Enhancing Quality of Life Through Environmental Action

Reaching Out to Brixham Foundry

Northfield Foundry has been emitting hazardous and noxious emissions for over two decades, with the local residence continually raising their voice in protest. Despite multiple warnings and demands to Torbay Council, no meaningful action was taken. In response, in 2019 a citizens’ campaign with the aid of ELF was established to fight for cleaner air in the community. The campaigners sought to build a relationship of trust with Brixham Foundry, as the factory provided much needed jobs and support to the local economy. Unfortunately, their repeated attempts to contact the Foundry were ignored, and faith in the integrity of Torbay Council was broken.

Leveraging ELF’s University Network

One ELF’s great strengths is our connected network of professionals and universities to provide research,  guidance and counsel. During this case, we turned to our university connections for assistance and guidance. With the resources and knowledge supplied from the University of Exeter clinic, the campaign team was able to gather and present a substantial amount of evidence that put immense pressure on Northfield Foundry. The campaigners’ efforts paid off and the Foundry eventually yielded to their demands, agreeing to replace their furnaces with an electric fleet by March 2023. Despite the Foundry’s commitment, the supportive attitude from the local representative in parliament and elected councilors was absent and this lack of support was profoundly disheartening.

Strength in Community

The Northfield Foundry campaign showcased the true strength of the community and the power of collective action. The campaign team demonstrated that citizens can take charge of their environment and pave the way for meaningful change. All of the efforts put in by the campaigners and the pressure put on Northfield Foundry helped bring about improved air quality and better respiratory health for the local community.

This remarkable story is an example of how citizens can work together in pursuit of a cleaner and healthier space. It shows the importance of holding elected officials and corporations accountable and of the collective strength possessed by the community. Thanks to their hard work and tenacity, the Northfield Foundry campaign is a model for how everyone can take action in order to ensure their environment is protected.

In January and March 2022, ELF instructed Joe Thomas of Landmark chambers in a Public Inquiry to decide the fate of a Town Green registered under the Commons Act 2006, and Local Wildlife Site, in the Green Belt. Registered as a Town and Village Green (TVG) in 2008 after a lengthy inquiry, Woodcock Hill VG in Borehamwood has been under the careful stewardship of local people and in particular the Woodcock Hill Village Green Committee (WHVGC) for many years. In 2020 the Borehamwood community received notice from Taylor Wimpey (TW), the owner of the Woodcock Hill Village Green, that they intended to seek de-registration of part of the TVG status which they duly did. A community in uproar, ELF was approached for assistance (see an earlier piece here). Working with Nick Grant initially and latterly Joe Thomas both of Landmark chambers and the wonderful characters of the WHVGC, it was an amazing experience for ELF to play a role in a public inquiry.

The VG has been managed by many active members of the community of Borehamwood, with the purpose of wildlife and habitat conservation and is a natural place, of unimproved grassland, unusual in that urban environment so close to people’s homes. It has provided the setting for many community events and activities during a long history of use. It is a typical village green and lies at the heart of the Borehamwood community. The community have loved, treasured and maintained this wild Local Wildlife Site and Village Green for years enhancing the conservation and biodiversity value, digging ponds, as well as holding cultural events, schools nature studies, and scouts.

Sadly, TW withdrawing their permission for the community to maintain the land for conservation in 2018, including no longer allowing them to access the site for the annual mowing, and the removal of the cuttings, needed to maintain the special grassland site for which it was designated a LWS, has led to encroachment and succession onto the grassland.

Village Green law is an idiosyncratic area of the law and a de-registration application unusual. In the long term TW want to build houses on this site. Under section 16 of the Commons Act 2006, in order to de-register the site TW had to propose replacement land instead of Woodcock Hill VG and demonstrate that the replacement land is at least as good, if not better than the land to be lost. The public interest test of both sites was under scrutiny. The purpose of the Inquiry was for TW to prove that the replacement land met the public interest test and was at least of equal value.

