.org/sites/all/themes/wild_trout/images/wtt-logo-border.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://www.wildtrout.org/sites/all/themes/wild_trout/images/wtt-logo-border.png" /></a></div>
For some perspective on some of the issues raised by river restorations we contacted the Wild Trout Trust, themselves deliverers or partners in many river restoration projects addressing similar issues to those met by the Latchmore proposal. As it turns out, they had made an advisory visit in September 2015; this was undertaken by their Conservation Officer, Mike Blackmore.<br /><br />Their advisory visit programme is "very much focussed on identifying good and poor trout habitat and what can be done practically to make the poor good. Mike looked at a 1 km reach of the Brook and a 500m reach of a tributary, the Thompson's Castle Stream." <br /><br />Their key findings were:<br /><br />
<ul>
<li>Valuable wild trout habitat is under threat by the status quo condition of the Latchmore Brook and tributaries. </li>
<li>Channel incision and accelerated morphological processes as outlined by the JBA Consulting report and as observed during the site visit are limiting the abundance and quality of marginal habitat (important for freshwater invertebrates and juvenile trout). These factors are also likely to be significantly impacting the viability of spawning habitat in the main channel. </li>
<li>Reconnecting paleo-meanders will result in a net increase in habitat for wild trout (as a result of increased channel length) and is likely to help protect existing spawning habitat by reducing the rate of channel incision and the magnitude of cut and fill events. </li>
<li>The overall paucity of in-stream and low-level bankside woody habitat features significantly limit the abundance, diversity and quality of cover and refuge habitat for trout. </li>
<li>Habitat quality and diversity is being significantly reduced by over-grazing and bank poaching by livestock. </li>
<li>Further habitat enhancement, including tree planting and the introduction and retention of woody habitat features, will be required to provide a good quality and diverse habitat for wild trout. </li>
<li>Improvement in the wild trout population of the Latchmore Brook and the aquatic ecosystem upon which it is dependent will require a significant change in land management including improved protection of the riverbanks from grazing livestock.</li>
</ul>
Their conclusions recognize the problems with the status quo and acknowledge the benefits of the project to fish species and wildlife. They also suggest measures which would make the habitat optimal for trout species, promotion of stream shading scrub, and fencing to prevent livestock poaching scrub and vegetation bankside, which would fly in the face of traditional forest management, and would even restrict the amenity in ways to which even the protesters would object. How would Forest users react to the sight of a fenced off stream, with access only through gates?<br /><br />Scrub does vary over time, and we know that historically there has been, at times, little scrub along stretches of the stream on the open forest. Even now, there is about a kilometre stretch with next to no riparian shade. The Commoners often push for active scrub removal to create more grazing (The NFA will usually push for key nectar species to be left where possible), and of course the livestock themselves will have nibbles that hamper growth. <br /><br />So, neither the current stream nor the proposed change would be absolutely ideal for fish species, but here's where the point is being missed by objectors' narrow focus. Habitats are complex. What benefits some species may be detrimental to others. The biodiverse rich habitat of the New Forest is not managed solely for any single species. Scrub removal may warm some of the unshaded water, but this will benefit the Dragonflies, even if it narrows the tolerances for the fish.<br /><br />Despite the insufficient scrub, both historically and at present, fish tolerate the conditions in the Brook. Restoring the meanders will recreate the more natural morphology that benefits these species. The claim that changing the stream will frighten away shy fish, is refuted by many the projects elsewhere aimed at wild fish habitat improvement which restore meanders (some other successful projects go even further and create meanders), including projects directed at fisheries (over 900 in the RRC database), and even more strikingly here in the New Forest, by the fish themselves. Brown Trout were recorded spawning in a restored section at Harvestslade within three months of the completion of that project.<br /><br />We thank the Wild Trout Trust for their permission to share their findings (particularly their director, <span style="color: #1f497d;">Shaun Leonard who provided the bullet point summary quoted above</span>), and for their candour and generosity in response to our queries. We commend them for their fine works in implementing and promoting habitat restoration. According to Environment Agency monitoring, their upper Itchen project has produced a four-fold increase in trout biomass, compared to unimproved, control sites.<br /><br />For further information on some of their projects, and ways to help, on the WTT website: <a href="http://www.wildtrout.org/content/projects-1">http://www.wildtrout.org/content/projects-1</a>. <br />Brian R Tarnoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12963403837782148443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8774928675776876745.post-77328171116048370992016-12-01T19:30:00.000+00:002016-12-02T12:39:52.638+00:00Chalara Ash Dieback Reaches The New Forest<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.forestry.gov.uk/images/2019134_740px.jpg/$file/2019134_740px.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://www.forestry.gov.uk/images/2019134_740px.jpg/$file/2019134_740px.jpg" height="161" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
At tonight's Consultative Panel, the Deputy Surveyor announced the first laboratory confirmed case of ash dieback within the New Forest National Park. This was discovered in trees near Picket Post.<br />
<br />
Chalara Ash Dieback is a disease caused by fungal infestation of <i>Hymenoscyphus fraxineus</i>. This fungus originated in Asia, where it is benign to the native Ash species. The disease was first identified in Europe as <i>Chalara Fraxinea</i> in Poland in 1992. It is devastating to European species of Ash, and is now firmly entrenched across mainland Europe. 2012 saw the first confirmed cases in the UK in a Buckinghamshire nursery in imported plants from the Netherlands. East Anglia, Kent and Essex have had the highest concentration of cases so far, but the outbreak is spreading to the west, with cases in the wild in Wales, and past the Forest to Cranbourne Chase and further west in southern England.<br />
<br />
<br />
The fungus produces tiny fruiting bodies on the leaf stalks of infected trees. By the following summer these produce spores which spread to other trees via their leaves. A slightly different form of the fungus then migrates into the branches and trunk where its mycellium interrupts the flow of water and nutrients, slowly starving the tree.<br />
<br />
Little can be done about it, there is no treatment. It kills small trees very quickly. Mature trees may be severely weakened, then killed by secondary pathogens. Some survive indefinitely in a weakened state, and there may be various degrees of resistance in these, although they remain infected carriers. The only active practical measure that may be taken, as the spores are
spread in the leaf litter of infected trees, is basic biosecurity, clean
your boots off between walks in different woodlands, limiting transport of, or treating wood harvested from infected trees, etc.<br />
<br />
Small comfort, but the Forest landscape will be less impacted than much
of the countryside, as Ash is less common on acid forest soils,
typically present here in wet/riverine woodlands. That does not reduce its
threat to the overall biodiversity of the country, nor the potential
impact on the forest's habitat assemblies that include Ash.<br />
<br />
<br />
One resistant tree has been identified in the UK, and several on the
continent, which may support future propagation and DNA fingerprint
tests for other resistant trees. Panel Chair and botanist Clive
Chatters observed that this is not as bad as Dutch Elm disease. That
outbreak was exacerbated by the lack of genetic diversity in Elm (once
intensively nursery produced), whereas in Ash in the wild "there is a vast amount of diversity". This diversity is important as the likelihood of
extant resistant plants is increased. While the vector for the disease is in the leaves, on a typical Ash plantation it would be a nonsense to hoover them up, Clive noted that "in our wood pastures, where the Commoners turn out their stock, the stock hoover up all those leaves, particularly in the wet woodlands where they get in there this time of year, they're absolutely hoovering up that fallen green. And I think the forest will be very interesting to monitor as a model for how things may cope in the future."<br />
<br />
Much more information about Chalara Ash Dieback, including how to report possible sightings, is available from this Forestry Commission page: <a href="http://www.forestry.gov.uk/ashdieback">http://www.forestry.gov.uk/ashdieback</a>. <br />
A 2012 Episode of the BBC Radio 4 Programme The Long View contrasts <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01p0fpb" target="_blank">Dutch Elm Disease and Ash Dieback</a> . And their programme from nature writer Richard Mabey, <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0367sqd" target="_blank">Mabey in the Wild</a> of 3rd July 2013, featured a discussion of New Forest trees including Elm, Holly and Beech with Clive Chatters.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/U0n-9-PZySA" width="560"></iframe>Brian R Tarnoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12963403837782148443noreply@blogger.comLyndhurst, UK50.872559 -1.576800000000048450.792385 -1.7381615000000483 50.952733 -1.4154385000000484tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8774928675776876745.post-25834148354985885242016-10-28T11:44:00.001+01:002016-10-28T12:32:52.955+01:00NFA Comment on Dibden Bay<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">The perennial threat of development of Dibden Bay by Associated British Ports (ABP) for a container port appears to be back on the table according to stories yesterday from both <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-37790178" target="_blank">the BBC</a> and the <a href="http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/14827921.Controversial_Dibden_Bay_plans_back_on_the_table/" target="_blank">Southampton Daily Echo</a>, with ABP complaining of limited capacity <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-37791314" target="_blank">and Chancellor of the Exchequer, Phillip Hammond saying he would support the development which would no longer be subject to a local planning inquiry, but would be considered a National Infrastructure Project</a>.<br />
<br />
Our Chair,
John Ward, has commented:</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
<br />
<a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3ADibden_Bay_at_Low_Tide_-_geograph.org.uk_-_386918.jpg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;" title="Gillian Moy [CC BY-SA 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons"><img alt="Dibden Bay at Low Tide - geograph.org.uk - 386918" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/47/Dibden_Bay_at_Low_Tide_-_geograph.org.uk_-_386918.jpg" width="256" /></a>
<br />
The harmful impacts to wildlife and to the landscape of the New Forest that would be caused by developing Dibden Bay as a container port would be no less today, tomorrow or in the coming decade than they would have been in 2004 when a lengthy planning inquiry led to the rejection of a similar proposal.<br />
<br />
The one thing of major significance to have happened since then has been the designation of the New Forest National Park, recognising that in addition to its massive importance for habitats and wildlife the New Forest is one of ‘the finest landscapes in England’. Government national planning policy emphasises the great weight that should be given to conserving the landscape and scenic beauty of National Parks. <br />
<br />
Dibden Bay is immediately adjacent to the boundary of the New Forest National Park. There is no hinterland, no buffer zone. At present on one side of this line there is Forest heathland and trees and on the other the environmentally important marsh and reclaimed land of Dibden Bay. Apart from the destruction of valuable habitat, a container port would bring vast cranes reaching far into the sky, 24 hour intensive lighting and greatly increased traffic not just from transporting containers but serving all of the ancillary activity that would spill out across surrounding areas. <br />
<br />
The west side of Southampton Water is already a busy area jostling against the fragile special qualities of the New Forest. It is no place for further major development.Brian R Tarnoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12963403837782148443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8774928675776876745.post-10075421157061796062016-10-10T11:43:00.000+01:002016-10-10T12:13:26.750+01:00Fracking the Forest?<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiD__kdKwa8UFj4qbh9IFgQr7WXwBA3idDVzEQ0BhyphenhyphenyZzLdIOINWMb0Y5KG_uD-zCXHZDpdx72Foy_vrLUzYM0fusXgcxpxRauU4l4mRBUD6rkRmRbhAfMeBbNW7zfM4VBmb0NgPiJf4RSm/s1600/Hampshire+Minerals+and+Waste+Plan+Oil+Gas+SPD+Cover+201602.jpg" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiD__kdKwa8UFj4qbh9IFgQr7WXwBA3idDVzEQ0BhyphenhyphenyZzLdIOINWMb0Y5KG_uD-zCXHZDpdx72Foy_vrLUzYM0fusXgcxpxRauU4l4mRBUD6rkRmRbhAfMeBbNW7zfM4VBmb0NgPiJf4RSm/s320/Hampshire+Minerals+and+Waste+Plan+Oil+Gas+SPD+Cover+201602.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br />
<br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">With the Government taking <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-37567866" target="_blank">the decision on fracking away from Lancashire County Council</a> on 6th October 2016, this brief review of our position and the possibility of hydraulic fracturing in this region could be of use. </td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
The NFA support <a href="http://www.cnp.org.uk/fracking" target="_blank">the position of the Campaign For National Parks</a>, that fracking in or under our National Parks has significant environmental impacts - polluting groundwater, damaging the landscape and ruining tranquility, and is inappropriate for the setting. While we've been given to understand that the New Forest's geology would not be attractive to fracking, we do not want to see this for any of our National Parks or other protected areas. Additionally the precedent it establishes for putting supposed infrastructure demands over these designations is truly chilling. 33 years ago an application by Shell UK to drill for oil and gas in Denny Inclosure was seen off, a battle we shouldn't have to fight all over again.<br />
<br />
Last year, when the Government was in the midst of its U-Turn on a promise not to license fracking in National Parks (eventually arriving at the position that they would allow drilling from just outside National Parks to go under them), Durham University published an article ranking the Parks likelihood for hydraulic fracturing.<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;"><b>New Forest National Park:</b> (Geology: <a href="http://bit.ly/1zPvEi0">http://bit.ly/1zPvEi0</a>)<br />
A relatively young geology and the rocks close to the surface have no shale gas, shale oil, or coal bed methane potential. Oil and gas have been found in rocks beneath areas close to the New Forest, and there has been exploration in the national park, but there is no evidence of any oil- or gas-bearing shales that would be of interest to fracking companies.<br />
<div style="text-align: right;">
-- <a href="https://www.dur.ac.uk/dei/resources/briefings/fracktionalparks/" target="_blank">Durham Energy Institute Briefing Note<br /> - From national to fracktional: <br />Will fracking come to Britain’s National Parks? (April 2015)</a></div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
The Briefing Note puts the Forest in its middle Amber (fracking unlikely) category (along with Brecon Beacons, Exmoor, and Northumberland). It listed four national parks as Red (fracking possible): North York Moors, Peak District, South Downs, and Yorkshire Dales (rocks of possible interest to companies looking to frack for shale gas, shale oil, or coalbed methane).<br />
<br />
Whilst researching other goings on at the Verderers Court, this item from 2014 popped up that suggests that fracking could come closer to the Forest than we had supposed:<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; vertical-align: top; width: 8%;">2014/<br />
7364</td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">HAMPSHIRE MINERALS & WASTE – OIL AND GAS DEVELOPMENT – REPORT ON MEETING ON 5TH JUNE 2014<br />
<br />
Mrs Westerhoff attended the meeting on behalf of the Court. The discussion centred around fracking. Two areas have been identified as potential sites, one being The Weald (as far west as Winchester) and the other is in Dorset reaching east to Thorney Hill adjacent to the New Forest. Whilst the New Forest could be fracked in the future, Mrs Westerhoff understood it would only happen under exceptional circumstances and would be subject to the European legislation protecting the SAC.<br />
<div style="text-align: right;">
--Verderers Minutes June 2014</div>
</td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; vertical-align: top; width: 12%;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">DISCHARGE</span></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
With the unknown shape of the Brexit plan, the reassurance of protection from the SAC (Special Area of Conservation, a European designation), is under threat unless those protections are formally and thoroughly back-stopped in UK legislation and policy.<br />
<br />
The most recent <a href="http://www3.hants.gov.uk/mineralsandwaste/planning-policy-home/oil-gas-development.htm" target="_blank">Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan</a> was adopted in 2013, before the more recent changes in policy and legislation. Subsequently, December 2015 they updated the <a href="http://documents.hants.gov.uk/planning-strategic/HMWPFAQOnshoreOilandGas.pdf" target="_blank">On-shore Oil & Gas FAQs (60 pages)</a> and in February 2016 the Hampshire Authorities adopted the <a href="http://www3.hants.gov.uk/mineralsandwaste/planning-policy-home/hmwp-spds.htm" target="_blank">Oil and gas development Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) (90 pages)</a>. From the FAQ:<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;"><b>Oil and gas exploration in National Parks</b><br />
<br />
There are known oil and gas resources within Hampshire's two National Parks and exploration already takes place within the South Downs National Park. There are other examples nationally of where oil and gas development takes place within designated areas. This includes western Europe's largest oilfield at Wytch Farm, Dorset
and sites in Surrey all of which are located within designated areas for nature conservation. The potential impact of a proposal on designations will be taken into account in detail at the planning application stage. The Government has recently announced new planning guidance on unconventional oil and gas development in areas of designation such as National Parks, AONBs and heritage sites (see question 23). There are also policies in the adopted Hampshire Minerals & Waste Plan in relation to minerals developments in designated areas (including Policy 4: Protection of the designated landscape) which will be used to guide whether planning permission should be given in such locations.<br />
<br />
In December 2015, there was a vote in the House of Commons regarding hydraulic fracturing
in National Parks. MPs voted in favour of allowing hydraulic fracturing to take place 1,200
metres below National Parks and Sites of Special Scientific Interest, as long as the drilling
(and associated infrastructure) takes place from outside the designated areas.<br />
<br />
There are no licences in the New Forest National Park administrative area.