WHVGC’s main argument against de-registration was that the replacement land did not match the nature value of the de-registration land and would be wholly different in its natural aspects; that the de-registration land because of its wild nature fostered a different experience for users than the heavily grazed replacement land would do. TW have proposed many ecological improvements to the replacement land, including introducing formal infrastructure. WHVGC argued this would be like other anodyne open green park spaces in the area; what was special about the VG was its wildness.

The community also argued that conservation activity was a “lawful pastime” as required under legislation along with the walking, bird watching and wild play activities that take place on the Green.

The community presented evidence about a shifting in the gravity of those who benefit from the current siting of the Village Green. When the VG was originally designated the neighbourhood was defined. The Borehamwood neighbourhood who directly access Woodcock Hill Village Green currently are of a lower social demographic than the neighbouring Elstree. The replacement land moves the VG’s centre of gravity to the Elstree neighbourhood and so removes the benefit from the neighbourhood for whom the village green designation was originally granted. Unfortunately there is no definition of neighbourhood in the Act but in reality this is a major impact for the community.

It became evident from TW that despite the designation as a LWS for its grassland, the incentive for the owner to degrade the site was recognised and even admitted at the Inquiry. Indeed TW stated that they would oversee the decline of the nature value of the LWS as they would allow no nature conservation and so the site would lose its nature value thus diminishing the public interest of the site. The objective for a developer landowner to develop land is of course better made if the site has less nature value.

Something that did come out of the inquiry which has to be viewed as a positive and certainly was by the Inspector, if not the community, was Taylor Wimpey’s commitment half way through the inquiry, on top of the £100,000 already proposed, to pay a further £370,000 towards ecological improvements to the replacement land.

On the 24^th May it was hugely disappointing to learn of the Inspector’s decision to allow the de-registration of part of the Woodcock Hill Village Green which will pave the way for a planning application for hundreds of homes.

To say the heart will be ripped out of the community by this decision is no exaggeration. Woodcock Hill has been maintained and looked after by a community voluntarily, hundreds of thousands of hours of their time over the decades into their stewardship, because they love Woodcock Hill. By this decision the Inspector has removed that love. The community made clear that they have no relationship with the replacement land, have no history with it or investment into it and they will not have the same motivation with the new site to love and look after it. The Inspector didn’t even touch on this loss of community goodwill. WHVGC argued that the community feeling for the site should not be overlooked and indeed the very nature of the registration of a VG should not then be reduced to an administrative process to de-register whenever a landowner wanted a VG site. ELF believes the decision  sets a dangerous precedent and will be noted by developers.

ELF would like to thank Joe Thomas of Landmark chambers for steering us all so expertly though the inquiry. We heard from our local experts from amongst the community including Pat Strack, extraordinary local woman, who has chaired the WHVGC for years and always been at the heart of her community, Clive Butchins, likewise a stalwart of the community. Pat gave evidence on the heritage and landscape values of the site and how it has been used for generations by local groups and scouts, for religious and civil gatherings alike. Matt Dodds conservation lead at Herts and Middlesex Wildlife Trust, gave important evidence on behalf of the community regarding the lack of a biodiversity net gain assessment from the applicant and why it was important to understand the respective nature values of the sites. The Inspector didn’t agree. Other local experts included Chris Berry of Borehamwood CPRE. ELF would like to thank all who gave up so much of their time to this important matter.

Woodcock Hill is a typical ELF, David and Goliath case. Despite the Inspector’s decision we maintain the replacement land is in no way comparable to what will be lost to the community. Sadly the Inspector didn’t agree. WHVGC are now considering their options.

Over twenty years ago there was a new ‘Storm Water Pumping System’ built to protect our beaches and coastal waters at Whitburn and Seaburn near Sunderland.  There was immediate evidence that sewage was being discharged to sea contaminating the fishing and polluting the beach, and this has continued to this day despite constant protests, a Public Inquiry and a EUCJ case found against the UK. 

Recently, just like other parts of the country, there have been a number of planning applications for many new houses and so local people have queried how there can be capacity in the sewage system, when there is constant spilling already. The local Council decided that Councillors could not question the Water Company’s assurance that there was capacity; that this was not within the LPA’s remit.

Luckily we contacted ELF’s Emma Montlake who obtained a legal opinion from Alex Shattock which highlights that the LPA has a legal duty to ensure capacity in the sewage system exists for new building.  This has been forwarded to our two local Councils and we await confirmation that they will change their views! It is also vital that there is independent scrutiny of local infrastructure so that our coastal and river waters are protected from sewage discharges, and we are glad to have the support of local groups and ELF to try to make this happen locally, and nationally.

The Environment Agency appear helpless to carry out their regulatory duties in this case and are intending to just add additional illegally connected flows to the Permit without public advertising or input and so there is a local Petition (http://bit.ly/30vyD6A) to try to ensure public knowledge of, and participation in, this process.

Our grateful thanks to ELF’s Emma and Alex Shattock for their help. Bob Latimer and Steve Lavelle.

UPDATE

ELF is delighted to report that the group we assisted in Cwmfelinfach, South Wales, the Lower Sirhowy Valley Residents Group, learnt yesterday that Natural Resources Wales have refused to grant an environmental permit for the proposed waste plant in their valley. When the group first came to ELF in August of last year, planning permission had already been granted and NRW were indicating that they were likely to grant an environmental permit in early September. Local residents had serious concerns over the health impacts of the proposed waste plant.

By the time the group came to ELF, they had already done a lot of work on the issue of emissions, much of it technical analysis of the applicant’s reports, and had a clear understanding of their own local environment notably the often seen weather event in their valley “temperature inversion”, a rare weather phenomena otherwise.

Local knowledge backed up by a determination to understand the technical reports, which led to them revealing many inconsistencies in the applicant’s reports, such as taking no account whatsoever of local conditions having made their readings from places as far away as 35 miles, meant the group did a phenomenal job in scrutinising the application. Quite soon it became clear that NRW had their own concerns with the application.

This is great example of where local people have the knowledge that outsiders do not have, when it comes to their local environment. And the tenacity to be undaunted by technical reports and to carefully consider them which resulted in their discovering problems with the application.

This morning we received an email from our contact from the group to say thanks to all at ELF who helped, the ELF professional members who we referred the work too – both Rory Hutchinson of JCP Solicitors and laterally Richard Buxtons solicitors.

“Counsellor Jan Jones and the group asked me to personally say thank you and Environmental Law Foundation for what you have done for us . . . the local pub was drunk dry yesterday evening from the village celebrating our good news!!”

More about this case below:

The Lower Sirhowy Valley Residents Group in Cwmfelinfach, South Wales, contacted ELF seeking help in assessing an environmental permit application from Hazrem Environmental Ltd. It wants to build a new waste processing facility to accept up to 100,000 tonnes of non-hazardous waste each year and turn it into fuel for incinerating power stations. Lorry diesel air pollutants will arise from hundreds of deliveries and collections each week, whilst the facility itself will generate high volumes of dust.

Planning permission for the building has already been granted.

Hazrem Environmental’s chosen location for the facility is a steep sided valley, well known for experiencing temperature inversions caused by cold drainage flow. Such inversions are a recurrent meteorological feature of valleys in the area, highly familiar to local people, which can trap cold air – and its pollutants – in a valley for days at a time.

The application took no account of these inversions and their potential to result in very high levels of pollutants. Its weather modelling used data from two weather stations, one on the coast at Rhose Airport, 35 miles away, the other on an open plain 7 miles away at Caerphilly.

Similarly, its air quality estimates – as the group only discovered six months after the granting of planning permission – used bias adjusted figures not from where the facility will be located, but from Caerphilly and Blackwood where, again, the topography bears no resemblance to the proposed location of the new facility.