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
The Weald in the South Downs National Park is a target for fracking, and would be a potential testbed for the 1200 metre rule. In September 2016 their Authority <a href="http://www.theplanner.co.uk/news/south-downs-national-park-rejects-oil-drilling-plan" target="_blank">rejected a plan for horizontal drilling with hydraulic fracturing</a>. The applicant believes "this proposal would be supported by the Planning Inspectorate or the Secretary of State in the event of an appeal." Given that <a href="http://www.theplanner.co.uk/news/%E2%80%9Cbillions-of-barrels%E2%80%9D-of-shale-oil-in-weald-basin-says-bgs" target="_blank">the British Geological Survey (BGS) estimate 2.2 and 8.6 billion barrels of shale oil beneath the Weald Basin</a>, that appeal could be in with a chance as that may be deemed nationally significant. We may need to lend our support to our neighbours should this go forward.<br />
<br />
The "<a href="https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/116344" target="_blank">Reverse the decision to allowing fracking under our national parks.</a>" parliament petition closed on June 19th 2016, with just 38,732 signatures, not enough to be granted a debate(>100k), but enough (>10k) to trigger a Government response, which includes these provisos about protected areas that leave us feeling much less protected:<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">The protected areas in which hydraulic fracturing will be prohibited have been set out through the Onshore Hydraulic Fracturing (Protected Areas) Regulations, which were formally approved by both Houses of Parliament in December 2015. These regulations ensure that the process of hydraulic fracturing cannot take place above 1200 metres in National Parks, the Broads, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs), World Heritage Sites and areas that are most vulnerable to groundwater pollution.<br />
<br />
Rather than enabling operations in protected areas, these regulations introduce an additional protection to our most sensitive areas and complement the strong protections already provided by the planning system. Moreover, it is worth emphasising that the regulations do not in themselves grant any form of permission for “associated hydraulic fracturing” to take place under any of these sites. They simply establish the principle that hydraulic fracturing should be prohibited by legislation in the specified areas and down to the specified depth. A company looking to develop shale will still need to obtain all the necessary permissions, like planning and environmental permits - and any proposals will necessarily be subject to further detailed consideration and scrutiny under our legal and regulatory regimes.</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
Orwellian newspeak at its finest "an additional protection to our most sensitive areas", these sensitive areas would not need <b>additional</b> protection, if they weren't under threat from this activity in the first place. They should simply be removed from the equation entirely. Putting an arbitrary depth of 1200 metres also ignores the fact that those 1200 metres (and the water table) will be drilled through to get to that level, that hole, however well engineered will be connected to the area into which fracking fluid will be pumped at high pressure. What could possibly go wrong? Fracking was temporarily suspended in 2011 after earthquakes were caused near Blackpool.<br />
<br />
In the 16th December 2015 vote on the Onshore Hydraulic Fracturing (Protected Areas) Regulations 2015 — Extension of Prohibition of Shale Gas Extraction, <a href="http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/14151657.Outrage_as_fracking_is_allowed_in_National_Parks_including_the_New_Forest/?ref=fbshr">New Forest East MP Dr. Julian Lewis spoke against the regulation publicly, but abstained from the vote</a>. New Forest West MP Desmond Swayne voted with the Government to allow fracking under National Parks. This is all the more troubling as the west of the Forest is in closest proximity to proposed sites, as noted by David Harrison, Lib Dem councillor, member of the New Forest National Park Authority, "I imagine the west of New Forest will be mainly affected."<br />
<br />
The NFA discussed fracking issues at the November 2015 Council meeting, and although
it is unlikely that the Forest's geology would attract fracking per se,
we're completely against this approach both in principle, and the
possibility that it would open the door to similar exploitation. These
fights are perennial and ongoing.<br />
<br />
The protections offered to designated landscapes and habitats, National Parks and SSSI, et.al. must be honoured and remain meaningful.Brian R Tarnoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12963403837782148443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8774928675776876745.post-41496907083873972192016-10-06T19:25:00.001+01:002016-10-06T19:25:39.380+01:00Cables Buried At Buckland Rings<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=8774928675776876745" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><br /></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgL20Go6OTSwOopeNfSl6FgY8q1_Gje8_hQBF9RCt5zalKoAAyntf55nGONymwO_zu_57wWN9SVONXr9yb7xo0tLGeBXN1sMS2MGUn7WUYj-jR1KaNxtE12OYCy5gMMLHGdrQ9sl31NNef5/s1600/Buckland+Cable+20161006.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="131" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgL20Go6OTSwOopeNfSl6FgY8q1_Gje8_hQBF9RCt5zalKoAAyntf55nGONymwO_zu_57wWN9SVONXr9yb7xo0tLGeBXN1sMS2MGUn7WUYj-jR1KaNxtE12OYCy5gMMLHGdrQ9sl31NNef5/s200/Buckland+Cable+20161006.jpg" width="200" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">There....</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Buckland Rings is an Iron Age Hillfort (and modern day informal BMX track) situated on the National Park's border with Lymington. To its south and east ran a 33v overhead cable which spoilt the setting of the fort from the adjacent open access.<br />
<br />
The cable has now been buried as part of Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks £15m project to underground 90km of overhead lines in AONB and National Parks in North Scotland and Central Southern England. A few weeks after the burial no evidence of the work can be seen on the ground.<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiMnPtneKhm_VWVQ3bUaD2DbnW9iUaRDHXyAEw2reUF6OP0mF-lfdcziehfg14VDAOU3JC8PugMZFRRp-V1R5oKGPrDvW6ZMH7CUdgoeFVa5zL4iWhSKzcmYAsSakOY9azF8CDTT_hJtS-Z/s1600/Buckland+Cable+Gone+20161006.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="150" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiMnPtneKhm_VWVQ3bUaD2DbnW9iUaRDHXyAEw2reUF6OP0mF-lfdcziehfg14VDAOU3JC8PugMZFRRp-V1R5oKGPrDvW6ZMH7CUdgoeFVa5zL4iWhSKzcmYAsSakOY9azF8CDTT_hJtS-Z/s200/Buckland+Cable+Gone+20161006.jpg" width="200" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">... and gone.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
NFA are now championing the burying of the cable from Hicheslea west along the old Ringwood train line via Slap Bottom to Bagnam. If anyone out there has an overhead cable in the New Forest National Park they particularly dislike, they should should contact <a href="mailto:planning@newforestassociation.org" target="_blank">planning@newforestassociation.org</a>. <br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">-- Graham Baker, Chair, Planning Committee<br />
<br />
(web editor's note: perhaps we could reduce our planning committee's workload by only notifying them of any overhead cables anyone is actually fond of....) </td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Brian R Tarnoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12963403837782148443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8774928675776876745.post-76186626912302342192016-09-29T12:27:00.000+01:002016-12-05T15:43:05.395+00:00The Forestry Commission's New Forest Fungi Policy<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.newforestassociation.org/Images/News_Images/DSCF0007-Copyright%20Brian%20Tarnoff.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://www.newforestassociation.org/Images/News_Images/DSCF0007-Copyright%20Brian%20Tarnoff.JPG" height="150" width="200" /></a></div>
<br />
The New Forest Association are pleased that the Forestry Commission are implementing a "Look, Don't Pick" rule regarding fungi foraging on the New Forest Site of Special Scientific Interest under their stewardship. This affirms the protection our habitat deserves. This is consistent with their obligations to the protections of the SSSI, their management of the New Forest SSSI as a National Nature Reserve and their powers to authorise or deny picking of fungi under consent from Natural England. This brings the FC policy in line with the ban on fungi foraging on the Commons the National Trust, and the Nature Reserves the Wildlife Trust manage within the Forest.<br />
<br />
We hope that enforcement may be hard hitting on pickers taking undue advantage of the forest whether commercial or not. Enforcement may also be soft and educational for casual foragers. The message is the same, this is a protected habitat and landscape, leave the fungi to nature and the autumn display for all to see.<br />
<br />
It brings the FC back in line with the guidance <a href="http://www.fungi4schools.org/Reprints/Pickers_code.pdf" target="_blank">1998 Wild Mushroom Pickers Code of Conduct</a>, the misreading of which was the source of the arbitrary 1.5 kg "limit", which has absolutely no basis in law. The code clearly meant the limit for undesignated habitats, not SSSI or National Nature Reserves. An allowance should never have been implemented at all in this protected habitat.<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;"><b>NCC Consent 25 January 1988 (subsequently under Natural England)</b><br />
The Nature Conservancy Council issued the following consent to the FC regarding the above operation:- "The collection of fungi as authorised by the Forestry Commission, subject to periodic review by the FC and the NCC."<br />
<br />
<b>FC/Verderers/English Nature Declaration of Intent 25 July 1995</b> <br />
"The Forestry Commission will continue to manage the New Forest as an area with the status of a National Nature Reserve and to maintain the nature conservation interests for which it is designated under national and international legislation or agreements."
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
<br />
In July 2015 the NFA launched its campaign for a very specific ban on fungi harvest from the SSSI on the Crown Lands of the New Forest. In doing this we've sought to bring about best practice under existing laws, byelaws and guidance. After careful consideration we decided that calling for an <a href="http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/things-to-do/green-spaces/epping-forest/wildlife-and-nature/Pages/default.aspx" target="_blank">Epping Forest</a> style ban was the most clear cut solution, with its obvious precedent. We're taking the precautionary principle that on a SSSI, especially one including fungi amongst its notified features, under heavy pressure from recreation and other use, that the fungi should be protected, part and parcel with the whole of this habitat.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.newforestassociation.org/Images/News_Images/DSCF9777-Copyright%20Brian%20Tarnoff.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://www.newforestassociation.org/Images/News_Images/DSCF9777-Copyright%20Brian%20Tarnoff.JPG" height="150" width="200" /></a></div>
The NFA campaigns for the habitat and heritage of the Forest. In entering into this campaign we consulted with our own ecologists and local mycologists. We've consulted with and had support from the<a href="http://www.britmycolsoc.org.uk/" target="_blank"> British Mycological Society</a>, <a href="http://www.abfg.org/" target="_blank">the Fungi Conservation Trust</a>, Natural England, <a href="https://buglife.org.uk/" target="_blank">Buglife</a>, <a href="http://www.plantlife.org.uk/" target="_blank">Plantlife</a> and <a href="https://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/new-forest-northern-commons/features/autumn-in-the-new-forest" target="_blank">the National Trust</a>, <a href="http://www.hiwwt.org.uk/reserves/roydon-woods" target="_blank">the Hampshire and Isle of Wight Wildlife Trust</a> (the latter two had already banned fungi foraging on SSSI land they manage). The fruiting bodies of the fungi are not merely food for other fauna, but are depended upon by at least 600 species of invertebrate using them as micro-habitats to fulfill their life cycles.<br />
<br />
The <a href="http://www.forestry.gov.uk/forestry/infd-6a5kw3" target="_blank">New Forest Site of Special Scientific Interest</a> is in one of the most densely populated National Parks, surrounded on many sides by conurbation with insufficient alternative greenspace, and mounting recreation pressure. As open access land, it is easily accessible to all users, and an easy touch for volume foragers. SSSI is a designation that confers habitat protection under UK law. The New Forest is also a Special Protection Area (SPA) and a Special Area of Conservation (SAC), Natura 2000 designations or initiatives under EU law, and a National Nature Reserve. <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/hampshire/hi/people_and_places/nature/newsid_9022000/9022740.stm" target="_blank">The Natural History Museum</a> picked the New Forest as one of two biodiverse rich sites on which to base their ongoing climate change study. It is a gem, one of the crown jewels of natural biodiversity in Britain, Europe and the World. We ask all to understand importance of this ecosystem and the need for its protection, and that they respect its protection and find their fungi elsewhere.<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;"><b>For Immediate Release</b><br />
<br />
We will be examining and addressing some of the counterarguments and myths surrounding this policy and fungi conservation in <a href="http://newforestassociationnews.blogspot.com/2016/12/look-dont-pick-arguments.html" target="_blank">"Look, Don't Pick" - The Arguments</a>.</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Brian R Tarnoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12963403837782148443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8774928675776876745.post-42034883653844933182016-09-23T13:13:00.000+01:002016-09-23T16:53:00.678+01:00Material World<a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3AWarwickslade_Cutting%2C_infilling_of_minor_drain_-_geograph.org.uk_-_1464070.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;" title="Peter Facey [CC BY-SA 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons"><img alt="Warwickslade Cutting, infilling of minor drain - geograph.org.uk - 1464070" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/db/Warwickslade_Cutting%2C_infilling_of_minor_drain_-_geograph.org.uk_-_1464070.jpg/256px-Warwickslade_Cutting%2C_infilling_of_minor_drain_-_geograph.org.uk_-_1464070.jpg" width="256" /></a>One concern I think we all share about the Latchmore Brook project is the transport of the infill materials. This is due to cause a certain amount disturbance and inconvenience to those residents and visitors along the delivery routes, as well as valid questions about the safety for both road and Forest users, man and beast. I've already had a private go at the FC and LUC over their need to provide concise and useful figures for the public to properly convey the size of the issue. Here I attempt a stop-gap.<br />
<br />
Movement of materials to the nine stockpiles to service nine different project areas is due to run over four different access routes in two or three of the four years of the overall project. Two of these access routes are via relatively well used roads, the B3078 Roger Penny Way from either Godshill or Brook to Telegraph Hill, and the turning from the A31 to Stony Cross, then the turning towards Slufters and Cadman's Pool, followed by the turn towards HighCorner /Linwood, almost immediately turning off onto the Forest Track to Holly Hatch / Alderhill. The more problematic routes go through the village / cul de sac Fritham, home of the Royal Oak pub, which some consider the unofficial office of the NFA, the other through the village of South Gorley and Ogdens. <br />
<br />
As you drive northeast up the unnamed road towards Ogdens, many of the houses grow larger. You'll pass Fir Tree Farm, one of the best placed and few remaining commercial stables on the Forest, its manège is only a fence and a few feet away from the narrow lane, riders in the school may not appreciate the extra challenge to their control and aid skills as their mounts react to passing tipper lorries. After the stables, the road becomes a forest track, with more modest dwellings fronting directly and quite closely to the road.<br />
<br />
Naturally we have every sympathy for those who may be effected. All the more reason to get at some realistic, and relate-able numbers.<br />
<br />
I've seen and heard alarming figures, 70HGV movements a day or 44000 HGVs over the course of the project, which I've discovered to be ridiculously overblown. Not that I blame anyone for getting this wrong as the planning documents do not lay out the information in a helpful way. I had to bounce around four or five of the submitted statements and appendices to pull this together.<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">1.3 The works are anticipated to last for approximately 4-12 weeks (July-September) per year over a period of 4 years. If weather conditions are poor (wet), works may halted temporarily to protect ground conditions.<br />
<br />
4.9 The highest maximum number of deliveries for each route to the site per day has been calculated as follows:<br />
<ul>
<li>Ogdens - 25 HGVs and 4 tractor/trailer deliveries per day.</li>
<li>Alderhill - 25 HGVs and 4 tractor/trailer deliveries per day.</li>
<li>Fritham - 25 HGVs and 4 tractor/trailer deliveries per day.</li>
<li>Telegraph Hill - 25 HGVs and 4 tractor/trailer deliveries per day.</li>
</ul>
4.10 In addition to the HGV movements set out above, there will be approximately six employees on site associated with the restoration works (i.e. total 12 movements per day).
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
In two of the planning documents we are only given maximums or ranges, we're told a maximum of 25 HGV deliveries per day per route, a window of 4-12 weeks in each of the four years, this last is the beginning of distortion as only the 2019 Phase is 12 weeks July to September the other three are 4-8 weeks August-September.<br />
<br />
Back to one of the numbers being bandied about by alarmists. 70 HGV's per day. If someone has quoted this figure at you, they are either lying, or unknowingly passing on an intentional lie. The only way one could arrive at the number 70 is to take the maximum 25 HGV deliveries, the 4 tractor/trailer, plus up to 6 staff vehicles for a total of 35 roundtrips = 70 movements, only 50 movements are HGV (still not a small amount, but smaller, and a maximum, averages may be lower). As we'll note later, despite the stated maximum of 4 tractor/trailer deliveries per day conjuring an equal level of traffic, the number bale deliveries becomes negligible very quickly.<br />
<br />
Here's the initial information I pulled out of the "Appendix 4.1: Estimated Restoration Material Quantities and Transport Movements Data" (a diabolically poorly laid out document in which every 2 out of three tables has a single line, in some case, a single cell). The 22 separate tables are easily and more usefully aggregated into three tables, the first gives us Material Quantities, the primary information we need to derive the number of deliveries, the other two Maximum number of deliveries per day clay/gravel/hoggin and heather bales respectively (plus Delivery timescale for HGV loads). You'll forgive the small size required to squeeze this in here. The more important summary tables that follow will be suitably legible.<br />
<br />
Table 1: Estimated Material Quantities<br />
<table border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width: 614px;">
<colgroup><col style="mso-width-alt: 8118; mso-width-source: userset; width: 167pt;" width="222"></col> <col style="mso-width-alt: 4242; mso-width-source: userset; width: 87pt;" width="116"></col> <col style="mso-width-alt: 3803; mso-width-source: userset; width: 78pt;" width="104"></col> <col style="mso-width-alt: 4644; mso-width-source: userset; width: 95pt;" width="127"></col> <col style="mso-width-alt: 3584; mso-width-source: userset; width: 74pt;" width="98"></col> <col span="6" style="mso-width-alt: 2962; mso-width-source: userset; width: 61pt;" width="81"></col> </colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr height="51" style="height: 38.25pt;">
<td height="51" style="height: 38.25pt; width: 12%;"><b><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Project
Area</span></b></td>
<td style="margin-left: 4px; width: 10%;"><b><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Stockpile</span></b></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><b><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Lorry
Route </span></b></td>
<td class="xl24" style="text-align: center; width: 9.5%;" width="127"><b><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Hoggin & Washed Gravels
(tonnes) </span></b></td>
<td style="text-align: center; width: 9.5%;"><b><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Clay
(tonnes) </span></b></td>
<td class="xl24" style="text-align: center; width: 11%;" width="81"><b><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Minimum Tipper Deliveries</span></b></td>
<td class="xl24" style="text-align: center; width: 8%;" width="81"><b><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Minimum Tipper Days</span></b></td>
<td class="xl24" style="text-align: center; width: 1%;" width="81"><b><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">_</span></b></td>
<td class="xl24" style="text-align: center; width: 8%;" width="81"><b><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Heather Bales </span></b></td>
<td class="xl24" style="text-align: center; width: 11%;" width="81"><b><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Minimum Tractor Deliveries</span></b></td>
<td class="xl24" style="text-align: center; width: 8%;" width="81"><b><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Minimum Tractor Days</span></b></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td height="17" style="height: 38.25pt; width: 12%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Islands
Thorns</span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Picket
Corner </span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Telegraph
Hill </span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">10004.6</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">4001.8</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">702</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">29</span></td>
<td style="width: 1%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">1815</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">7</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">2</span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td height="17" style="height: 38.25pt; width: 12%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Islands
Thorns</span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Islands
Thorns </span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Fritham
</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">5002.3</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">2000.9</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">352</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">15</span></td>
<td style="width: 1%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">1815</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">7</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">2</span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td height="17" style="height: 38.25pt; width: 12%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Islands
Thorns</span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Fritham
Bridge </span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Fritham
</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">5002.3</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">2000.9</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">352</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">15</span></td>
<td style="width: 1%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td height="17" style="height: 38.25pt; width: 12%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Thompson’s
Castle: </span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Hampton
Ridge </span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Telegraph
Hill </span></td>
<td style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 1%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">460</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">2</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">1</span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td height="17" style="height: 38.25pt; width: 12%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Thompson’s
Castle: </span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Ogdens
Car Park </span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Ogdens </span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">2071.0</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">829</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">146</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">6</span></td>
<td style="width: 1%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td height="17" style="height: 38.25pt; width: 12%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Latchmore
Mire: </span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Hampton
Ridge </span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Telegraph
Hill </span></td>
<td style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 1%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">1944</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">7</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">2</span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td height="17" style="height: 38.25pt; width: 12%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Studley
Wood: </span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Claypits
</span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Telegraph
Hill </span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">5860</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">2344</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">411</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">17</span></td>
<td style="width: 1%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">986</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">4</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">1</span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td height="17" style="height: 38.25pt; width: 12%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Studley
Wood: </span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Picket
Corner </span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Telegraph
Hill </span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">5860</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">2344</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">411</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">17</span></td>
<td style="width: 1%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td height="17" style="height: 38.25pt; width: 12%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Ogdens
Mire: </span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Ogdens
Mire </span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Ogdens </span></td>
<td style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 1%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">2280</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">8</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">2</span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td height="17" style="height: 38.25pt; width: 12%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Ogdens
Mire: </span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Ogdens
Car Park </span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Ogdens </span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">99.75</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">39.9</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">7</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">1</span></td>
<td style="width: 1%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td height="17" style="height: 38.25pt; width: 12%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Amberwood
and Alderhill Inclosures: </span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Fritham
Bridge </span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Fritham
</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">9662.43</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">3864.97</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">678</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">28</span></td>
<td style="width: 1%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td height="17" style="height: 38.25pt; width: 12%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Amberwood
and Alderhill Inclosures: </span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Alderhill
Inclosure </span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Alderhill
</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">9662.43</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">3864.97</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">678</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">28</span></td>
<td style="width: 1%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">1920</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">7</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">2</span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td height="17" style="height: 38.25pt; width: 12%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Sloden:
</span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Sloden
Inclosure </span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Alderhill
</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">5671.5</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">2268.6</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">398</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">16</span></td>
<td style="width: 1%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td height="17" style="height: 38.25pt; width: 12%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Watergreen
Bottom: </span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Alderhill
Inclosure </span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Alderhill
</span></td>
<td style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 1%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">500</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">2</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">1</span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td height="17" style="height: 38.25pt; width: 12%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Latchmore
Shade: </span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Ogdens
Car Park </span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">Ogdens </span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">9755.4</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">3902.16</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">684</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">28</span></td>
<td style="width: 1%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td height="17" style="height: 38.25pt; width: 12%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 1%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td height="17" style="height: 38.25pt; width: 12%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">TOTALS</span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td style="width: 10%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">68651.71</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 9.5%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">27461.2</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">4819</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">200</span></td>