Public Health Wales, responding as statutory consultee, has warned, “We would therefore recommend that the Regulator [Natural Resource Wales] exercise caution in considering the granting of a Permit”.

This case illustrates how difficult it can be for communities (and planning authorities and lawyers) to identify and challenge technical reports. With this in mind, ELF have begun discussions with our university partners about the possibility of involving technical and scientific departments, in their ELF clinics.

If practical, this would significantly boost the ability of communities to assess and present hard evidence on matters such as air and water quality, geological and biological impacts, and noise. Please get in touch if you can help us progress this initiative.

The photo shows a temperature inversion over Islwyn Road, Wattsvile at 8.30am – rush hour traffic. This area already exceeds the recommended level of air pollution.

ELF was contacted in May 2017 by Cranleigh Civic Society (CCS) about ongoing pollution from a sewage works into Cranleigh Waters, in Surrey. CCS is concerned that the situation will be made worse by planned housing developments and that the issue is not being properly addressed by the authorities in breach of Water Framework Directive requirements. CCS has been campaigning on this issue for more than three years with no legal guidance up to now.

Cranleigh Waters, a stream (classified as a “main river” by the Environment Agency as it is under its jurisdiction rather than that of the local authority) and an outflow from a sewage treatment facility operated by Thames Water, has a multitude of historic licence and permits for sewage effluent discharge to facilitate the dilution of effluent.

Over the last few years the stream has stopped flowing, particularly in the summer months, due to changes in rainfall patterns caused by climate change, low aquifers and increases in population. If the flow is too low the stream can’t dilute the sewage effluent sufficiently and Cranleigh Waters has now become eutrophic. This results in a water body rich in phosphates, nitrates, and organic nutrients and encourages the proliferation of plant life which kills fish and other animals by depriving them of oxygen.

In light of this, CCS has particular concerns over the amount of development proposed for their village and surrounding area. Waverly Borough Council (WBC) has granted planning permission for 1,320 homes and at least 5,000 new homes are proposed to discharge into Cranleigh Waters. This would represent an 86% increase in the discharge of effluent from current levels. The local angling society already has evidence of significantly dwindling fish stocks downstream and CCS considers additional housing projects are likely to cause further impacts.

CCS believes that the baseline data in the June 2017 version of an Amec Foster Wheeler report on Cranleigh Waters carried out on behalf of WBC, is based on a mean value for the period 2010 – 2015. A water expert working with CCS considers that this cannot be described as ‘current’, yet is used as a basis for all modelled predictions. For example, it is indicated that fish are at good or high status whereas locally provided information from an authoritative source would indicate their virtual absence in 2016.

Two weeks ago ELF was urgently notified by CCS that they had been presented with an opportunity to present oral representations at WBC’s local plan examination. Part of those submissions was to be mitigation measures that CCS proposed for Cranleigh Waters in the context of the local plan. ELF sought urgent assistance from our pro-bono professional membership network and John Bates, barrister at Old Square Chambers, long time ELF member and water law specialist, kindly agreed to assist.

Amongst many lines of discussion with John, of particular interest was the finding of the EU court in the Bund für Umwelt case. This found that there was an “obligation of the Member States not to authorise a project that may cause a deterioration of the status of a body of surface water”.

However, having gone to considerable effort, it was with great disappointment that 12 hours before CCS were due to present their submissions, they were told the Inspector no longer wanted to hear from them. This was extremely disappointing. CCS hope that the Inspector will consider their written representations although feedback from one attendee indicated that the environment was not on the table for discussion.

Adrian Clarke of Cranleigh Civic Society and a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Building who has worked on several large housing and commercial projects, said:

“We are not against new building; we accept the need for new housing particularly in South East England. Our issue is that we think that local authorities should make sure that they sort out the infrastructure before approving new housing estates. In many cases, they are simply not doing that.”

Despite this latest setback, CCS’s campaign continues. The local MP Anne Milton has arranged a meeting with CCS, the Environment Agency, Thames Water and WBC on 24th July 2017 to discuss the problems at Cranleigh Waters.

ELF sees so many synergies with communities that we are working to support and we will continue working with CCS and others who campaign on issues of water quality. More generally of course this case highlights the pressures on the natural environment caused by a rapid increase in house building and the need for regulatory authorities to properly consider their statutory environmental duties in addressing them.

ELF has been assisting Somercoates Against Development Residents Action Group (SAD) in their campaign against plans for 200 houses on a site in Derbyshire with a 70-year history of contamination and adjacent to another former landfill site. Planning permission was initially refused and has now gone to appeal. The greenfield and contaminated site has been a rugby club for many years but a deal was done whereby the local rugby club got a new home, club house etc and their current site was to be built upon.

Back in June 2015, ELF was approached by Kellie Judson who lives very close to one of the sites, which is known to have serious past contamination, largely undocumented and of great concern to local people. Since then, as well as fundraising and organising local resistance, Kelly has been raising the profile of her matter.

On 20th June 2017 SAD’s matter was featured in the Radio 4 programme What Lies Beneath, the Legacy of Landfill and on 27th June a BBC news feature looked at Kellie’s case. SAD’s fight is part of a wider story about the question over building on contaminated land as the ever greater push for more house building and government targets are imposed on communities.

The site is a designated greenfield area which had been mined by opencast and quarried over many years. The resultant open pits were used to tip waste over several decades throughout the 1960s, 70s, and 80s. The tips were operated legally during the day with permitted materials including asbestos, toxic metal compounds, mercury contaminated compounds and vanadium compounds.

Many of these compounds would now be considered dangerous and not be allowed to be placed in pits in an uncontained manner under current legislation.

Local residents also claim the tips were operated illegally at night and that materials tipped during this time may have included caesium 134, cobalt 60 and dioxin 237 and 238, strontium and uranium.

This development, the community were clear, posed a threat to local peoples’ health. This site was turned down for housing by the Secretary of State in 1991 and an adjacent site turned down for opencast mining by the Secretary of State in 1989. The reasons being the danger posed by insufficient knowledge of the hazardous waste particularly dioxins that are contained in the tips.

Last year two associated planning applications for the new rugby club and housing came before Amber Valley Borough Council (AVBC). The new site for the rugby club was approved. However, the application for 200 dwellings whilst being recommended by the planning officer was refused by the planning committee. AVBC took the decision back to the committee for “another go” but it was again refused. The planning decision notice specifies, “That the application be refused due to insufficient information available on this date”. This concerned the contamination and lack of available information. Many older local people with a very worrying story to tell about how the site was contaminated spoke at the committee stages.

The applicant appealed the decision to refuse and with ELF’s assistance SAD wrote to PINS (planning inspectorate) asking that this be a full inquiry as local people were a very important component in the decision making process. However, AVBC’s request for the appeal to be a one day hearing prevailed.

SAD of course still had a role to play so ELF looked for an ELF barrister to help. A new ELF member, Stanzie Bell at Kings Chambers agreed to assist, but in the first instance recommended that instead of a barrister the group needed a contamination expert. This proved sage advice and the group through Stanzie found Stephen Fryer to present a report at the hearing although SAD had to raise funds for this.

Preparing for the hearing Kellie commented,

“Thank you so much for your help over the past almost 3 years, you have made me strong at times when I felt like giving up…. At least we know about our landfills; how many communities are fighting development in their back yards who do not have a clue what they live next to? You have been instrumental in our fight and I can only thank you for that”

UPDATE

To the delight of SAD and local residents, the Inspector dismissed the appeal on 17th August 2017.

This was an interesting matter, and illustrates the importance that a well-placed expert can have on the outcome of a public enquiry. We would urge communities to take note. Where we are used to countless technical reports produced by applicant developers, in certain technical matters, there is a lot to be said for communities fundraising where necessary in order to produce their own.