<td style="width: 1%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">11720</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 11%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">44</span></td>
<td align="right" style="width: 8%;"><span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: x-small;">13</span></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
I have added four columns of calculations, number of both
deliveries and days for each material. In each case all numbers are
rounded up to the nearest whole number before being used as a factor in
the next calculation. These are based on both the optimal 100% load
capacity and the maximum number of deliveries per day, and so derive the
minimum number of deliveries necessary for each location/phase/route of
the project. Depending on your point of view, this is perhaps the best
case scenario, the maximum amount of disruption each day, but the
fewest number of days.<br />
<br />
Table 1a1: Estimated Material Quantities by Route by Year HGVs<br />
<table border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width: 608px;">
<colgroup><col style="mso-width-alt: 8118; mso-width-source: userset; width: 167pt;" width="222"></col> <col style="mso-width-alt: 4242; mso-width-source: userset; width: 87pt;" width="116"></col> <col style="mso-width-alt: 3803; mso-width-source: userset; width: 78pt;" width="104"></col> <col style="mso-width-alt: 4644; mso-width-source: userset; width: 95pt;" width="127"></col> <col style="mso-width-alt: 3584; mso-width-source: userset; width: 74pt;" width="98"></col> <col span="2" style="mso-width-alt: 2962; mso-width-source: userset; width: 61pt;" width="81"></col> <col style="mso-width-alt: 2413; mso-width-source: userset; width: 50pt;" width="66"></col> </colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr height="51" style="height: 38.25pt;">
<td colspan="1" height="51" rowspan="12" style="background-color: white; height: 38.25pt; width: 5%;" width="222"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; margin-left: -95px; width: 10%;" width="116"><b>Year</b></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15%;" width="104"><b>Lorry
Route </b></td>
<td class="xl24" style="background-color: white; text-align: center; width: 15%;" width="127"><b>Hoggin
& Washed Gravels (tonnes) </b></td>
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: center; width: 15%;" width="98"><b>Clay
(tonnes) </b></td>
<td class="xl24" style="background-color: white; text-align: center; width: 15%;" width="81"><b>Minimum
Tipper Deliveries</b></td>
<td class="xl24" style="background-color: white; text-align: center; width: 15%;" width="81"><b>Minimum
Tipper Days</b></td>
<td class="xl24" style="background-color: white; width: 5%;" width="66"><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td class="xl27" style="background-color: white; width: 10%;">2019</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">Alderhill </td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">15333.93</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">6133.57</td>
<td align="right" class="xl26" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">1076</td>
<td align="right" class="xl26" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">44</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td class="xl27" style="background-color: white; width: 10%;">2020</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">Alderhill </td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
<td class="xl26" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
<td class="xl26" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td class="xl27" style="background-color: white; width: 10%;">2017</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">Fritham </td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">10004.60</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">4001.80</td>
<td align="right" class="xl26" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">704</td>
<td align="right" class="xl26" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">30</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td class="xl27" style="background-color: white; width: 10%;">2019</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">Fritham </td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">9662.43</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">3864.97</td>
<td align="right" class="xl26" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">678</td>
<td align="right" class="xl26" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">28</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td class="xl27" style="background-color: white; width: 10%;">2017</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">Ogdens </td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">2071.00</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">829.00</td>
<td align="right" class="xl26" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">146</td>
<td align="right" class="xl26" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">6</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td class="xl27" style="background-color: white; width: 10%;">2018</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">Ogdens </td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">99.75</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">39.90</td>
<td align="right" class="xl26" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">7</td>
<td align="right" class="xl26" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">1</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td class="xl27" style="background-color: white; width: 10%;">2020</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">Ogdens </td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">9755.40</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">3902.16</td>
<td align="right" class="xl26" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">684</td>
<td align="right" class="xl26" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">28</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td class="xl27" style="background-color: white; width: 10%;">2017</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">Telegraph Hill </td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">10004.60</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">4001.80</td>
<td align="right" class="xl26" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">702</td>
<td align="right" class="xl26" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">29</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td class="xl27" style="background-color: white; width: 10%;">2018</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">Telegraph Hill </td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">11720.00</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">4688.00</td>
<td align="right" class="xl26" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">822</td>
<td align="right" class="xl26" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">34</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">TOTALS</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">68651.71</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">27461.20</td>
<td align="right" class="xl26" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">4819</td>
<td align="right" class="xl26" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">200</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
<br />
If
the lorry loads are always at fullest capacity, than the number of
deliveries remains constant. That's the minimum number of deliveries
that would have to happen, you could have them in the fewest number of
days if the maximum deliveries per day is reached, but more likely you
may want to spread that pain.<br />
<br />
Table 1b1: Estimated Deliveries/Days by Route by Year and Comparison to %90 Capacity / 20 deliveries/day snapshot<br />
<table border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width: 609px;">
<colgroup><col style="mso-width-alt: 512; mso-width-source: userset; width: 11pt;" width="14"></col> <col style="mso-width-alt: 1280; mso-width-source: userset; width: 26pt;" width="35"></col> <col style="mso-width-alt: 2998; mso-width-source: userset; width: 62pt;" width="82"></col> <col span="3" style="width: 48pt;" width="64"></col> <col style="mso-width-alt: 2304; mso-width-source: userset; width: 47pt;" width="63"></col> <col style="mso-width-alt: 1024; mso-width-source: userset; width: 21pt;" width="28"></col> </colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr height="96" style="height: 72.0pt; mso-height-source: userset;">
<td colspan="1" height="96" rowspan="12" style="background-color: white; height: 72pt; width: 5%;" width="14"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;" width="35"><b>Year</b></td>
<td style="background-color: white; margin-left: 10px; width: 20%;" width="82"><b>Lorry
Route </b></td>
<td class="xl24" style="background-color: white; text-align: center; width: 15%;" width="64"><b>Minimum Tipper Deliveries</b></td>
<td class="xl24" style="background-color: white; text-align: center; width: 15%;" width="64"><b>90% Capacity Tipper Deliveries</b></td>
<td class="xl24" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;" width="64"><b>Minimum
Tipper Days</b></td>
<td class="xl24" style="background-color: white; text-align: center; width: 15%;" width="63"><b>90% Capacity 20 Max Tipper Days</b></td>
<td class="xl24" colspan="1" rowspan="12" style="background-color: white; width: 5%;" width="28"><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;">2019</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Alderhill </td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">1076</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">1195</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">44</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">61</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;">2020</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Alderhill </td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;">2017</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Fritham </td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">704</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">780</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">30</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">40</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;">2019</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Fritham </td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">678</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">752</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">28</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">38</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;">2017</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Ogdens </td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">146</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">163</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">6</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">9</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;">2018</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Ogdens </td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">7</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">9</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">1</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">1</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;">2020</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Ogdens </td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">684</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">759</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">28</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">38</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;">2017</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Telegraph Hill </td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">702</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">779</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">29</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">39</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;">2018</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Telegraph Hill </td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">822</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">914</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">34</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">46</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Totals</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">4819</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">5351</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">200</td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; text-align: right; width: 15%;">272</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
For a lesser case scenario, I tweaked numbers for HGV loads at 90% of
Capacity, which would increase the number of deliveries required, and
thus the number of days, and further increased the number of days by
decreasing the maximum deliveries per day to 20. This makes for some
useful comparisons.<br />
<br />
Table 1a2: Estimated Material Quantities by Route by Year Tractor/Trailer<br />
<br />
<table border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width: 607px;">
<colgroup><col style="mso-width-alt: 512; mso-width-source: userset; width: 11pt;" width="14"></col> <col style="mso-width-alt: 1280; mso-width-source: userset; width: 26pt;" width="35"></col> <col style="mso-width-alt: 2998; mso-width-source: userset; width: 62pt;" width="82"></col> <col span="3" style="width: 48pt;" width="64"></col> <col style="mso-width-alt: 512; mso-width-source: userset; width: 11pt;" width="14"></col> </colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr height="51" style="height: 38.25pt;">
<td colspan="1" height="51" rowspan="12" style="background-color: white; height: 38.25pt; width: 10%;" width="14"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;" width="35"><b>Year</b></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;" width="82"><b>Lorry
Route </b></td>
<td class="xl24" style="background-color: white; text-align: center; width: 20%;" width="64"><b>Heather Bales </b></td>
<td class="xl24" style="background-color: white; text-align: center; width: 15%;" width="64"><b>Minimum Tractor Deliveries</b></td>
<td class="xl24" style="background-color: white; text-align: center; width: 15%;" width="64"><b>Minimum Tractor Days</b></td>
<td class="xl24" colspan="1" rowspan="12" style="background-color: white; width: 10%;" width="14"><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;">2019</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Alderhill </td>
<td align="right" style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">1920</td>
<td align="right" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">7</td>
<td align="right" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">2</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;">2020</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Alderhill </td>
<td align="right" style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">500</td>
<td align="right" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">2</td>
<td align="right" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">1</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;">2017</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Fritham </td>
<td align="right" style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">1815</td>
<td align="right" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">7</td>
<td align="right" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">2</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;">2019</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Fritham </td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;">2017</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Ogdens </td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;">2018</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Ogdens </td>
<td align="right" style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">2280</td>
<td align="right" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">8</td>
<td align="right" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">2</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;">2020</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Ogdens </td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;">2017</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Telegraph Hill </td>
<td align="right" style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">4219</td>
<td align="right" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">16</td>
<td align="right" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">5</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;">2018</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Telegraph Hill </td>
<td align="right" style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">986</td>
<td align="right" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">4</td>
<td align="right" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">1</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">TOTALS</td>
<td align="right" style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">11720</td>
<td align="right" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">44</td>
<td align="right" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">13</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
Heather Bales will by delivered by tractor/trailers with a capacity of 300
Bales per delivery. We've also been told there's a maximum of 4
deliveries per route per day. It's tempting to simply add that to the
other numbers of daily deliveries, but the problem with that is that
there are not that many deliveries of bales needed compared to the other
infill materials. At maximum capacity, there would need to be 44
deliveries for the entire project, not per year, not per route, the
whole bale of wax. If you were to spread those evenly by year by route
that's less than 3. I can't conceive that 3 extra tractor trailers per
YEAR would be noticeable on even the quietest routes. For our lesser
case scenario, we run at ¾ full, and that ups the total deliveries to
58.<br />
<br />
Table 1b2: Estimated Deliveries/Days by Route by Year and Comparison to %75 Capacity snapshot<br />
<table border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width: 609px;">
<colgroup><col style="mso-width-alt: 512; mso-width-source: userset; width: 11pt;" width="14"></col> <col style="mso-width-alt: 1280; mso-width-source: userset; width: 26pt;" width="35"></col> <col style="mso-width-alt: 2998; mso-width-source: userset; width: 62pt;" width="82"></col> <col span="4" style="width: 48pt;" width="64"></col> <col style="mso-width-alt: 658; mso-width-source: userset; width: 14pt;" width="18"></col> </colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr height="96" style="height: 72.0pt; mso-height-source: userset;">
<td colspan="1" height="96" rowspan="12" style="background-color: white; height: 72pt; width: 5%;" width="14"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;" width="35"><b>Year</b></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;" width="82"><b>Lorry
Route </b></td>
<td class="xl24" style="background-color: white; text-align: center; width: 15%;" width="64"><b>Minimum
Tractor Deliveries</b></td>
<td class="xl24" style="background-color: white; text-align: center; width: 15%;" width="64"><b>75%
Capacity Tractor Deliveries</b></td>
<td class="xl24" style="background-color: white; text-align: center; width: 15pt;" width="64"><b>Minimum
Tractor Days</b></td>
<td class="xl24" style="background-color: white; text-align: center; width: 15%;" width="64"><b>75%
Capacity Tractor Days</b></td>
<td colspan="1" rowspan="12" style="background-color: white; width: 5%;" width="18"><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;">2019</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Alderhill </td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">7</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">9</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15pt;">2</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">3</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;">2020</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Alderhill </td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">2</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">3</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15pt;">1</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">1</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;">2017</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Fritham </td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">7</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">9</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15pt;">2</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">3</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;">2019</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Fritham </td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15pt;"><br /></td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;">2017</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Ogdens </td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15pt;"><br /></td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;">2018</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Ogdens </td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">8</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">11</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15pt;">2</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">3</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;">2020</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Ogdens </td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15pt;"><br /></td>
<td class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;">2017</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Telegraph Hill </td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">16</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">21</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15pt;">5</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">7</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;">2018</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Telegraph Hill </td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">4</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">5</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15pt;">1</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">2</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: left; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15pt;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 15%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Totals</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">44</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">58</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15pt;">13</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">19</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
Of course it's not that evenly spread, as we see when we look at the data,
but the Fritham and Ogdens routes would need 7 and 8 deliveries
respectively for the whole project. It gets better than that, the
number of bale deliveries coming by road routes might be nil:<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">For the purposes of the assessment it has been assumed that the heather
bales will be transported from outside the catchment via the four routes
listed below, thereby assessing a worst case scenario in terms of
potential effects. However, it is more than likely that the heather
bales will be harvested from within the open forest areas near to the
Latchmore Catchment and public roads will not be needed to transport
them to the areas of the proposed works.
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
Table 1c: Total Estimated Deliveries/Days over course of whole project by Route and Comparison to Worst Case snapshot (in combining Days for both Infill and Bale Delivery, overlap has been accounted for.)<br />
<table border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width: 609px;">
<colgroup><col style="mso-width-alt: 877; mso-width-source: userset; width: 18pt;" width="24"></col> <col style="mso-width-alt: 1280; mso-width-source: userset; width: 26pt;" width="35"></col> <col style="mso-width-alt: 2998; mso-width-source: userset; width: 62pt;" width="82"></col> <col style="width: 48pt;" width="64"></col> <col style="mso-width-alt: 768; mso-width-source: userset; width: 16pt;" width="21"></col> <col span="2" style="width: 48pt;" width="64"></col> <col style="mso-width-alt: 950; mso-width-source: userset; width: 20pt;" width="26"></col> </colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr height="96" style="height: 72.0pt; mso-height-source: userset;">
<td colspan="1" height="96" rowspan="6" style="background-color: white; height: 72pt; width: 7%;" width="24"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;" width="35"><b>Lorry
Route </b></td>
<td class="xl24" style="background-color: white; text-align: center; width: 15%;" width="82"><b>Minimum Deliveries</b></td>
<td class="xl24" style="background-color: white; text-align: center; width: 15pt;" width="64"><b>Worst Case Deliveries</b></td>
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: center; width: 5%;" width="21"><b><br /></b></td>
<td class="xl24" style="background-color: white; text-align: center; width: 15%;" width="64"><b>Minimum Days</b></td>
<td class="xl24" style="background-color: white; text-align: center; width: 15%;" width="64"><b>Worst Case Days</b></td>
<td colspan="1" rowspan="6" style="background-color: white; width: 20pt;" width="26"><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Alderhill </td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">1085</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15pt;">1207</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 5%;"><br /></td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">45</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">62</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Fritham </td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">1389</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15pt;">1541</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 5%;"><br /></td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">58</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">78</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Ogdens </td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">845</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15pt;">942</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 5%;"><br /></td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">35</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">48</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Telegraph Hill </td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">1544</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15pt;">1719</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 5%;"><br /></td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">63</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">85</td>
</tr>
<tr height="17" style="height: 12.75pt;">
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;">Totals</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">4863</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15pt;">5409</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 5%;"><br /></td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">201</td>
<td align="right" class="xl25" style="background-color: white; width: 15%;">273</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
It is also important to note that some mitigation measures are already in
the plan which include: The same drivers will be used, and will be made
aware of the "possible pedestrians, cyclists and livestock in the
carriageway", there will be "speed restrictions for delivery vehicles;" -
15mph on the Forest gravel tracks, 5mph under the ordinary 20mph
restriction under the byelaws, and "traffic management with radios on
the Ogdens route" as well as term time restrictions for school run to
local schools. For those concerned about the condition of their roads,
there will be a survey of the local highway network before and after the
restoration phase to identify and agree any remedial works reasonably
attributable to the restoration activities. (Full list in ES Vol 3
Appendix 4.2 Construction Traffic Management Plan Section 5).<br />
<br />
We
hope that this analysis goes a little way to giving a realistic scale to
the potential problems. Even if some may still want to scare monger,
at least they should have more realistic numbers. But we don't want
fear, we want sensible and proportional discussion. And no, we don't
expect that this solves any remaining concerns - whether or not
conditions are placed on the planning application to suggest further
mitigation, there may still be work needed by both the Forestry
Commission and local residents to accommodate each other fairly.Brian R Tarnoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12963403837782148443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8774928675776876745.post-43835342797025187482016-09-21T10:55:00.000+01:002016-10-05T00:26:06.070+01:00Presentment: Latchmore Brook: Part 2: Wildlife, Materials and Beauty<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">In a feat of both irony, and good timing thematically, the presenter met the five minute limit for Presentments, and was cut short. <a href="http://newforestassociationnews.blogspot.com/2016/09/presentment-latchmore-brook-part-1.html" target="_blank">The first part was an apology from the New Forest Association</a> for not displaying our support for the Latchmore project "often enough, publicly enough, or possibly well enough." allowing snide comments and poor treatment of the Verderers, Forestry Commission and National Park Authority to stand.<br />
<br />
The second part shifts emphasis to addressing areas that concern all of us about the project, Wildlife, Material Delivery Routes and Beauty.</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
...I won't make up for lost time now. I have <a href="http://newforestassociationnews.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/fact-checking-our-friends.html" target="_blank">a critique of more than ten errors</a> on just one of their webpages which I've sent separately to the Verderers (on our news page). But I beg the courts indulgence to address a few points. Amongst the more emotive subjects, the potential disturbance to and loss of wildlife in the implementation itself. Of course this is of concern, but there's a reason why we view the end-of-days prognostication of those opposed as baseless conjecture.<br />
<br />
2119. Two thousand One Hundred and Nineteen. This is the non-exclusive number of completed River Restoration projects in the UK since 1994 listed in the database of the River Restoration Centre. Some smaller, some larger: the <a href="http://westcumbriariverstrust.org/projects/river-restoration-strategy" target="_blank">Cumbria River Restoration Strategy</a> (CRRS) a partnership project between Natural England, the Environment Agency and the Rivers Trusts of Eden, West Cumbria and South Cumbria won <a href="http://www.therrc.co.uk/uk-river-prize" target="_blank">the 2016 UK River Prize</a>. They restored 14 km of river across the three catchments to a more natural form. Not all restore meanders, only 1593 had Habitat objectives, some were done for Flood Risk, Fisheries, etc. 120 are listed as a result of Community Demand. But all would have had the issue of disturbance to wildlife. Projects including hundreds of Rivers Trusts, Catchment Partnerships, private estates, the Royal Parks, the National Trust, amongst others. When the RSPB, and the Wildlife Trusts, and their ecologists support the Latchmore Brook project and other Forest wetland restorations, they do so with their experience, including many projects on the land they manage. If the consequences, in 22 years and 2119 projects, were as dire as the leaders of the opposition contend, I should think we'd have heard about it by now, or certainly their researches would have brought this to our attention.<br />
<br />
We do all share concerns about the project. The New Forest History and Archaeology Group have raised issues with the survey, we believe they are surmountable and encourage all interested parties to work towards a solution.<br />
<br />
Movement of materials to the site may cause disturbance and inconvenience to those along the delivery routes. I've seen and heard alarming figures, 70HGV movements a day or 44000 HGVs, which I've discovered to be ridiculously overblown. Not that I blame anyone for getting this wrong as the planning documents do not lay out the information in a helpful way. I've already had a private go at the FC and LUC over their need to provide concise and useful figures for the public to properly convey the size of the issue. The route through Ogdens, for example, we've been told this will be used in three years of the project, which is worrying, but hazard a guess at how many days would be necessary for deliveries through Ogdens in 2017 - 6, 2018 - 1, that's right in 2018 they only need to make approx 7 deliveries on that route that year, 2020 - 28, of course that will bear more discussion, but it brings perspective. For the entire project all routes all years combined there will be fewer than 10k HGV movements, fewer than 11k in the worst case scenario we've run. I'll be putting up <a href="http://newforestassociationnews.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/material-world.html" target="_blank">our numbers on our newspage later today</a>, available to all, even if you want to scare people with numbers at least you can use realistic figures.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgWPglhdbXInMmJ3IJub8Go5SoTcyzQpDUQgiSUog9pqQgigxOsUlzCWLCoBW5W4qgCkg7LSTVWjOwbMHLyrjn1u-cuIjQ8VOVch5-YuQPMA5Mt5BwmkHjSfezlAcSfqo6i7Lj4L4gWP5cV/s1600/Latchmore+Abandoned+Meander+Dscf2366.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgWPglhdbXInMmJ3IJub8Go5SoTcyzQpDUQgiSUog9pqQgigxOsUlzCWLCoBW5W4qgCkg7LSTVWjOwbMHLyrjn1u-cuIjQ8VOVch5-YuQPMA5Mt5BwmkHjSfezlAcSfqo6i7Lj4L4gWP5cV/s320/Latchmore+Abandoned+Meander+Dscf2366.jpg" width="320" /></a>Finally, many are rightfully concerned about the future beauty of the Latchmore Brook. Walking along Latchmore Shade, you will clearly see the original meanders. In some cases you will see this as gently undulating curves written as a gentle scar in the landscape, it is easy to imagine a pleasant stream flowing along this course. Elsewhere the meanders have been eroded into unattractive ruts, and in other places the area between the current water course and the meanders become a quagmire when the drains rush water into the area, the flood in the now dysfunctional flood plain is partially contained by the meander, not allowing much onto the adjacent grazing. Fixing this will not make the area any less beautiful. I spoke of the prizewinning project in Cumbria, which we may begrudgingly agree is also an iconic landscape. That project was twice the size of Latchmore.<br />
<br />
Look at Warwickslade Cutting and Fletchers Thorns amongst many of the completed restorations which have bedded in, they look absolutely lovely now. There are many to choose from, but don't impatiently show up moments after the diggers left and expect an instantaneous transformation. Give nature time to do its magic. After all nature took its time creating those meanders before they were ruined.<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">-- Brian Tarnoff, Chair, Habitat and Landscape Committee<br />
New Forest Asssociation<br />
<br />
While this second part was not read in the open court, the full presentment was distributed in written form to the
Verderers, as well as the <a href="http://newforestassociationnews.blogspot.com/2016/09/fact-checking-our-friends.html" target="_blank">Annotated Fact Check of the Latchmore Crowdfunding Page</a>.<br />
<br />
Much of this half of the Presentment was repurposed in the Public Questions section of the subsequent National Park Authority meeting, with an emphasis on addressing the PR problem now faced by Wetland Restorations in the wake of the leaders of the opposition to Latchmore's concerted campaign of <a href="http://newforestassociationnews.blogspot.com/2016/09/rumour-wishful-thinking-or-fiction.html" target="_blank">misinformation</a>, <a href="http://newforestassociationnews.blogspot.com/2016/09/fact-checking-our-friends.html" target="_blank">misrepresentation</a>, hyperbole and pseudoscience.</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Brian R Tarnoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12963403837782148443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8774928675776876745.post-75006802194024127442016-09-21T10:50:00.000+01:002016-10-05T00:09:47.144+01:00Presentment: Latchmore Brook: Part 1: An ApologyAs the Latchmore Brook planning application may be decided before the next month's Verderers Court. The NFA find that we owe <u>everyone</u> an apology.<br />
<br />
We've never made a secret of our support for the Forestry Commission's wetland restorations. But clearly, in some areas, we haven't made our case often enough, publicly enough, or possibly well enough. For that we must apologize to the whole of the Forest.<br />
<br />
We apologize to the Verderers, I know you don't need anyone to leap to your defence, but you have been impugned, under the snide accusation that everyone involved in, or indeed supporting the project, would knowingly harm the Forest. The Verderers who many of us regard as the conservative line in the sand, that we are so fortunate have powers granted by the New Forest Acts. You have supported this project in the various forms its taken when it has come before you.<br />
<br />
This is one of the Leaders of the opposition's most poisonous assertions, that the process itself, is somehow tainted by a cosy "partnership". The National Park Authority, Verderers and Forestry Commission are only "partners" in the project inasmuch as they are the statutory bodies obviously required to be on the project board. It only benefits the FC as they fulfil their legal obligation to respond to the Natural England condition assessment of the SSSI, and only benefits the Park as it successfully fulfils their statutory purposes "to conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the area". The NPA is represented on the board by their Chief Exec Alison Barnes.<br />
<br />
The NPA's Planning Committee is made up of 14 of the 22 members of the Park Authority. The Committee is mostly (12) local Parish, Town, District and County Councillors and 2 Secretary of State Appointees [through DEFRA]. As with any Planning Authority they have strict criteria they must adhere to, and whilst they may seek advice from the civil servant staff of the Authority including their own ecologists and the Chief Exec, the decisions are theirs. No previous scheme has been refused because, like the present one, they are worthwhile restorations to improve the habitat, and have met the criteria for planning approval. There is NO conflict of interest as the Chief Exec on the board of the project serves the members of the Authority, not the other way around.<br />
<br />
We apologize to the Forestry Commission, and other public servants that have had to bear the brunt of what many would call a hostile work environment. I've heard hissing at Parish Council meetings. I've seen ecologists aggressively berated at consultations and site visits, where they are merely doing their job and explaining, calmly, what the values of these projects are. The NFA haven't been able to be present at all occasions and have not intervened enough. Not that I lay all bad behaviour at the feet of the Leaders of the opposition, but neither do they repudiate such behaviour. <br />
<br />
We also apologize to the FC because while the NFA have campaigned for more monitoring built in to all these projects - We didn't insist enough to give everyone a larger more convincing body of evidence.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh8aaLVrRCmTPgc_Hx-_-5EFPOS3loBUbxi6QnVJug-3pxA5LrNo8IGvgtDjM8DHY5MY4MVvsA11wWEzwMIkdWEpJL6qLDSSu0TcXbI5cge_1ACBA8uZz0TzXjoHB1h4NiYIoYXgY6dlNb-/s1600/DSCF2375.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh8aaLVrRCmTPgc_Hx-_-5EFPOS3loBUbxi6QnVJug-3pxA5LrNo8IGvgtDjM8DHY5MY4MVvsA11wWEzwMIkdWEpJL6qLDSSu0TcXbI5cge_1ACBA8uZz0TzXjoHB1h4NiYIoYXgY6dlNb-/s320/DSCF2375.JPG" width="320" /></a>We apologize to the Friends of Latchmore. Yes, we do. On one level we welcomed them, we disagreed with their conclusions, but a localized voice giving the Forestry Commission a hard time, could have been useful. The NFA, covering more issues over the whole Forest, can't be everywhere all the time. But they are never sceptical enough with their own arguments, they don't sort the wheat from the chaff, as a result we've heard a few valid points hidden amidst a white noise of hyperbole and pseudoscience.<br />
<br />
But here's where the NFA have done the leaders of the Friends of Latchmore and as a result many of their followers a true disservice. We didn't challenge them publicly often enough. We thought there was no point in popping up doing tit for tat when the planning process would make the decision. We limited speaking here at the Verderers Court mostly to key moments when the Verderers were to decide their views. In some cases they may even have taken our silence for validation.<br />
<br />
We've let them steal a march on us in the public perception, but in doing so they have spread an entrenched dogmatic view which stifles debate, because you can't have a discussion where one side never concedes any of the many valid points that suggest that either this project is worthwhile, or that its challenges are proportionate. <br />
<br />
I won't make up for lost time now. I have a critique of more than ten errors on just one of their webpages which I've sent separately to the Verderers (on our news page). But I beg the courts indulgence to address a few points.....<br />
<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">-- Brian Tarnoff, Chair, Habitat and Landscape Committee<br />
New Forest Asssociation<br />
<br />
In a feat of both irony, and good timing thematically, the presenter met the five minute limit for Presentments, and was cut short. <a href="http://newforestassociationnews.blogspot.com/2016/09/presentment-latchmore-brook-part-2.html" target="_blank">The second part shifts emphasis to addressing areas that concern all of us about the project, Wildlife, Material Delivery Routes and Beauty</a>. The full presentment was distributed in written form to the Verderers, as well as <a href="http://newforestassociationnews.blogspot.com/2016/09/rumour-wishful-thinking-or-fiction.html" target="_blank">the Annotated Fact Check of the Latchmore Crowdfunding Page</a>.<br />
<br />
<br />
The Presentment was preceded by a very short thank you to the Forestry Commission for their new <a href="http://www.forestry.gov.uk/forestry/infd-6e3gaz" target="_blank">Look, Don't Pick Fungi policy</a>. We released <a href="http://newforestassociationnews.blogspot.com/2016/09/the-forestry-commissions-new-forest.html" target="_blank">a fuller response to the policy here</a>.</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Brian R Tarnoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12963403837782148443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8774928675776876745.post-9926602619202867352016-09-21T10:45:00.000+01:002016-09-26T09:26:52.530+01:00Deputy Surveyor: Stream Restoration and Fish<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">At September's Verderers Court, the Deputy Surveyor, Bruce Rothnie used his optional Presentment slot to discuss Stream Restoration's potential benefits and impacts on fish.</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3AFMIB_43029_Brown_Trout_(Salmo_fario)_This_is_the_common_brook_trout_of_Europe%2C_and_it_has_been_named_Von_Behr_Trout_by_the_United_States.jpeg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;" title="See page for author [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons"><img alt="FMIB 43029 Brown Trout (Salmo fario) This is the common brook trout of Europe, and it has been named Von Behr Trout by the United States" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3e/FMIB_43029_Brown_Trout_%28Salmo_fario%29_This_is_the_common_brook_trout_of_Europe%2C_and_it_has_been_named_Von_Behr_Trout_by_the_United_States.jpeg/512px-FMIB_43029_Brown_Trout_%28Salmo_fario%29_This_is_the_common_brook_trout_of_Europe%2C_and_it_has_been_named_Von_Behr_Trout_by_the_United_States.jpeg" width="512" /></a></div>
<br />
There have been some presentments made in this Court raising concerns about the impacts of the stream restoration work on fish.<br />
<br />
Fish are a vital part of the ecology of the Forest and we all want to know that their surroundings are in a condition where they can thrive. In many places across the Forest the streams have the natural diversity of conditions that are good for fish - gravel riffles, pools, and vegetation in the water and along the bank. The stream life is in harmony with the natural processes of the site and robust to weather variations. <br />
<br />
Unfortunately in some places man's intervention by straightening and deepening the streams has upset these natural processes and reduced the natural diversity upon which fish and other stream life depend. The straighter channels increase water flow which strips them of gravels, vegetation and the natural variation of water depth that is so vital for all stages of fish development.<br />
<br />
We all know that ponies grazing on the Forest need the freedom to roam in order to thrive. They can find shelter from hot or stormy weather; they can find water in ponds and streams; and they can exploit the range of vegetation at different places and at different times of year. Imagine if they were to be constrained to areas without this variation - their condition would quickly deteriorate.<br />
<br />
The same is true for fish and we have an opportunity through our stream restorations to re-establish the diversity. By restoring meandering streams we provide the physical conditions from which the natural processes can take over and the stream life can return at nature's pace. These changes do not occur overnight and we have seen at sites restored in the past that benefits can show quickly but may take years to establish fully.<br />
<br />
Of course we are concerned about disturbing the existing fish populations during work. That is why we undertake fish surveys before work and then capture and relocate them downstream just prior to work starting - these techniques are widely used across the country and allow us to minimise the impacts on the existing population during work. After the work we are carrying out further surveys of fish and invertebrates at sample locations to see how quickly the stream life returns. I was talking with one of the people doing this monitoring work the other day and I was struck by his enthusiasm about the increasing numbers of fish and invertebrates he had been observing over successive visits - it's early days but very encouraging.<br />
<br />
Concern has also been raised about higher water temperatures if scrub adjacent to the streams is removed and their shading effects lost. Often this scrub has established on the drier spoil banks created when streams were dredged. Removing this scrub allows us to flatten the spoil banks and permit the stream to flood out naturally during high flows onto the adjacent floodplain - a key part of restoring natural processes. This is important "surgery" before healing can take place. <br />
Water temperatures will vary and it is this variation in different parts of the stream and at different times of the year that is important for the survival of fish at all of their stages of development. The vital factor is that fish have opportunity to utilise the natural temperature variation created by pools and riffles and the vegetation in the stream. So by restoring this physical diversity we also restore the natural temperature variations that we also seek.<br />
<br />
All restoration schemes are planned and executed to minimise the impacts on wildlife. The measure of success of these schemes will come with evidence of their condition over time once nature has responded to the physical changes. Anyone left in doubt that these transformations are beneficial should visit some of the earliest sites on the Forest restored in the early 2000s - their condition is impressive and certainly more in character with the Forest we all know and love.<br />
<br />
Bruce Rothnie<br />
Deputy Surveyor<br />
21st September 2016<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">--used with permission with our thanks.<br />
<br />
This is part of the NFA's initiative to publicise good works on the Forest. Presentments by the Deputy Surveyor ordinarily do not enter the public record until the minutes of the whole Court, including the <i>in camera</i> sessions, are approved at the subsequent month's sitting, unless directly reported by the local papers.<br />
<br />
Those opposed to some of the wetland/river restorations have floated some theories suggesting detrimental impacts for fish. The Brown Trout observed spawning in a restored section of Harvestslade Bottom, three months after the works were completed, clearly didn't get their memo.</td><td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Brian R Tarnoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12963403837782148443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8774928675776876745.post-16388386599594611142016-09-21T10:30:00.001+01:002016-09-25T19:35:10.632+01:00Verderers View: Dog Attacks / Presentments<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">At September's Verderers Court, in his Announcements and Decisions, the Official Verderer, Dominic May, spoke of a recent successfully prosecuted dog attack, and affirmed the rules for length and relevance of Presentments to the Court.</td><td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
<h3>
Dog Attack</h3>
On April 21st, two bull mastiff dogs, owned by a visitor to Holland's Wood Campsite, chased and viciously attacked a Shetland pony. The pony was chased so far from the campsite that she was not found until the next day. At first it was hoped she could be saved, but due to the severity of the injuries inflicted by the dogs, a vet recommended that she should be destroyed.<br />
<br />
The owner of the dogs, Thomas Allen from Slough, was successfully prosecuted and has been fined £1,000 and ordered to pay £884 compensation to the pony's owner and costs of £250. <br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3ANorthern_end_of_Hollands_Wood_camp_site%2C_New_Forest_-_geograph.org.uk_-_43408.jpg" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" title="Jim Champion [CC BY-SA 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons"><img alt="Northern end of Hollands Wood camp site, New Forest - geograph.org.uk - 43408" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/de/Northern_end_of_Hollands_Wood_camp_site%2C_New_Forest_-_geograph.org.uk_-_43408.jpg" width="256" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Northern end of <br />
Hollands Wood camp site, New Forest.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
We are very grateful to the staff at the campsite, to Forestry Commission Keeper Jonathan Cook, and to the police, for their actions and evidence which resulted in this successful prosecution.<br />
<br />
We also thank the campers and staff at Holland's Wood for their brave efforts in trying to drive off the dogs. In doing so they undoubtedly risked being seriously injured themselves.<br />
<br />
One of the dogs suffered a broken nose as a result of being kicked during the incident.<br />
<br />
This successful prosecution sends a clear message to all dog owners that they must keep their animals under close control at all times when in the Forest.<br />
<br />
<h3>
Presentments</h3>
We have recently suffered some irrelevant or over-long presentments from the public, so please may I remind the Court of our rules. <br />
<br />
Presentments must be relevant, and should only address matters that are the responsibility of the Verderers or the Forestry Commission as set out in the various New Forest Acts and Forestry Acts, namely Conservation, Landscape, Governance, Management and Animal Health.<br />
<br />
Secondly, presentments must be brief: no longer than five minutes. <br />
<br />
Thirdly, presentments must be moderately phrased and free of any express or implied abuse. <br />
<br />
As chairman of the Court, I will stop any presentment from the public which is not relevant, brief or moderate.<br />
<br />
Thank you.<br />
<br />
Dominic May<br />
Official Verderer<br />
21st September 2016<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">-- used with permission with our thanks.<br />
<br />
This is part of the NFA's initiative to publicise good works on the Forest. Announcements and Decisions by the Verderers ordinarily do not enter the public record until the minutes of the whole Court, including the <i>in camera</i> sessions, are approved at the subsequent month's sitting, unless directly reported by the local papers.<br />
<br />
Here is <a href="http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/14762272.Brave_campers_in_bid_to_fight_off_killer_dogs_who_attacked_pony/" target="_blank">the dog attack as covered by the Daily Echo</a>.<br />
<br />
Many visitors to the Forest do not take account of both the unpredictability of the Forest's livestock, nor their own dogs facing their novelty. Even though you are your dogs are allowed off lead, that does not make it always appropriate. All are requested to have dogs under "close control" which may include use of the lead. The FC Byelaws state: "No person shall in or on the lands of the Commissioners:-...(xiv) permit a dog for which he is responsible to disturb, worry or chase any bird or animal or, on being requested by an officer of the Commissioners, fail to keep the dog on a leash;".<br />
<br />
Here is the National Park's page on the <a href="http://www.newforestnpa.gov.uk/info/20165/walking/172/dog_walking/6" target="_blank">New Forest Dog Walking Code</a>.<br />
<br />
It should be noted that an NFA representative swiftly tested the five minute limit on Presentments, and was duly cut short, as was one other presentment at Wednesday's Court. </td><td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Brian R Tarnoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12963403837782148443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8774928675776876745.post-45027899968937768852016-09-21T10:02:00.000+01:002016-09-26T11:48:49.962+01:00Verderers View: Leaving The EU: The Implication For Higher Level Stewardship Funding<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">At September's Verderers Court, in his Announcements and Decisions, the Official Verderer, Dominic May, updated the Court on the fate of funding for High Level Stewardship, post Brexit, along with an appreciation of the achievements of the scheme.</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
I am pleased to inform the Court that the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced on 13th August that agri-environment schemes will be fully funded, even when these projects continue beyond the UK's departure from the EU. Our Higher Level Stewardship, the largest in the country, runs until February 2020, and we can continue doing so much good work improving the New Forest with this very important financial backing.<br />
<br />
The New Forest suffers over time by a ratchet affect. No one activity will by itself ruin it, and each disturbance taken in isolation may on the face of it appear negligible. But add up every human intervention, such as artificial drainage, car parks, gravel tracks, utility structures such as telegraph poles or pumping stations, and incrementally over time we experience the significant loss of grazing, loss of landscape amenity, loss of habitat, and loss of good environmental condition. <br />
<br />
Our HLS funds projects to conserve or improve the ecology and environment of the New Forest Crown Lands. We find ourselves in an impoverished financial climate within the public sector, so the £2,000,000 per year which we are spending from the HLS is absolutely fundamental to the future good condition of the New Forest.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3ATylers_Copse%2C_New_Forest._-_geograph.org.uk_-_661931.jpg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;" title="geojoc [CC BY-SA 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons"><img alt="Tylers Copse, New Forest. - geograph.org.uk - 661931" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/27/Tylers_Copse%2C_New_Forest._-_geograph.org.uk_-_661931.jpg" width="256" /></a>This money enables us to turn the clock back to remove previous man-made interventions. We are improving the landscape amenity of the forest. We are improving grazing for the benefit of the forest stock, which are the architects of our beautiful New Forest landscape. <br />
<br />
Our wetland restorations remove man-made drainage, so damaging to the ecology encourage the re-establishment of the flood plain, depositing beneficial organic matter on the forest rather than it being washed out to sea. And a positive by-product is to reduce flood risk downstream.<br />
<br />
We are experiencing some concerted opposition to our wetland work: happily we live in a democracy with its foundation on freedom of speech, so this opposition is entirely proper. It is therefore up to us to win the debate, and provide justification for our plans. Some opposition is based on scientific principles; some on the use of public money; and some is based on what people are used to seeing in "their" area. However, the time horizon of us humans is very short, compared to the 937 years since the legal governance of the New Forest was formalised in 1079.<br />
<br />
The HLS-funded terrestrial work on the New Forest has increased in importance and is providing ecological benefits as well as improved grazing. In the last year the HLS has paid to remove 136 acres of rhododendron. It has paid to restore 56 acres of lost lawns. It has paid to remove self-seeded non-native conifers over 316 acres of open forest. It has paid heather removal over 32 acres. And the HLS has paid for 355 acres of bracken control. <br />
<br />
<a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3APonies_in_the_pound_at_a_drift.png" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;" title="By ThatPeskyCommoner (Own work) [CC BY-SA 3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons"><img alt="Ponies in the pound at a drift" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b7/Ponies_in_the_pound_at_a_drift.png/256px-Ponies_in_the_pound_at_a_drift.png" width="256" /></a>We are keen that the HLS leaves a legacy for the future. This year the HLS has funded new stock pounds at Woodgreen, Holmsley, Appleslade and Woodfidley; these are built in hardwood for longevity.<br />
<br />
With the inexorable increase in the number of cars, we are seeing a huge loss of grazing and thus habitat interest: areas of grass on the edge of roads or outside houses are being lost to bare gravel. You have all seen it. The causes are widespread: over-running the verge at junctions; dog walkers not using car parks; car parking in villages; ignorance from visitors. We are therefore funding a programme of works which will protect eroded verges, and in the longer term allow re-growth of natural vegetation. This verge restoration programme has been slow to get going, but this year the HLS has funded work in Woodgreen and Fritham, with plans in and around East Boldre in the near future.<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3AHimalayan_Balsam_-_geograph.org.uk_-_963201.jpg" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" title="ValP [CC BY-SA 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons"><img alt="Himalayan Balsam - geograph.org.uk - 963201" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/38/Himalayan_Balsam_-_geograph.org.uk_-_963201.jpg" width="256" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Himalayan balsam (Impatiens glandulifera)<br />
in middle distance along the riverbank<br />
at Newbridge in the New Forest.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The HLS funds the New Forest Non-Native Plants Removal Project, removing parrots feather, bog arum, skunk cabbage, Montbretia, Japanese Knotweed, Japanese Iris, buddleia, Himalayan honeysuckle, Himalayan balsam and pitcher plant.<br />
<br />
This summary of our Higher Level Stewardship achievements enables everyone to understand how important it is to the New Forest, and the Chancellor's confirmation of continued funding to 2020 will enable us to keep up our very important work.<br />
<br />
Dominic May<br />
Official Verderer<br />
21st September 2016<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">--used with permission with our thanks.<br />
<br />
This is part of the NFA's initiative to publicise good works on the Forest. Announcements and Decisions by the Verderers ordinarily do not enter the public record until the minutes of the whole Court, including the <i>in camera</i> sessions, are approved at the subsequent month's sitting, unless directly reported by the local papers.<br />
<br />
The <a href="http://www.hlsnewforest.org.uk/hls/" target="_blank">High Level Stewardship</a> scheme is an Environmental subsidy, as evidenced by the word "Stewardship". The New Forest HLS scheme is England’s largest. Whilst this statement from the Official Verderer confirms funding for the current scheme to 2020, there will still be post Brexit implications to subsequent schemes, other habitat funding, agricultural funding and environmental and habitat protections safeguarded under EU legislation, which may need to be back-stopped or re-invented before the formal exit process begins.<br />
<br />
The NFA spoke at the July 2016 Verderers Court about some related issues in their Presentment <a href="http://newforestassociationnews.blogspot.com/2016/07/brexit-and-forest.html" target="_blank">Brexit and The Forest.</a> </td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Brian R Tarnoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12963403837782148443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8774928675776876745.post-23817021737453998102016-09-20T21:44:00.000+01:002016-09-29T16:07:48.652+01:00Rumour, Wishful Thinking, or Fiction?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiv8jNbaI5rPYrgtWxh8TZmOkXV-8v6DRDulu9k1zTnB729YXL8BxUDDrKT2y9a6eDPWLHpL34u8ZH-hvE_3Gaph6UcswzMX8U3F5eWS9qCZU_e7a6gzd-yLreQUx-GyITUI_uH57H-u5At/s1600/Latchmore+Meander+Press+Release+Graphic.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="149" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiv8jNbaI5rPYrgtWxh8TZmOkXV-8v6DRDulu9k1zTnB729YXL8BxUDDrKT2y9a6eDPWLHpL34u8ZH-hvE_3Gaph6UcswzMX8U3F5eWS9qCZU_e7a6gzd-yLreQUx-GyITUI_uH57H-u5At/s200/Latchmore+Meander+Press+Release+Graphic.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
On August 30th, The Friends of Latchmore issued <a href="http://friendsoflatchmore.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Latchmore-Brook-Press-Release-1.pdf" target="_blank">a press release</a>. It spoke of an independent review which would cause the Forestry Commission to immediately withdraw the planning application for the Latchmore Brook wetland restoration. It was all their Christmases come at once. It was a complete fabrication.<br />
<br />
Now, to be fair, it is <i>possible</i>, as we will see, that they were led up a garden path, rather than, as has often been the case, the leaders.<br />
<span id="goog_940235640"></span><span id="goog_940235641"></span><br />
The <a href="http://friendsoflatchmore.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Latchmore-Brook-Press-Release-1.pdf" target="_blank">August 30th Press Release</a> Begins:<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">Representatives of the Friends of Latchmore are pleased to learn that the Chief Executives of the Forestry Commission and Natural England have agreed that there will be a full and independent review of the wetland 'restoration' proposals in the New Forest National Park, including Latchmore Brook. The review is expected to begin towards the end of this year as soon as suitable experts can be appointed.
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
<br />
We now know that, apart from the first nine words, this is untrue. It then decends into a series of flights of fancy "Forestry Commission and Natural England officials are relieved at the decision, due to the range of complaints…" and "the Forestry Commission is expected to withdraw the Latchmore planning application". Then crows a "Spokesperson for Friends of Latchmore said "We are absolutely delighted with the announcement" ".<br />
<br />
The alarm bells already ringing became a klaxon. Much of what had already been said was out of character, to say the least, with what we knew about the resolute intentions of the Forestry Commission to see the planning application through. But a reaction to an "announcement"? What announcement? There had been no announcement. It appeared that FoL had published their "Press Release" with absolutely no corroboration. <br />
<br />
Cue, half a day of tail chasing, FC and NE internally, and many of us on the outside trying to determine a) if there was a shred of truth to this b) where these notions originated. We confirmed that it wasn't true, there had been no announcement, and that the rumour would be addressed by the Deputy Surveyor at the Consultative Panel.<br />
<br />
At the 1st September, New Forest Consultative Panel, Steve Avery, Executive Director Strategy and Planning for the National Park when asked about the alleged withdrawal of the planning application by the FC, "That hasn't reached me, or my authority. We have a live planning application that we will proceed to determine until told otherwise." The Deputy Surveyor, Bruce Rothnie categorically denied any intention of withdrawing the planning application or knowledge of an independent review.<br />
<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">[partial transcript of the Consultative Panel]<br />
BR: There's been a degree of misunderstanding, misinformation that has put out in the last few days and I want to clarify the position. We remain fully committed to Latchmore Brook Restoration Project and believe the current planning process is the appropriate way to deliver that. Some of you will remember that some time ago, and certainly before I returned to the Forest, it was agreed that this should be handled through the planning process because of the democratic process it brings. And that we volunteered to produce an Environmental Impact Assessment which was not required but we felt responded to the concerns of communities around us. Now we've completed that and it is our intention to see that process through. <br />
<br />
[referring to the rumour of the independent review]<br />
I have no information to me that there have been any
discussions of chief executives coming down to me.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I’m intrigued as to where you got that information.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I have certainly not been able to find any
other information provided, down to this level, about that, so perhaps you
could explain wherever that’s come from.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
[a Burley Parish Councillor, then pressed a leader of Friends of Latchmore, in attendance representing another organization, to make a statement ]<br />
<br />
FoL: The information came from the top of Natural England. The press release was “passed”. It was understood that there was to be a joint statement today from the Forestry Commission and Natural England, that there would be a review. There’s obviously some confusion somewhere. I’ve no idea quite how why what’s occurred there, but that’s where the information has come from.
<br />
<br />
BR: Through what channels ...?
<br />
<br />
FoL: Board of Natural England.<br />
<br />
BR: And how was that released to you, your knowledge?<br />
<br />
FoL: Through somebody that is in touch with them, and released through the environmentalist that’s been advising them, which I gather Steve’s had a letter from telling him all about it. So I was a little bit surprised that Steve said he didn’t know anything about it so there’s obviously confusion. Let’s say that. I can say no more, that’s the information I’ve had.<br />
<br />
[shortly afterwards, Steve Avery was asked for a final comment]<br />
SA: In the last week, out of 283 representations we received, one of them
was from a gentleman called Tom Langton who referred to an imminent
review of the scheme and withdrawal of the application, but it's not
grounded or sourced at all as to where that information has come from.
The document is on our website, for everyone to see. But, like Bruce, I'd
be interested to know where that information has come from, whether from
the Forestry Commission or Natural England as alleged.</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
Tom Langton is the Consulting Ecologist that the Friends of Latchmore hired for their "rapid review" (as we know, rapid is how all the best science is done). After the Consultative Panel closed, panel members speculated that it was possible that either Langton or the Friends of Latchmore had become confused about the review of the New Forest Wetland Management Plan 2006-2016.<br />
<br />
The New Forest Wetland Management Plan 2006-2016 published in April 2006, is (and was already at the time of these events) undergoing its end of term review. The big clue is in the "-2016". The review is being done internally within Natural England with the participation of the Forestry Commission. <a href="http://www.hlsnewforest.org.uk/hls/downloads/download/8/new_forest_wetland_management_plan_2006-2016" target="_blank">The Management Plan</a> is available on the <a href="http://www.hlsnewforest.org.uk/hls/info/50/wetland_restoration" target="_blank">New Forest HLS website</a>. It's difficult to conceive that the leaders of Friends of Latchmore would not be aware of this important document.<br />
<br />
In <a href="http://publicaccess.newforestnpa.gov.uk/online-applications/files/574DBD9141601B826B88E3CBCF1F4AFE/pdf/16_00571-MR_T_LANGTON_-_NEIGHBOUR_REPRESENTEE-582631.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Tom Langton's letter</a> to the Planners he sites "threats to geological SSSI features and <i>Odonata</i> interests of international importance", strange when you consider that the British Dragonfly Society (the <i>Odonata</i> in question) support the project. <br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">It is my understanding that the Chief Executives of the FC and NE have agreed in recent days to undertake an independent inquiry/review of the Latchmore and other restorations and that this will be put in place later this year. …<br />
…<br />
I think you may agree on reflection that, in any case, the need for a review in effect casts sufficient doubt over the Latchmore plans.<br />
…<br />
It would be helpful if the application is withdrawn before this Friday 2nd September, the close of the consultation period.
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
He doesn't seem to be at any pains to explain how he reached his "understanding", and at no point does he, in the words of Steve Avery, ground or source his statements. The actual review is a standard end of plan exercise, not caused by a negating "need", and as it is a review of the work carried out under the management plan 2006-2016, it won't include Latchmore as that hasn't happened yet. His strangely presumptive sign off continues his baselessly strong suggestion that the application be withdrawn.<br />
<br />
On 17th of September, FoL issued a <a href="http://friendsoflatchmore.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/LatchmoreBrookPressReleaseUpdate17092016.pdf" target="_blank">further press release</a> which attempted, poorly, to reconcile statements, allegedly from the statutory bodies. Strangely it shows that they don't know the difference between an independent review (denied) and an internal assessment (confirmed). They seem to be happy that the fact the word "review" was used at all somehow corroborates their original fantasy. The Lymington Times of 17th September <a href="http://friendsoflatchmore.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/LT17092016WithdrawLatchmoreApplication.pdf" target="_blank">published a story</a> that partially continued to credit the refuted press release, and the Salisbury Journal ran <a href="http://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/14748068.Restoration_works_to_be_reviewed_following_massive_campaign/" target="_blank">an article</a> which quoted much of it word for word. <br />
<br />
On the 19th September a Forestry Commission Communication Manager confirmed several things to us:<br />
<ol>
<li>The statements about the alleged agreement to an independent review between the Chief Execs of FC and NE, and the withdrawal of the planning application in the Friends of Latchmore 30th August 2016 press release are total fiction.</li>
<li>The Forestry Commission had further denied the statements directly to the reporters from the Lymington Times and the Salisbury Journal before their deadlines for the pieces that ran anyway erroneously continuing to credit those statements.</li>
<li>The New Forest Wetland Management Plan 2006-2016, as mentioned, has already been in preparation -- but there has been a decision to speed up finalising this document so that it is done in the next two weeks. It will then get an extra peer review, as described below:</li>
</ol>
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;"><b>Statement from Natural England:</b><br />
Over 140 wetland restorations have been undertaken in the New Forest since 1997. Ongoing reviews of evidence, experience and lessons learnt are an integral part of any long term nature conservation project such as this.<br />
<br />
During the past 12 months, Natural England has been working on an Assessment of the evidence supporting wetland restoration projects in the New Forest.<br />
<br />
The Chief Executives of the Forestry Commission and Natural England recently agreed to prioritise finalising this Assessment. The next stage for the Assessment is an independent peer review through Natural England's Science Advisory Committee. The objective is to ensure that the evidence and justification for wetland restorations reflect the most recent developments and that any gaps in our knowledge are identified. <br />
<br />
The draft Assessment has been authored by Natural England staff, including a Senior Freshwater Ecologist and Senior Wetland Specialist. Scoping and commission of the peer review is about to commence and we expect it to be completed during October. Once completed, the Assessment will be published on the Natural England <a href="http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/" target="_blank">Access to Evidence</a> website.
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
Unfortunately this leaves us with some speculation as to how they arrived at this, it looks like Tom Langton <i>may have heard about the existing review of the wetland management plan, put two and two together and came up with five</i>. Then either <i>he potted it up as truth which he presented to his one time masters who embraced it as a dream come true</i>, or <i>passed it on as rumour which the leaders of FoL felt no compunction in passing off, uncorroborated as truth</i>.<br />
<br />
Even had an independent review been in the offing, would the leaders of FoL have been happy with any result that didn't go their way? As far as we can tell, this project has received more scrutiny than any other project of its kind. The voluntarily done Environmental Impact Assessment shows the planning authority how well the application fits the required criteria. The leaders of the FoL won't be happy with anything except stopping the project.<br />
<br />
What's so dangerous about either of the speculative scenarios is that they both point up the leaders of the Friends of Latchmore "special" relationship with the truth. We're used to their lack of fact checking, their disproportionate elevating of minor issues into cause célèbre, and general hyperbole that sadly obscures the few valid points they may raise. We have, and will continue to point these out here and elsewhere. But this feels like new territory, releasing uncorroborated rumours as Press Releases, with their usual unearned authoritative tone, and even after public denial, getting two local media outlets to swallow this guff. That's steering towards the land of fabrication.<br />
<br />
That brings us onto a third possibility. <i>They intentionally cooked this up with their lackey Langton, to press for what didn't already exist, and perhaps lead everyone on a merry chase.</i> Are they that calculating, canny?<br />
<br />
So you judge, Rumour, Wishful Thinking, or Utter Fiction?<br />
<br />
(although noted within the text, speculative passages have been <i>italicised</i>) Brian R Tarnoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12963403837782148443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8774928675776876745.post-9865414918353720682016-09-19T06:30:00.000+01:002016-09-19T12:04:47.282+01:00Fact Checking Our FriendsThe Friends of Latchmore have created a Crowdjustice crowd funding page to fund future legal challenges to the restoration project at Latchmore Brook. It contains some of their most problematic statements to date. The Crowdjustice site have told me that they do nothing to verify any case promoted through their “platform”, that this is entirely up to the claimants and their legal representatives. <br />
<br />
Some of these mistakes might be forgiven in a neophyte, but the authors of these pronouncements have been dogmatically stating their version of this case for several years, clearly having time and motivation to properly research, so we must take some of these as wilful misrepresentations. Given that their page is asking people to donate money to their cause, I should hope that the more sensible leaders of the Friends of Latchmore ought to feel a little bit queasy over these inaccuracies, which could lead to allegations of a scam.<br />
<br />
While we don’t believe there is malicious intent, even the possibly unintentional errors have the feel of those grasping at straws for virtually anything that supports their case, whilst systematically ignoring everything that doesn’t. We leave it up to you, dear reader, to decide how innocent these mistakes are.<br />
<br />
[What follows is the text taken from the site as seen on 18th September 2016, highlights in bold and numbered annotations are ours.]<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">Stop destruction of New Forest habitat<br />
<br />
The Forestry Commission, New Forest NPA and the Verderers are spending EU money infilling Forest streams and destroying protected wildlife.<br />
<br />
Why this case matters<br />
<br />
The Verderers of the New Forest, The National Park Authority and the Forestry Commission have formed a partnership and obtained significant funding running into millions of pounds from the EU to 'Restore' wetlands under <b>the Higher Level Stewardship Scheme which is an Agricultural subsidy meant to help British farmers(1)</b>, The partners <b>described the whole New Forest National Park as a 'farm' in order to claim this money(2)</b> but it has turned into a massive engineering project infilling many streams with <b>waste products(3)</b> in a misguided attempt to restore them, despite their having a <b>wonderful biodiverse habitat supporting many of our rarest and most protected wild species(4)</b>.
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
(1) The Higher Level Stewardship Scheme is an Environmental subsidy, the key give away is the word Stewardship which indicates a range of Environmental Stewardship programmes. Entry Level Schemes include subsidy to farmers laying hedgerows, or planting wild flowers beneficial to wildlife on fallow fields.<br />
<br />
(2) The partners would not need to describe the National Park as a “farm”. The HLS is eligible to both farmers and land managers. Common land is eligible. The HLS Scheme for the New Forest only applies within the perambulation of the common land, and so does not include the whole National Park. DEFRA does occasionally treat the New Forest Common lands as one unit, but this is for things like the Single Farm payment scheme (an actual Agricultural subsidy) and to make the cattle movement rules practical for commoning (movement restrictions which apply elsewhere to prevent spread of TB and other vectors would cripple the relative freedom of the cattle on the commons and their movement back to nearby free holdings). <br />
<br />
(3) “Waste products” – this is an utter misrepresentation – the materials for infill include hoggin, washed gravel, clay and heather bales. The materials used must be approved by Natural England. Elsewhere the FoL refer to the material as “alien”, the gravel is taken from the same geological strata (on earth) as that on which the New Forest rests. If we’re being charitable (why shouldn’t we be?), they may have taken the term “rejects” as applied to some of the gravel. This refers to gravel not pretty enough to be sold in garden centres, but perfectly beautiful enough to be used for infill. This tabloid culture of infill shaming must be stopped.<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">The Forestry Commission have just submitted a Planning Application for Latchmore Brook, 3 miles from Fordingbridge, to carry out major works involving 7 km of the stream and importing nearly 100,000 tonnes of infill material. <b>This area is an SAC, SPA, RAMSAR and SSSI site and thus should be afforded the highest level of protection(4)</b> but <b>the New Forest National Park Planning Authority has not refused any of the previous Planning Applications for these engineering works, as it is one of the partners of the scheme.(5)</b></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
(4) The project is being done at the behest of and with the approval of Natural England. The Forestry Commission as the land managers of the New Forest SSSI are obligated to remedy the Condition Assessment prescribed by Natural England, part of their duties to monitor and protect SSSI. Natural England are then asked to give consent to the proposed solution, there is no guarantee of this as the proposal must pass another set of criteria on top of addressing the underlying problem. Natural England support the project.<br />
<br />
(5) The National Park Authority, Verderers and Forestry Commission are only "partners" in the project inasmuch as they are the statutory bodies required to be on the project board, and only benefits the Park as it successfully fulfils their statutory purposes "to conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the area". The NPA is represented on the board by their Chief Exec Alison Barnes.<br />
The NPA's Planning Committee is made up of 14 of the 22 members of the Park Authority. The Committee is mostly local Parish, Town, District and County Councillors (12) and 2 Secretary of State Appointees (through DEFRA). As with any Planning Authority they have strict criteria they must adhere to, and whilst they may seek advice from the civil servant staff of the Authority including their own ecologists and the Chief Exec, the decisions are theirs. No previous scheme has been refused because, like the present one, they are worthwhile restorations to improve the habitat, and have met the criteria for planning approval. There is no conflict of interest as the Chief Exec on the board of the project serves the members of the Authority, not the other way around.<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">The Forestry Commission still uses the same methods for each new project<b> despite substantial evidence of serious adverse effects(6)</b> on the biodiversity of large areas caused by <b>previous failed restoration attempts(7)</b>.</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
(6) They do not have substantial evidence, in fact, in this short a time after the completion of previous projects, results are promising, but there is no substantial amount of data, which would require years of monitoring to support claims. An encouraging independent study by the River Restoration Centre and Jonathan Cox Associates, The New Forest Wetland Restoration Review, surveyed post restoration sites from 2004.<br />
(7) This is one of the laziest and unsubstantiated claims, none of these are considered failed. Where they claim restorations are failed they provide no evidence or relevant criteria to make this claim. The best they seem to be able to do, is to take photos of a dry stream bed before the project has finished bedding in and ignore that this is not its constant or eventual state. Not to mention that Ditchend Brook is situated in a valley where streams notoriously run dry in Summer (oh, we did mention that).<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg95WJxmch7x9UZj8j9NkBKtZQR9uLyAhvx9SFsQc-k29kd80KuOrq8mzVRDYhpXqqI3K5YW3Ro0oP6CrjJvPzzL2Fijm0lzrf0uOANqZ99pRgmT3OXlv5IRptRbKbf4zvczABsPV_cR2pR/s1600/Ditchend+Brook+New+Forest+2+FC-NW-IMG_1827+20141114.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg95WJxmch7x9UZj8j9NkBKtZQR9uLyAhvx9SFsQc-k29kd80KuOrq8mzVRDYhpXqqI3K5YW3Ro0oP6CrjJvPzzL2Fijm0lzrf0uOANqZ99pRgmT3OXlv5IRptRbKbf4zvczABsPV_cR2pR/s320/Ditchend+Brook+New+Forest+2+FC-NW-IMG_1827+20141114.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Ditchend Brook in normal conditions<br />
photo courtesy of the Forestry Commission</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">CAPTION: "Failed Restoration" [Friends of Latchmore photo of Ditchend Brook as a dry stream bed, looking like a gravel path, above you will see instead a less shocking photo of Ditchend Brook. An NFA member reported a visit from earlier this year finding numerous small fish, newts and tadpoles in the very spot of the FoL photo. ]<br />
<br />
It's not just the fragile ecosystem which is at risk, but <b>there are also precious archaeological sites(8)</b> as well as significant geological areas, not to mention the serious knock-on effect the works will have on tourism and local businesses as well as the lives of local residents - <b>massive tipper lorries each carrying in excess of 30 tonnes of material will be driving down narrow Forest lanes(9)</b>, putting the<b> lives of the ponies and cattle at risk(10)</b>, as well as walkers, horse riders and cyclists, not to mention the potential for <b>structural damage to properties(11</b>) adjacent to the planned routes.
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
(8) The New Forest History and Archaeology Group have raised issues with the archaeological survey conducted to support the Environmental Impact Assessment. We believe these concerns may be mitigated and rectified, and we would support all interested parties to achieve this.<br />
<br />
(9) Slight error, the tipper lorries proposed have a maximum load of 20 tonnes. Odd though, as if their weird claim were true, it would mean at least 33% fewer HGV movements.<br />
<br />
(10) The same drivers will be used, and will be made aware of the "possible pedestrians, cyclists and livestock in the carriageway", there will be "speed restrictions for delivery vehicles;" - 15mph on the Forest's gravel tracks, 5mph under the ordinary 20mph restriction under the byelaws, and "traffic management with radios on the Ogdens route" as well as term time restrictions for school run to local schools. Consider the number of large scale refurbishments to properties along the route, which would have had none of these extra precautions taken for their HGV movements, and no protest over these.<br />
<br />
(11) Vibration study was carried out as part of EIA.<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">How you can help<br />
We need your help to stop what <b>Sir Desmond Swayne MP calls 'state-funded<br />vandalism' (12)</b>
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
(12) This quite vocal campaign group is in his constituency. His views about protecting the Forest though are inconsistent. In early 2011 at the time of Env. Minister Caroline Spelman's disastrous proposal to sell off the public forests, only one of the two New Forest Conservative MPs (plus one from nearby Romsey) rebelled against their party. It was Rt Hon Dr Julian Lewis, not Desmond who opposed the sell off.<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">We are crowdfunding to pay for legal representation and expert opinions to<br />
mount significant legal challenges and if necessary to support a possible Judicial Review. We hope to challenge the legality of whole scheme and require the Authorities to put a stop to interference with <b>balanced ecosystems (13)</b> on this massive scale.
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
(13) The ecosystem is not balanced, it was broken when Victorian engineers diverted the watercourse away from the natural meanders into artificial straight drains. The project seeks to undo this damage to bring balance back to the ecosystem of the area.<br />
<br />
[for space we've omitted two paragraphs, one about their legal firm, and one about the author of the page]<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">Fast facts<br />
- one of the most iconic and beautiful streams in the New Forest <b>will be<br />irreparably damaged (14)</b><br />
- the Forestry Commission have just submitted a Planning Application to the New Forest National Park Authority </td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
(14) Clearly the author does not understand the difference between fact and unsubstantiated conjecture.Brian R Tarnoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12963403837782148443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8774928675776876745.post-74831524294559419442016-09-02T09:22:00.000+01:002016-09-06T10:05:53.206+01:00The New Forest Association support the Latchmore Brook Restoration<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhBpw1_KmJNmAcoYW8yfyUFosv5Ru20Jdzumwi6Xbc86vaGchs14yi4jGQzHPpv6bbrSC_FKIC4f-Z0xDiZyfYT6XWBlViKU91quZagtiMYZPQLZhiy2yrM2VKOIVcsWpUrQqe4yqMq4G14/s1600/NFA+Latchmore+Cover+20160830.jpg" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" height="236" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhBpw1_KmJNmAcoYW8yfyUFosv5Ru20Jdzumwi6Xbc86vaGchs14yi4jGQzHPpv6bbrSC_FKIC4f-Z0xDiZyfYT6XWBlViKU91quZagtiMYZPQLZhiy2yrM2VKOIVcsWpUrQqe4yqMq4G14/s640/NFA+Latchmore+Cover+20160830.jpg" width="640" /></a>The New Forest Association has been following the progress of stream restoration work done by the Forestry Commission carefully over the years. The Association backed the first of these projects in 2005 with some trepidation. Confidence has grown as the results came through and management techniques evolved. The work has been carried out sympathetically and has done much to enhance the overall environment for the long term.<br />
<br />
Our ecologists agree with Natural England that these works should help restore these precious habitats to “favourable” condition. We are delighted with the results of similar completed restorations, we are enthusiastic in our support for this proposal. We join our support to that of the Hampshire and IOW Wildlife Trust, Ringwood Natural History Society, and the British Dragonfly Society, amongst others.<br />
<br />
<h3>
Background</h3>
<br />
Natural England do condition assessments on Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). They found that for many of those sites in "unfavourable" condition on the Forest, a contributing factor was previous drainage works (many Victorian). As the Land Manager of the Crown Lands of the New Forest, the Forestry Commission is obliged to improve units in adverse condition. The programme of wetland restoration was seen as the best response to the condition assessment. The latest tranche of these is being done through the High Level Stewardship Scheme which is part of the wider Environmental Stewardship subsidies (from the EU). These projects are controlled by a project Board whose voting members are the statutory bodies with responsibilities for the Crown Lands: The National Park Authority, the Forestry Commission and the Verderers of the New Forest. Consultation on versions of the scheme at Latchmore has been going on since 2009. Along the way, the proposal was expanded to include all the areas in the stream catchment above Latchmore so that all the project areas that would be needed for eventual success could be rolled into one larger Planning Application. Making the application that size has also meant extra due diligence including a voluntary Environmental Impact Assessment, and extensive consultation.<br />
<br />
The project will decrease flood risk downstream. An elementary understanding of hydrology would tell you that taking a straightened Victorian drain, and replacing it with curving meanders will slow down the egress of water from the system. Birmingham and So'ton Uni's used the river catchment upstream of Brockenhurst, where previous restorations under the HLS, Final 4000 and LIFE3 programs have been completed over the last decade, for a study showing "flooding alleviated by targeted tree planting and river restoration".<br />
<br />
The British Dragonfly Society response to the planning application concludes, "The removal of shade by clearing trees and scrub, the reinstatement of meanders and the other associated works to restore the site will, we believe, improve the opportunities for Southern Damselfly to spread.”<br />
<br />
<h3>
Friends of Latchmore</h3>
<br />
We have no doubt that the “Friends of Latchmore” and their supporters love the Forest. However, their leaders have waged a one-sided campaign full of scaremongering unsubstantiated claims of ecological disaster. This is strong emotive stuff, if we took what they say at face value, we’d join their barricades, but their black and white view of the matter stifles debate and cheats their followers of the full view of the facts. They don’t even try to discount the great support from ecologists and conservation organizations, they ignore it, and they certainly don’t mention it to their followers. Nor will they concede the great successes of previously completed restorations. They have the gall to selectively quote, on their website, the British Dragonfly Society, who support the project.<br />
<br />
Not that they don’t have valid points to make, but they bury them under a white noise of hyperbole, and irrelevancies. Instead of making points constructively and proportionately, they, in their clutching at straws manner, nitpick any small mistake with previous restorations as though it were a thorough refutation. These are the kind of minor notes the NFA and others would simply press upon the FC to add to their maintenance program.<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgUYE2uIVz2fjKzQVa0BBZrytwNz32c0zWqiLDR0urLKcpSega6G4LVZJzpLkh2kmeo9EBFp6OB3Fx0HkCfbKX33Flgn_dvkHZZdea2v6HC1PZuxRX-iY2oLqgwwH168EHOEDGE8GlC1bQB/s1600/Ditchend+Brook+New+Forest+2+FC-NW-IMG_1827+20141114.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgUYE2uIVz2fjKzQVa0BBZrytwNz32c0zWqiLDR0urLKcpSega6G4LVZJzpLkh2kmeo9EBFp6OB3Fx0HkCfbKX33Flgn_dvkHZZdea2v6HC1PZuxRX-iY2oLqgwwH168EHOEDGE8GlC1bQB/s320/Ditchend+Brook+New+Forest+2+FC-NW-IMG_1827+20141114.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">the Brook in normal conditions<br />
photo courtesy of the Forestry Commission</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
There is one stream, Ditchend Brook, which had work completed in 2014, which hasn't bedded in as quickly as some of the other projects (which, frankly have bedded in much more quickly than expected). When particularly dry, there is a stretch that the FoL like to photograph and parade as a "failed restoration" (although they offer no criteria for this "failure"), they are seemingly alarmed by the large stone cobbles (which replicate the type of substrate found here, and are less likely to be washed downstream) .<br />
<br />
The FoL are fond of suggesting that the Planning Authority cannot be impartial as the National Park is also a “partner” in the project. Their assertion cynically relies on oversimplification and ignorance.<br />
<br />
The National Park Authority is only a "partner" in the project inasmuch as it is one of the statutory bodies required to be on the project board, and only benefits from the project as it successfully fulfills the Park's statutory purposes "to conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the area". The NPA is represented on the board by their Chief Exec Alison Barnes.<br />
<br />
The NPA's Planning Committee is made up of 14 of the 22 members of the Park Authority. The Committee is mostly local Parish, Town, District and County Councillors (12) and 2 Secretary of State Appointees (through DEFRA). As with any Planning Authority they have strict criteria they must adhere to, and whilst they may seek advice from the civil servant staff of the Authority including their own ecologists and the Chief Exec, the decisions are theirs. No previous scheme has been refused because, like the present one, they are worthwhile restorations to improve the habitat. There is no conflict of interest as the Chief Exec on the board of the project serves the members of the Authority, not the other way around.<br />
<br />
<h3>
Reservations</h3>
<br />
Does the NFA uncritically support these Wetland Restorations? No. Nor do we unreservedly support all of the Forestry Commission’s plans. For example, we are currently challenging the FC to have a serious rethink of their current version of the proposed Forest Design Plan, and we just successfully campaigned for the FC to tighten their regulation of fungi foraging on the New Forest SSSI.<br />
<br />
We continue to campaign for better monitoring both by the Forestry Commission and Natural England which would make the case on paper for this and future restorations much more cut and dried. We may have preferred a more strategic prioritization of restorations (admittedly this could easily have been a tail chasing money burning exercise with little net benefit). We seriously note concerns raised by the New Forest Equestrian Association : road safety and transport of materials, and New Forest History and Archaeology Group : inaccuracies and omissions in the archaeological report, but believe these may be mitigated and rectified, and the Planning Authority and applicants should work with all interested parties to achieve this.<br />
<br />
With any new scheme it is accepted that there will be some disruption in the immediate vicinity. Much of the scrub clearance would have been carried out as part of normal open Forest work for Commoning pasture management. This work compliments ancient lawn maintenance and adds to biodiversity. The area will recover quickly and be a better place for wildlife and the stream will meander across the lawn as it did once before. On balance, we have concluded that this project is worthwhile and should be approved.<br />
<br />
<h3>
Conclusions</h3>
<br />
If you are on the fence about support for this project, we hope that you will avail yourself of information (see further reading below). But, if you’d prefer to ponder this over a pleasant walk, we’d suggest you go and walk the Warwickslade Cutting, near Rhinefield Drive. The restoration on this stretch was completed in 2009. It was proposed and funded under the Final 4000, a project between the Forestry Commission, the National Park Authority, Natural England and the Environment Agency. It was done with the approval of the Verderers and with no opposition from the Commoners Defence Association (keep in mind that this project did not include any subsidy to benefit either). When you walk the stream at Warwickslade, you will be hard pressed to even imagine that work was done there, the only indication of the original straight channel you may glimpse is a gap in the canopy of the trees that were once either side. This is a mere seven years later, but it already looked this good five years ago.<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhIgbSbWiM-ucNIkEvvhk8okBv-Y_-ANcreSnA5sZrUOZbjBoQ9C3aJbaJwkGz3VEZGN8fpjWVteVwQFclObuEhYwDWZvvOViWkHJxMn1_8GmJMc1a8aLOQ1GV7ABnVaJDeIcsavmSHC9Jx/s1600/Latchmore+Abandoned+Meander+Dscf2400.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhIgbSbWiM-ucNIkEvvhk8okBv-Y_-ANcreSnA5sZrUOZbjBoQ9C3aJbaJwkGz3VEZGN8fpjWVteVwQFclObuEhYwDWZvvOViWkHJxMn1_8GmJMc1a8aLOQ1GV7ABnVaJDeIcsavmSHC9Jx/s320/Latchmore+Abandoned+Meander+Dscf2400.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Latchmore Brook, abandoned meander.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
You may also want to go walk the Latchmore Brook itself. The original meanders are still very apparent, although the Victorians cut the throat of their source to convert the Brook to a drain. In the photo at the top of this note you’ll see part of the meander to the left of the current course. It’s edged by an area of parched grass to the left that would likely be green improved grazing if the meander were in place and functioning with its floodplain. Imagine a stream gently flowing through the middle of the picture on the right, consider whether that harms, improves or equals the beauty we have now.<br />
<br />
Finally, please consider this: The Victorian Engineers who put in the drainage works did not do Environmental Impact Assessments, they did not use sensitive methods of moving stream beds aside, so that invertebrates and other features of the habitat could be preserved, as done in the restorations we have now. Spoil heaps were left willy-nilly, conditions for erosion and bank instability were created, and the stream was disconnected from its natural flood plain. Despite the bullishly done works of our forebears, these areas have bounced back. Nature is resilient. We need look further than our own lifetimes, both to the future and the past. If this work does not go forward, it will be a missed opportunity to provide an ecosystem more resilient to change, and to restore landscape and habitat.<br />
<br />
Going forward the NFA hope we can all hold the Forestry Commission up to the highest standards for implementation, monitoring and maintenance of this work.<br />
<br />
<b>– Brian Tarnoff, Chair, Habitat and Landscape Committee, New Forest Association</b><br />
(a modified version appeared previously as a note on our Facebook page)<br />
<br />
<h3>
Further Reading:</h3>
<br />
For more information on the schemes, as well as a good look at all the very successful schemes the FoL neglect to mention:<br />
<a href="http://www.hlsnewforest.org.uk/hls/info/50/wetland_restoration">http://www.hlsnewforest.org.uk/hls/info/50/wetland_restoration</a><br />
<br />
For a smattering of both sides of the argument have a look at the Presentments from the June 2012 Verderers Court: <a href="http://www.verderers.org.uk/jun12mins.pdf">http://www.verderers.org.uk/jun12mins.pdf</a><br />
<br />
For the official NFA Response to the Planning Application from our Planning Committee: <a href="http://publicaccess.newforestnpa.gov.uk/online-applications/files/6E1746670EAA39568B650AFD5B85BDF0/pdf/16_00571-MR_G_BAKER__NEW_FOREST_ASSOCIATION__-_NEIGHBOUR_REPRESENTEE-578576.pdf">http://publicaccess.newforestnpa.gov.uk/online-applications/files/6E1746670EAA39568B650AFD5B85BDF0/pdf/16_00571-MR_G_BAKER__NEW_FOREST_ASSOCIATION__-_NEIGHBOUR_REPRESENTEE-578576.pdf</a><br />
<br />
For the supplemental NFA Response to the Planning Application from our Habitat and Landscape Committee: <a href="http://publicaccess.newforestnpa.gov.uk/online-applications/files/D1506ED02A3ADDF94479BB09D0A55E3F/pdf/16_00571-MR_B_TARNOFF__CHAIR_HABITAT___LANDSCAPE_COMMITTEE_NEW_FOREST_ASSOCIATION-582830.pdf">http://publicaccess.newforestnpa.gov.uk/online-applications/files/D1506ED02A3ADDF94479BB09D0A55E3F/pdf/16_00571-MR_B_TARNOFF__CHAIR_HABITAT___LANDSCAPE_COMMITTEE_NEW_FOREST_ASSOCIATION-582830.pdf</a><br />
<br />
For the rest of the BDS response: <a href="http://publicaccess.newforestnpa.gov.uk/online-applications/files/3FCA4CD543DBA6FD8C17CBD415C58F63/pdf/16_00571-DR_P_TAYLOR__BRITISH_DRAGONFLY_SOCIETY__-_NEIGHBOUR_REPRESENTEE-577179.pdf">http://publicaccess.newforestnpa.gov.uk/online-applications/files/3FCA4CD543DBA6FD8C17CBD415C58F63/pdf/16_00571-DR_P_TAYLOR__BRITISH_DRAGONFLY_SOCIETY__-_NEIGHBOUR_REPRESENTEE-577179.pdf</a><br />
<br />
This study from Birmingham and So'ton Uni's used the river catchment upstream of Brockenhurst where previous restorations under the HLS, Final 4000 and LIFE3 programs have been completed over the last decade: <a href="https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/03/160310214139.htm" target="_blank">"Flooding alleviated by targeted tree planting and river restoration, scientists discover"</a><br />
<br />
The River Restoration Centre used the work at Warwickslade Cutting for their Manual of River Restoration Techniques, although these may not be the same for the Latchmore project, it gives an indication of the great care that is taken in these restorations, and is worth a look <a href="http://www.therrc.co.uk/MOT/Final_Versions_%28Secure%29/1.11_Highland_Water.pdf">http://www.therrc.co.uk/MOT/Final_Versions_%28Secure%29/1.11_Highland_Water.pdf</a><br />
<br />
Warwickslade project for comparison: a mix of 8,000 tonnes of hoggin (dug sand and gravel mix) and 800 tonnes of firm clay by-product, both sourced locally, for 2km stretch, at a cost of £214,500.<br />
<br />
Much larger project for Latchmore Brook and the many restorations further up the catchment: 5km of old Brook meanders will be restored, 8km of main channel, tributaries and side drains will have their bed level raised, and 4.6km of main channel, tributaries and side drains will be infilled. Total 13km restored/repaired, 4.6km infilled. Approx 96,000 tonnes Cost Approx £1,500,000. (based on estimates available at time of writing)Brian R Tarnoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12963403837782148443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8774928675776876745.post-84552342951557840402016-07-20T10:30:00.000+01:002016-09-26T11:46:04.228+01:00Brexit and The Forest<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/13708199_815142631918770_6316739848823290602_o.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="265" src="https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/13708199_815142631918770_6316739848823290602_o.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<h2>
NFA Presentment for the Verderers Court 20th July 2016</h2>
<br />
However we feel about the Brexit referendum, its aftermath has introduced a vast array of uncertainty, including many elements key to the future of the Forest.<br />
<br />
At last Thursday’s National Park Authority meeting, several members stressed the need to express our concerns about keeping the Forest's levels of protection, investment and subsidy to government as soon as possible. The Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union and the Environment Secretary will be contacted. The NFA offer our support and input, and hope that the Verderers will join this effort.<br />
<br />
There will be much to consider: commoners subsidies past 2020; retention of the important landscape scale habitat designations of the SAC and SPA (Special Areas of Conservation / Special Protection Areas); what we may want from a new British Agricultural Policy, together with reformed Habitats and Birds Directives. New legislation may be necessary to back-stop these protections before the ties to the EU directives might be cut. There's every reason for having the same levels of protection – or better – enshrined directly in United Kingdom law, policy and implementation.<br />
<br />
The New Forest Acts and the role of the Verderers remain the bedrock safeguarding the Forest, and our National Park has unique qualities and demands. This must be recognized and respected at the highest levels going forward.<br />
<br />
There will be clarifications needed. There is work to be done, and a timely and united forest would help put our vital points across.<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">Presentment made at the Verderers Court by Brian Tarnoff, Chair, NFA Habitat and Landscape Committee.
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Brian R Tarnoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12963403837782148443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8774928675776876745.post-88233615907740385942016-07-14T10:00:00.000+01:002016-09-26T11:46:04.233+01:00Forest Design Plan - next steps<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2Sl6FmQXouhnSRARF-x3fjHt5w-2LwtjOJKb62vwPG27j68QkCxg_63ZcscY6_fQBEQFURp_FECK6AbsjQ-2JQk_zS0UGv6M_DK7Is_EYdU8_h5DI0qowP1VWH9EyJQmtt_y5jujh5OlX/s1600/Forest+Design+Plan+NFA+NPA+Statement+Cover+20160714.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="238" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2Sl6FmQXouhnSRARF-x3fjHt5w-2LwtjOJKb62vwPG27j68QkCxg_63ZcscY6_fQBEQFURp_FECK6AbsjQ-2JQk_zS0UGv6M_DK7Is_EYdU8_h5DI0qowP1VWH9EyJQmtt_y5jujh5OlX/s640/Forest+Design+Plan+NFA+NPA+Statement+Cover+20160714.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<h2>
NFA Statement to the National Park Authority Meeting 14th July 2016</h2>
<br />
[The Forest Design Plan is both the Forestry Commission’s long term vision for the Inclosures, and the Felling License and Restocking Plan for the next ten years. ]<br />
<br />
The NFA find much to commend in the “New Forest Inclosures - Forest Design Plan - 2016 Forestry Commission Consultation draft”. On the surface, it seeks to deliver the emphasis on habitat restoration demanded by the Minister’s Mandate, the SAC management plan, the Lawton White Paper, Policy on Ancient Woodland Sites, and this authority’s Biodiversity Action Plan.<br />
<br />
Sadly, we find the current draft flawed at the detail level. Good intentions have not been applied in a way that will produce functional habitat. For example, there are nods to habitat defragmentation, but large plantation blocks and fencing remain. Without a thorough ecological review, this draft would likely fail the inspectorate’s habitats regulation hurdles. The NFA offer the Forestry Commission our resources and experienced ecologists to assist; and hope that the National Park will lend the expertise of their relevant officers. We also ask this Authority to join us in urging the Forestry Commission to pause, take stock and accept our help to revise the detail plan. This should be fixed before it is submitted to the next stage.<br />
<br />
<h3>
Campsites and Recreation</h3>
<br />
Consistent with the SAC Management Plan 2001, the NFA campaigns for the removal or relocation of campsites situated on Ancient and Ornamental Woodland, and other important woodland sites. These are managed to the detriment of both biodiversity and landscape; have less than half the canopy of comparable woodland sites; and just this year Hollands Wood has been subject to an incident of unguided felling by over-enthusiastic contractors and inappropriate investment in new road priorities at its entrance.<br />
<br />
The Plan explicitly seeks to fulfil the SAC Management Plan, and states an objective for recreation provision “best placed to balance public enjoyment with protection of habitats and biodiversity”, however it dodges the issue with this caveat, “this Plan does not attempt to pre-suppose or assume any issues or proposals which may arise in due course as part of a wider recreation strategy for the New Forest.”<br />
<br />
However, if camping provision in A&O woodlands is to be suitably relocated, existing Inclosures are likely candidates. This plan cannot exist in isolation. It needs this National Park Authority to implement a comprehensive review of recreation infrastructure on the Forest, which is currently arbitrary, outdated, and has no strategic relationship between forest users and the habitats whose condition they may affect.<br />
<br />
At this moment, when concerned habitat campaigners, including the New Forest Association, are looking to all levels of government for reassurance that our habitat’s protections, policies and funding will continue at current, or better standards, positive engagement on these issues would be very welcome.<br />
<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">Statement made at the Authority Meeting by Brian Tarnoff, Chair, NFA Habitat and Landscape Committee. The current draft of the plan was open to a public consultation until 4th July 2016.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>From the SAC Management Plan 2001 Part 3 General Prescriptions, page 30:</b><br />
<br />
The following table lists the locations of camp sites in or adjacent to pasture woodlands. A summary of their impact and their contribution to unit condition is given together with a prioritised recommendation for action.<br />
<br />
Campsites : Denny Wood, Hollands Wood & Longbeech<br />
Location : In pasture woodland<br />
Impact : Severe reduction in old trees/ dead wood/ lichens & ground flora<br />Condition Assessment : Unfavourable declining<br />Recommendation : Relocate camp site / Restore pasture woodland<br />
Priority : High<br />
<br />
Campsite : Ashurst<br />Location : In pasture woodland<br />Impact : Severe reduction in old trees/ dead wood/ lichens & ground flora<br />
Condition Assessment : Unfavourable maintained<br />Recommendation : Redesign infrastructure to maintain existing features & prevent further degradation.<br />
Priority : Low
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
<br />Brian R Tarnoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12963403837782148443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8774928675776876745.post-89542176350638102212016-06-15T10:25:00.000+01:002016-09-26T11:46:04.235+01:00Forest Design Plan<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEje2XKbO5_OxjXNUS3YM_QTiVSxZP8rslzNZK1cjiGAWh6RCNDqvpILRGO636x1rSOeHe1Ou7ILMYGtwnketF36oVeEnI-8BoabKX9SHK6O4cNk8e6dTw-3DZiD664g269nN7ehn3ZErDPQ/s1600/Forest+Design+Plan+NFA+Presentment+Cover+20160615.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="238" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEje2XKbO5_OxjXNUS3YM_QTiVSxZP8rslzNZK1cjiGAWh6RCNDqvpILRGO636x1rSOeHe1Ou7ILMYGtwnketF36oVeEnI-8BoabKX9SHK6O4cNk8e6dTw-3DZiD664g269nN7ehn3ZErDPQ/s640/Forest+Design+Plan+NFA+Presentment+Cover+20160615.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<h2>
NFA Presentment for the Verderers Court 15th June 2016</h2>
<br />
[The Forest Design Plan is both the Forestry Commission’s long term vision for the Inclosures, and the Felling License and Restocking Plan for the next ten years. The current draft of the plan is open to a public consultation until 4th July 2016]<br />
<br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>
</i><i>
</i><i>
</i><i>
</i><table border="0" style="width: 100%;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td><td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;"><i>“A significant proportion of woodlands in the Inclosures will be modified to restore pasture woodlands, heathlands, valley mires and Ancient and Semi-Natural native woodland where these are appropriate. A consequence of the modification will be that the present overall balance between broadleaves and conifers will be changed in favour of broadleaves. The pace of this modification will depend on markets, availability of resources and a desire to avoid unnecessary premature felling of existing growing trees, the removal of which will be necessary for restoration of habitats.</i><br />
<br />
<b>– Plan for the Inclosures, Minister’s Mandate For the Forest 1999-2008 (July 1999)
</b></td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
<br />
<br />
The NFA find that the proposed Forest Design Plan comes much closer to delivering on this promise than the plan made a decade ago. Additionally it is in keeping with policies and directives including Policy on Ancient Woodland Sites, the SAC management plan, the Lawton White Paper and even an aesthetic nuance demanded by the 1877 New Forest Act.<br />
<br />
Last month the court heard an accusation that the plan would reduce the Forest to an artificial park. A monocultural crop of uncertain or decreasing commercial value, little or no habitat value is the very definition of a fake landscape held in aspic. While we can’t ask the Forestry Commission to guarantee the economic future of forestry, a more diverse woodland would be safer for future climate change and biosecurity. The Forest has been a working forest long before the proliferation of blocks of non native conifers, and can be again. Plantation and managed woodland and habitat restoration may co-exist within a naturally structured functional ecosystem.<br />
<br />
The NFA welcomes the broad intent of the plan. However, we find the current draft flawed at the detail level, the good intentions have not been applied in a way that will produce the needed functional habitat. Without serious attention to these details, the plan would likely fail the habitats regulation hurdles of the inspectorate. The NFA offer the Forestry Commission our resources and experienced ecologists to assist and will encourage like minded knowledgeable organizations to follow suit. We hope the Verderers may add their collective wisdom of the Forest’s ecology, history and law to our efforts.<br />
<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">Presentment made at the Verderers Court by Brian Tarnoff, Chair, NFA Habitat and Landscape Committee.
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Brian R Tarnoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12963403837782148443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8774928675776876745.post-70973774974991931902016-05-18T10:12:00.000+01:002016-09-26T11:46:04.222+01:00 Linwood to Lyndhurst Road<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtN8MpNAgW3J8OCfGzf44oEbQM3RTd_6IkRmLurrOcXJSRi3YMqC2kNi56K-aCBoMWS2xoL_L30lIe3a8vucY18f7mIuz_wZkS1moAgYF__numTjlReKD4ltj3uPkjcvHit9lqB7OcPWx2/s1600/Linwood+Rd+Osm+Red+Shoot+Deacon+Presentment+Cover+20160518.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="238" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtN8MpNAgW3J8OCfGzf44oEbQM3RTd_6IkRmLurrOcXJSRi3YMqC2kNi56K-aCBoMWS2xoL_L30lIe3a8vucY18f7mIuz_wZkS1moAgYF__numTjlReKD4ltj3uPkjcvHit9lqB7OcPWx2/s640/Linwood+Rd+Osm+Red+Shoot+Deacon+Presentment+Cover+20160518.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<h2>
HCC’s Disappointing Response to Hit & Run Accidents</h2>
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">Presentment to Verderers Court 18th May 2016, by Richard Deacon (shared here with his kind permission) -- we previously shared his <a href="http://newforestassociationnews.blogspot.co.uk/2016/02/problems-with-excessive-traffic-and-hit.html" target="_blank">February 10th 2016 Presentment Problems with excessive Traffic and Hit & Run accidents in 2015</a>. For more context see the end of this note.
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
On behalf of the CDA, my first task is to express our satisfaction and thank those involved for the newly erected signage on the B3078, Roger Penny Way, the Brook to Telegraph Rd. Some two years ago we raised our concerns at proposed signage changes and that the issue should be taken to a higher Authority. Hampshire County Cllr, Mr Edward Heron, and also now on the Verderers bench, duly chaired several meetings and has been instrumental in the most recent installation. The new arrangements catch the eye and hopefully refresh drivers awareness of the risks to our livestock and ponies.<br />
<br />
Flushed with this success, I now move to my second task, which is to achieve the same goal on the single lane, but heavily trafficked, Linwood to Lyndhurst road, most particularly in the village of Linwood itself. My family have pursued this goal over more than the last 50 years. My late father successfully campaigned in the 1960s for the erection of two directional chevrons at Amies Corner and the S- bend at Newlands. We were forever helping to pull cars out of the bog on the far side of the latter. Those coming to grief at Amies Corner, more often needed an ambulance than a tractor.<br />
<br />
Sadly, in the last two months, at Amies Corner, an unfortunate driver has totaled his Nissan Micra into the tree just 3m from the chevron and the ensuing fire has destroyed both car and tree. Several weeks earlier another driver, failed to negotiate the bend, missed the first tree, careered around the bank on the far side, bounced back-across the road and hit the ancient oak on the other side.<br />
<br />
In February, I came to the court, to report 3 Hit & Run accidents involving commoners animals on this road. The number of accidents, within the confines of the village of Linwood, has now risen to 5 in just the one year. The carnage comprises;<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>a gelding and a foal each with a broken leg - both destroyed;</li>
<li>a cow, hospitalised for weeks with injuries;</li>
<li>two vehicles, written off, one a mini-bus taxi, transporting school children;</li>
<li>a Mercedes saloon with severe frontal damage.</li>
</ul>
<br />
We trust that the Verderers agree, that on a 15 km stretch of rural road, 5 accidents in one year, all occurring within the 1300m frontage that is Linwood, adequately demonstrates that Linwood has a significant traffic safety problem.<br />
<br />
After my earlier presentment this year, HCC have responded to the Official Verderers supporting request, with a desktop study and find that Linwood 'does not meet the criteria for a 30mph speed limit'. HCC allude to the many factors to be taken into account in setting speed limits, and I quote;- 'road character, roadside development, accident history, road safety issues, current traffic speeds, junction frequency, private entrances and the presence of amenities that attract both motorised and non-motorised road users'.<br />
<br />
We would point out that in almost 10 years, no formal assessment of traffic speed or frequency has been conducted along this road despite 2 years of the Verderers current speed enforcement initiative. In 10 years, rat run activity and congestion on the A31 has seen traffic levels soar on the Linwood Rd. Excessive speed and erratic driving behaviour are increasingly prevalent.<br />
<br />
Linwood now has 47 homes, 2 public houses, 2 busy FC carparks (Appleslade and Broomy Walk). 11 properties open directly onto the Linwood Rd and a further 4 dwellings are served by short gravel tracks. The remainder of Linwood residents gain access via the junctions at the two ends of Toms Lane.<br />
<br />
For 8 months of the year, the village populace is supplemented by the Red Shoot Camping Park with 110 pitches and Deers Leap Caravan Park with 34 units, each directly served by an unpaved vehicular access. In 2015, the camping park alone hosted 8687 child nights, i.e. an average of 35 children per night. These children, either with or without adult supervision, mostly access the Forest via the Toms Lane/Linwood Rd. junction where visibility is poor for drivers.<br />
<br />
The Red Shoot Inn, meets the needs of both its own patrons and the camping park with many young children playing on the green areas immediately adjacent to the unfenced Linwood Road. At 40mph, this is a fatal accident waiting to happen.<br />
<br />
As to amenity, the immediate area and the carparks are heavily frequented by unfamiliar holiday dogwalkers, particularly in the early morning and at dusk. Two of the National Park designated cycle tracks use all of the 1300m of the Linwood Road. Family cycle activity, training runs, and organised cycle events use the same section of road.<br />
<br />
We do not consider that HCC's desktop study has really paid any attention to these contributing factors and we request HCC to carry out a genuine appraisal of our traffic problems, so as to secure a safe passage of traffic. To this end, I would be happy to provide a safe housing and power supply for a sustained SID survey in the vicinity of Linwood's roadside telephone box. This survey will provide accurate current data of traffic speed and frequency for a definitive assessment<br />
<br />
Drivers need to be advised that they are entering a village community with an exceptional range of hazards. No such signage is provided at present.<br />
<br />
Having read the minutes of the Verderers post-Court meeting of February, I must express my dismay at the Court's dismissal of any form of definition of the Linwood village boundaries. I am at a loss to find any other village within the Forest, with such a substantial make-up of homes and businesses and Forest visitor carparks, as listed above, that is not permitted to display its village name. Many much smaller villages within the Forest are clearly signposted, often with accompanying request to 'drive with care' and the benefit of a 30mph speed restriction. We can depend upon it, that if all 47 homes and 2 pubs should decline to pay their NFDC rates, the village of Linwood would not remain a non-entity for very long!<br />
<br />
Further, after 8 years of my trying to restore suitable signage on the Linwood Road, warning of the likely presence of commoners' 'Animals on the Road, Day and Night', it beggars belief, that an unfamiliar motorist can still leave the A31 at Ringwood and traverse the entire New Forest from Rockford to Ashurst, via Lyndhurst, without ever seeing this or any other information sign warning of the presence and risk to depastured livestock.<br />
<br />
8 of the 47 homes in Linwood house families that actively depasture animals, 5 are young commoners. We must again ask the Verderers to seek remedy of this signage deficiency.<br />
<br />
To Sum up, this presentment is a wake up call for a proper traffic risk assessment for the village of Linwood.<br />
<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">Richard Deacon, Linwood resident and a practising commoner, retired civil engineer with considerable experience of highway and environmental engineering. Shared with permission to this NFA page. This follows up his February 10th 2016 Presentment <a href="http://newforestassociationnews.blogspot.co.uk/2016/02/problems-with-excessive-traffic-and-hit.html" target="_blank">Problems with excessive Traffic and Hit & Run accidents in 2015</a>.
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
The Official Verderer, Dominic May, took up these issues with Hampshire County Council and made the following Announcements at the March and April 2016 Verderers Courts:<br />
<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;"><h4>
16th March 2016</h4>
<br />
2016/8524 ROAD THROUGH LINWOOD<br />
<br />
'Thank you to Richard Deacon for making his presentment about speeding though Linwood. The Verderers support you in your desire to slow down the traffic, and also your wish to remove much of the traffic by discouraging the use of this road as a rat run to avoid the A31. I therefore wrote in mid-February to Hampshire County Council to request that the speed limit through Linwood Village be reduced from 40mph to 30mph as it is in most other New Forest Villages.<br />
<br />
In my letter, I have also chased up for Hampshire County Council's long-awaited proposal to make the road across Broomy Plain a single track with passing places. If a single track road with passing places were implemented here, traffic would be slowed by the inconvenience, and use as an A31 bypass would diminish considerably.<br />
<br />
And I have requested that Hampshire County Council erects a sign the entrance to the open Forest at Moyles Court.<br />
<br />
I have not yet received a reply from Hampshire County Council, and when I do, I will update the Court further.<br />
<br />
Meanwhile, we have requested that Hampshire Constabulary consider the area as a site for our Verderers-funded Speed Camera Van.'<br />
<br />
<h4>
20th April 2016</h4>
<br />
2016/8582 ROAD THROUGH LINWOOD<br />
<br />
'I have received a disappointing reply from Hampshire County Council regarding the excess traffic through Linwood. It is a classic local government one-and-a-half pages to tell me that the Council will do nothing to reduce the speed limit through Linwood. And also that the proposal to protect the road verges across Broomy Plain, and install passing places, has been rejected by something called the Operation Resilience team, without any reference to, or consultation with, the Verderers. The ongoing damage to the Broomy Plain verges, which are SSSI, is a matter of continuing concern, and I will write back to suggest to Hampshire County Council that it cannot ignore its responsibilities under national legislation.'
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />The NFA support initiatives to reduce animal accidents and make the roads of the Forest safe. In developing our own Road Safety campaign we will be fully supporting the efforts of the Verderers, and concerned residents such as Mr. Deacon. We are very disappointed with HCC’s response; and its own stated criteria “road character”, “accident history”, “road safety issues”, and “the presence of amenities” make this area an obvious candidate for slower speeds and road safety measures.Brian R Tarnoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12963403837782148443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8774928675776876745.post-44605716258675065382016-04-20T10:58:00.000+01:002016-09-26T11:46:04.217+01:00Hit and Run Accident Prosecutions<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/13123417_776231429143224_1301744783101532519_o.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="300" src="https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/13123417_776231429143224_1301744783101532519_o.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">Now that the foals are starting to appear on the open forest, with more due to drop throughout May, we felt we should publicise the now available announcements from the Official Verderer at the March 2016 Court.
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
<h3>
ANNOUNCEMENTS & DECISIONS BY THE OFFICIAL VERDERER</h3>
<br />
<h4>
2016/8523 HIT AND RUN ACCIDENTS - PROSECUTION FOR ANIMAL CRUELTY</h4>
<br />
The Court is appalled by the increase in Hit and Run drivers after hitting a legally grazing animal. May I remind everyone that the stock is grazing the New Forest by right, and you are driving the roads by privilege.<br />
<br />
If a Hit & Run driver is identified, the Verderers will push for the police to prosecute for animal cruelty, possibly leading to a jail sentence. I would like to remind the Court of a past prosecution whereby a driver from Hyde was convicted in Southampton Magistrates Court of failing to stop and report an accident and causing unnecessary suffering under the Animal Welfare Act 2006. On the charge of 'causing unnecessary suffering to an animal' he was sentenced 28 days detention.<br />
<br />
The Court will urge the relevant authorities to prosecute for cruelty wherever such a case arises. The rules on simply reporting a motor accident are quite separate from those governing cruelty. It may be sufficient to report damage to a garden fence within 24 hours. Cruelty results from leaving an animal suffering for any length of time that can be avoided. The police should always be telephoned within minutes. If you have no mobile phone signal, knock on the nearest house and ask to use the landline!'<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">Here’s the Verderers response to Richard Deacon’s <a href="http://newforestassociationnews.blogspot.co.uk/2016/02/problems-with-excessive-traffic-and-hit.html" target="_blank">excellent presentment from February</a>, which, with his kind permission we were able to share previously.
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<h4>
2016/8524 ROAD THROUGH LINWOOD</h4>
<br />
'Thank you’ to Richard Deacon for making his presentment about speeding though Linwood. The Verderers support you in your desire to slow down the traffic, and also your wish to remove much of the traffic by discouraging the use of this road as a rat run to avoid the A31. I therefore wrote in mid-February to Hampshire County Council to request that the speed limit through Linwood Village be reduced from 40mph to 30mph as it is in most other New Forest Villages.<br />
<br />
In my letter, I have also chased up for Hampshire County Council's long-awaited proposal to make the road across Broomy Plain a single track with passing places. If a single track road with passing places were implemented here, traffic would be slowed by the inconvenience, and use as an A31 bypass would diminish considerably.<br />
<br />
And I have requested that Hampshire County Council erects a sign the entrance to the open Forest at Moyles Court.<br />
<br />
I have not yet received a reply from Hampshire County Council, and when I do, I will update the Court further.<br />
<br />
Meanwhile, we have requested that Hampshire Constabulary consider the area as a site for our Verderers-funded Speed Camera Van.'<br />
<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">We'd further note that at the April Verderers court, the Official Verderer was displeased by Hampshire County Council's inadequate response to this issue. Details as they become available... (Court proceedings are currently only published after minutes of both the private <i>in camera</i> meetings of the Verderers and the sitting of the open court have been approved at the following month's session).
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Brian R Tarnoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12963403837782148443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8774928675776876745.post-88014595359566697112016-04-15T10:41:00.000+01:002016-09-26T11:46:04.231+01:00NFA President's Report 2015-16<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13006704_767417643357936_4696850299424928608_n.jpg?oh=f81df51c95b24fd117425a2b552c7e49&oe=58602852" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="253" src="https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13006704_767417643357936_4696850299424928608_n.jpg?oh=f81df51c95b24fd117425a2b552c7e49&oe=58602852" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">We leave the last word before tomorrow's Annual General Meeting to our esteemed President, Oliver Crosthwaite Eyre. He sets this year's work against the backdrop of developments in conservation and planning on the national stage.
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
<br />
In last year's report I mentioned the growing financial challenges that beset the Forest's publicly funded bodies such as the Forestry Commission, Natural England and the National Park Authority. At that time we had yet to get through the general election and the future was shrouded in uncertainty. However, the election is now far behind us and in his public spending review statement before Christmas last year the Chancellor delighted conservationists by singling out England's National Parks as organisations that would be protected from any government cuts for the next five years. Not only that, the existing grant would be increased each year by almost 2%. The only other organisation to receive this special treatment was the police force.<br />
<br />
Whatever the Chancellor's reasons were for this welcome decision, we must not squander our moment in the sun. We must not assume that the goodwill that seems to currently ooze out of Defra is something that will be either perpetuated or repeated, and all the Forest's bodies must combine forces to extract the most that we can from this opportune climate.<br />
<br />
The Secretary of State for the Environment, Liz Truss, is very keen to make some lasting decisions for conservation, and has commissioned a Plan for National Parks in England, and a brisk period of consultation has now started with a view to launching the plan later this spring. This is running parallel to the creation of a separate and broader 25-year conservation plan for the whole country. It is still very much on the drawing board, but at present its focus is, I am happy to report, on reinforcing the special status that places like the New Forest have as protected landscapes.<br />
<br />
We must watch the process carefully, and ensure that the new plan avoids entering in to the territory of actively promoting tourism and ever more visitors to the Forest. We are the smallest of the country's national parks, and yet we have the most visitors for our size by far. Indeed, when looking at the large centres of population that surround the Forest the term "besieged" could sensibly be used! However, if the new plan is properly written and intentioned it will, I hope, be good news for the Forest.<br />
<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: white; text-align: center; width: 60%;"><h2>
<i>looking at the large centres of population that surround the Forest the term "besieged" could sensibly be used!
</i></h2>
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 20%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
<br />
In the meantime the Council's laudable efforts to influence the Forestry Commission in its decisions on how to control fungi picking continue. Prompted by the excellent public statements recently made by this Association, there is strong support for the view that the Commission should copy the bold action taken by the National Trust and ban all picking until it can be shown that no harm is being done by uncontrolled gathering of mushrooms in the Forest. This would follow the precautionary principle which is the conservationist's touchstone, including (one would hope) that of Natural England as the Government's advisors on such matters. It does seem to be totally illogical that the Commission's byelaws strictly and quite rightly prohibit the unauthorised removal of any plants and trees from its land, which is enforced, and yet mushrooms are somehow not deemed to be worthy of the same protection.<br />
<br />
The Council continues to very effectively monitor the constant flow of planning applications in the Forest, and selectively lends its support or objections for applications with great effect whenever necessary. This year sees a full blown review of existing planning policy. An in-depth consultation is underway with all concerned parties to ensure that any changes are properly thought through and supported.<br />
<br />
Our Association is heavily involved in this process, and is keeping a very close eye on the flow of new national planning proposals that are coming from the Government, many of which are designed to encourage a rapid nationwide acceleration in the building of new houses. We need to ensure that the New Forest is exempt from those measures which would potentially damage the landscape and its special qualities. Nobody doubts the need for more housing in England, but we must continue where necessary to persuade Ministers that some of the new ideas are definitely not appropriate for highly sensitive and protected places like the Forest. The work continues.<br />
<br />
As ever, on behalf of all the members of the Association, I would like to conclude my report by thanking the Council for its vigilance and hard work over the year.<br />
<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">-- Oliver Crosthwaite Eyre, President, New Forest Association </td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Brian R Tarnoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12963403837782148443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8774928675776876745.post-71338963529198340382016-04-15T10:26:00.000+01:002016-09-26T11:46:04.224+01:00NFA Habitat & Landscape 2015-16<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/10295546_767593360007031_1651430790558075203_o.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="480" src="https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/10295546_767593360007031_1651430790558075203_o.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">Highlighting tomorrow’s NFA AGM, further amended excerpts from our Habitat and Landscape Committee's Annual Report
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
<br />
Our ecologists have had a very busy year, and I hope they will forgive me if this report cannot hope to capture the full scope of their efforts. They have my, and I presume the Association’s, deepest thanks.<br />
<br />
<h3>
Site Visits</h3>
<br />
HAL members attended site visits and provided feedback for a variety of Forestry Commission led habitat restoration and maintenance project proposals. This has included:<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li> Linford Bottom</li>
<li> Norley Mire, Bagshot Moor, Upper Crockford Bottom,</li>
<li> Three Beech Bottom and Horseshoe Earth</li>
<li> Ogdens Mire and Sloden Inclosure</li>
<li> Lyndhurst South (Coxlease Lawn, Brick Kiln Mire, Allum Green)</li>
<li> Waters Copse, Withycombe Shade</li>
<li> Broomy/Ocknell Plain (Suburbs Wood Mire, Broomy Bottom, Linford Brook Mire)</li>
<li> Dibden Bottom, The Noads Mire, Ferny Croft</li>
</ul>
<br />
We continue to support the FC’s restorations. We would like to see more resources for monitoring, a more procedural basis for prioritizing the schemes with clear reference to the framework provided by the habitats regulations and the SAC Management Plan and a cohesive grand design for habitat restoration across the whole of the Forest.<br />
<h2>
</h2>
<h3>
The Forest Design Plan</h3>
In July 2015, we were one of a select group of conservation organizations invited by the Forestry Commission to comment on their earliest draft of the next Forest Design Plan. With a shift towards much more broadleaf planting, it represents a huge sea change for the foresters. In a much appreciated move, the FC is actively seeking our input and expertise. We hope to see more detail and nuance as the plan is further developed this year, with public consultation this Autumn. Much of this committee’s work over the last decade has been preparing research and evidence to bolster the NFA’s vision for the inclosures as presented in Recovering Lost Landscapes, and has been aided further by changes in government policy as evidenced in the Lawton Report and the Policy on Ancient Woodland Sites.<br />
<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">The Forestry Commission have opened up the next stage of consultation which runs for eight weeks from 11 Apr 2016 to 6 Jun 2016. This will produce the version of the plan which will be submitted for the inspectorate, and final consultation later this year. The NFA will argue that the planned eight weeks may not be sufficient for less nimble organizations (those that meet less frequently, such as Parish Councils, or those larger whose relevant knowledge is spread across expert and consequentially busy staff); we would prefer ten to twelve weeks. When the timeframe was sprung upon the great breadth of Forest organizations in attendance at a special launch day on March 22nd, the FC suggested that they may be "flexible" about the length of the consultation. We will be making our case later this month.
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
<br />
<h3>
Busketts and Felling Licenses</h3>
<br />
In Autumn 2015, Neil Sanderson, one of our leading ecologists, spotted veteran and woodland edge trees marked for felling at Busketts Lawn. Whilst this had been done as part of a scheme to improve grazing – and had been granted a felling license – many trees of value, but not detrimental to the lawn, had been marked including glade edge Oaks, nectar source Crab Apples and Hawthorns.<br />
<br />
The NFA had not previously been aware of the plans due to the sparse detail available in the list of works we receive through our membership of the Open Forest Advisory Committee, and the equally slim notification of the felling licenses through the parish councils. To the FC’s credit they did manage to arrange a site visit before the works commenced and took on board some of our advice. Whilst from our point of view this was damage limitation rather than success – we saved some trees and shrubs and a large mature Oak – we were also able to make suggestions that were accepted as useful going forward: we got some Oak pollarding, preventing loss of grassland to shade, not previously considered as a tool in lawn management; and by cutting back Holly from former wood edge trees, we agreed to maintain a transition from lawn to wood, both aesthetically, and functionally within the habitat, desirable.<br />
<br />
We will be pressing for improvements in the way the FC and Natural England notify felling licenses and document works of this type on the open forest.<br />
<br />
<h3>
New Forest Water Blitz 2016</h3>
<br />
We did a trial email shot to our members looking for volunteers for the New Forest Water Blitz, a survey taking place during the four week period of 12th March – 10th April 2016. This was a trial run survey taking place as part of the larger Clean Water for Wildlife project. The NFA are promoting this study as a member of the New Forest Catchment Development Group, a clean water initiative between the National Park and the Freshwater Habitats Trust. Over twenty volunteers administered very easy to use water test kits, collecting two samples from assigned locations within the New Forest during the four week period.<br />
<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">Whilst nearly all the Association's work is done through our council and committees by volunteers from our membership, this was the first time we were able to offer a small scale, "Citizen Science" style volunteer opportunity to engage our members. We were very heartened by the enthusiastic response we received. There will be further opportunities for all to volunteer both as the New Forest Water Blitz is due to be extended (popular demand!) and as the Clean Water for Wildlife project moves forward.
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
<br />
Naomi Ewald of the Freshwater Habitats Trust will be one of the Association's guest speakers at our post AGM members event. She will be discussing the New Forest Catchment Project and the New Forest Water Blitz.<br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
Going Forward -- Other areas of concern to address in 2016:</h3>
<br />
<b>Countryside Stewardship Scheme –</b> This new version of the HLS funding will need our particular attention. We were very disappointed in the NELMES consultation that produced Natural England's Countryside Stewardship Statement of Priorities. As funding may be targeted based on the erratic outcomes of the consultation, we are hoping to have these refined or corrected.<br />
<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">Having received negative feedback, Natural England are duly redrafting the document. The NFA are happier that this is being addressed, but will be reviewing the result still wary of the process that produced the original version.
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
<br />
<b>Night Disturbance from LEDs – </b>As part of our tranquillity remit, we want to see the nocturnal disturbance to wildlife and infringement of the New Forest byelaws cease. With our neighbouring conurbations, it is unlikely that we’d ever qualify as an International Dark Sky Reserve (a designation held by 3 other National Parks), but any steps in this direction would be welcome.<br />
<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">-- excerpted with updates from the NFA Habitat and Landscape Committee Annual report, by Committee Chair, Brian Tarnoff, with permission.
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Brian R Tarnoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12963403837782148443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8774928675776876745.post-77536974628243923922016-04-14T10:13:00.000+01:002016-09-26T11:46:04.226+01:00NFA Council 2015-16<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/12971025_767127936720240_980192685692899461_o.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="425" src="https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/12971025_767127936720240_980192685692899461_o.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">More of our year in review for this Saturday's NFA AGM. NFA Chair John Ward reports to our council the issues the NFA has continued to address this year.
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<h2>
“Another busy year for the New Forest Association, with aspirations to do more than we have, but struggling to find enough time and volunteers.”</h2>
</blockquote>
<br />
This could have been the standard opening sentence for the Association’s annual report in recent years and 2015 was no exception, demonstrating how even when life in the Forest is generally going well there is a constant flow of issues, decisions and proposals from various directions causing lively debate at Council meetings.<br />
<br />
The issue of fungi picking in the New Forest came to the fore and Council decided that the NFA would campaign strongly and publicly to raise general public awareness about the increasing scale of the problem and to galvanise action by the New Forest National Park Authority and the Forestry Commission. We were pleased when The National Trust set out its intention to ban picking within its own protected areas.<br />
<br />
Tranquillity research, power lines, ancient woodland re-stocking, habitat restoration, planning applications and much more have formed the workload delivered through our two functional committees, the Planning & Transport and Habitat & Landscape Committees.<br />
<br />
Cycling was very much a topic of vigorous debate in 2014. While the rhetoric calmed down during 2015, the Association’s concern about the harm done by off-road cycling on the open forest away from designated gravel roads is just as strong, including the growing sport of off-road cycling with bright lights during darkness. Hitherto the Forest and its wildlife have been generally undisturbed during the night and the NFA will campaign vigorously to prevent such disturbance.<br />
<br />
But it was the potential long term threats to the New Forest from the Government’s various proposals to reform national housing and planning policies that made 2015 an uncomfortable year for those seeking to protect the relatively small New Forest National Park from the impact of development within and around its boundary. Large-scale urban development in and close to the New Forest in the 1970s and 1980s added immensely to pressures on the Forest. Supported by the NFA, a complete planning policy change from growth to restraint followed to take us into the new century. The risk now is that a drive to solve national and regional housing needs may once again threaten the New Forest, if it is delivered though opportunistic and uncoordinated development instead of a robust planning framework that recognises the special qualities of National Parks to provide public well-being through the qualities of their special landscapes.<br />
<br />
Ironically, at the same time proposals to extend “Right to Buy” to housing association properties cast doubt about the future for small village housing schemes to meet local needs.<br />
<br />
We are fortunate to have well-developed and close working relationships with other National Park Societies and the Campaign for National Parks to assist us in forming co-ordinated responses to national proposals such as these.<br />
<br />
A positive boost to the protection of the New Forest came in the form of a £2.89 million Heritage Lottery Fund Landscape Partnership grant awarded to the New Forest National Park Authority. We were pleased at their success in securing this funding to restore lost habitats, develop Forest skills and inspire a new generation to champion and care for the New Forest.<br />
<br />
We did also manage to enjoy ourselves during the year with some informative walks for members and the annual barbecue. And the Secondary Schools New Forest Conference at Brockenhurst was a great success. The Association’s Education Group is working with the National Park Authority on the 2016 conference.<br />
<br />
2017 will be the New Forest Association’s 150 year anniversary and we realised that although that might seem some way off in 2015 we needed to start our thinking now. A small working group was formed and the beginnings of an Anniversary Year Programme have been put together. There will be lots for members to participate in. We also volunteered to host the National Parks Societies annual conference as a part of our year of celebrations. The venue was booked and the date fixed – Balmer Lawn Hotel from 12th to 14th October 2017. There is no doubt that 2016 will be a busy year again. <br />
<br />
<b>-- John Ward, Chair, New Forest Association</b>Brian R Tarnoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12963403837782148443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8774928675776876745.post-46796995728384385482016-04-13T09:48:00.000+01:002016-09-26T11:46:04.219+01:00NFA Planning & Transport 2015-16<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfcpadVJ2LzvK6CE2ygaVvw422zWdyksekeqto9Bm3YpAynVeeC_xJQQbadaDiaWbV51zJwf9IICTQ4BtKAiqmJhfPVN9pQ3yc6ibJXy4MGuPu9hKlVaKBsN9yqf5QfxFFH8PSTrSaNO3T/s1600/Planning+Housing+Cover+Map+20160413.jpg" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" height="236" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfcpadVJ2LzvK6CE2ygaVvw422zWdyksekeqto9Bm3YpAynVeeC_xJQQbadaDiaWbV51zJwf9IICTQ4BtKAiqmJhfPVN9pQ3yc6ibJXy4MGuPu9hKlVaKBsN9yqf5QfxFFH8PSTrSaNO3T/s640/Planning+Housing+Cover+Map+20160413.jpg" width="640" /></a><br />
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=8774928675776876745" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"></a>
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">In anticipation of Saturday's NFA AGM, we look back at this year's work. In his annual report from our Planning & Transport Committee, Chair Graham Baker discusses the Government's now constant shifting of planning goalposts, the threat of the rising property market to Commoning, and inadequate compensation for the thousands of homes planned for the Forest's borders.
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br />
The concord with the National Park Authority has persisted and monitoring applications for development has become a reduced part of the committee’s job. Still we argue about fences, about contribution to affordable homes, about the size and bulk of replacement dwellings, but these are the arguments at the margin - the difference between a man with a job and a man with a passion.<br />
<br />
In development control these days we are usually supporting the National Park Authority and are generally on the winning side. Supporting them against Parishes where valuable principles might be sacrificed for local convenience, against applicants wishing to misuse valuable back up pasture, against developers determined to try every avenue to gain a bigger house, against those seeking to overturn decisions at appeal and most of all supporting them in resisting Government attempts to relax the planning rules. Working with the National Park Authority and the Campaign for National Parks, we have succeeded in gaining exemption from many of these relaxations. But proposals come thick and fast; before the results of the last one on significant changes to national planning policy are known, two new consultations have been announced, both containing many dangerous proposals.<br />
<br />
The more we succeed in keeping unwanted development at bay, the more attractive the area becomes as somewhere to live and the more house prices have risen. In November 2015, the average property in the National Park cost £531,162 that is 14.2 times the local average wage, a higher ratio even than London. If land-based occupations are to survive the next 25 years we must secure more homes for local people unable to afford market housing.<br />
<br />
Driven by a Government determined to ever increase house numbers, our surrounding Planning Authorities have become the main threat to the Forest. Thousands of homes are planned south of Romsey, on the Waterside, at Fawley and East of Christchurch. Everyone recognises that each house built increases recreational pressure on the protected areas of the National Park and everyone agrees that the Authorities should compensate for the damage that it will do. But the compensation is inadequate, and as part of the revision of the New Forest National Park local plan, the New Forest Association will campaign for sensible mitigation contribution used for effective, long term measures.<br />
<br />
Chairman - Graham Baker<br />
<br />
<table border="0" style="width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
<td style="background-color: #eeeeee; width: 80%;">The NFA's Planning & Transport Committee does a huge volume of work, not just wading knowledgeably through planning applications which may be of concern, but increasingly, as the objectives of neighbouring Authorities force us to look strategically, they review development, green space provision, mitigation and compensation outside the Forest's borders. Despite this daunting task, Graham signs off:<br />
<br />
"The planning committee is in good heart and up to complement. Burley gives us cause for concern, and if there is someone from the village who would like simply to check planning applications each month for likely problems, I ask them to contact me."
</td>
<td style="background-color: white; width: 10%;"><br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Brian R Tarnoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12963403837782148443noreply@blogger.com