Community Benefit Society R4C have lodged a complaint with the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) that the contract for a Stroud incinerator is in breach of competition rules.

As highlighted previously, R4C was set up following a long campaign against proposals for the Javelin Park incinerator, finally given permission by Gloucestershire County Council (GCC) in 2015.

When the planning appeal and the legal challenge were lost local objectors decided to take a different tack and R4C proposed its own alternative, commercially sustainable recovery and recycling plant. The contract, originally signed in 2013 and then renegotiated in 2015, for the £500 million incinerator was awarded to Urbaser Balfour Beatty although details on pricing and information on termination were only made public following an Information Tribunal ruling in March this year (2017).

In light of this information, and after seeking assistance from Counsel through ELF member, Duncan Sinclair of 39 Essex Chambers, R4C lodged a complaint with the CMA on 21st March that the Javelin Park contract breaches the Competition Act 1998.

R4C believe that the exclusive contract is anti-competitive and prevents technological innovation, imposing a huge financial burden for years to come. They state that:

• the price paid by GCC for waste disposal for a minimum amount is 10 times the next tranche, thereby creating ‘de facto’ exclusivity and foreclosing the market for waste treatment (including eliminating incentives to recycle/move higher up the waste hierarchy);
• there are excessive termination costs thereby enforcing the ‘lock-in’; and
• the 25-year contract prevents newer, cheaper and more efficient/environmentally friendly alternatives developing to the detriment of consumers in terms of not only price but also their interest in the environment (both local and more broadly).

On 31st March R4C published independent analysis of the Javelin Park contract at an event at the Guildhall, where the actor Jeremy Irons spoke in support of the report.

If the complaint is upheld the contract could be declared void and GCC would face financial penalties.

ELF was contacted by a Parish Councillor of Heighington, Lincoln. They were seeking urgent assistance on the public consultation that was taking place for the Lincolnshire Waste & Minerals draft policy, and in particular the policy on hydrocarbons (i.e. fracking). A means of delivering local policy for the next 10 years on how the county deals with its waste and minerals extraction, the draft is a very important document. Alarmed by the apparent blanket acceptance of its wording in relation to hydrocarbons – indicating an assumption in favour of development – local people sought ELF’s help in investigating the legality and soundness of the proposed policy.

With in-house guidance and a last minute but crucial intervention (at midnight) from Richard Turney at Landmark who had written a previous paper on the National Planning Policy Framework and Fracking, ELF was able to deliver guidance which, our local contact proclaimed, identified “some fundamental issues”.

The Colwall Action Group is made up of residents living in the AONB of the Malvern Hills in Herefordshire, concerned by a planning application for a local farmer to build industrial chicken rearing units with a projected turnover of 200,000 chickens every 35 days. The giant $145 billion pa US agro-business Cargill owns a large broiler chicken abattoir and processing plant nearby and is supporting farmers who apply for the requisite permissions.

As so often, a central concern here is apparent lack of transparency, and following of due process, especially Environmental Impact Assessments. Nearby local residents did not receive planning application notices and were concerned that they had not been given adequate opportunities to participate in environmental decision making.

The plant is projected to produce 84 tonnes of chicken dung per month, releasing ammonia into the atmosphere which can have damaging impacts on locally sensitive nature sites, and can be catastrophic for mosses and lichens. The site is at the headwaters of Cradley Brook which feeds the River Teme, a very sensitive river ecologically (SSSI) and there are several SSSIs within 2 km.

The matter was referred to Matt Gilks of Dutton Gregory for some advice, with whom the group has now spoken.

“We have had a long discussion with Matt which has already proved very useful…Thank you for the introduction.”

Update – January 2016 The Marine Management Organisation – a non-departmental public body sponsored by DEFRA – seems determined to continue dumping. Shortly we will see an application by them for a new licence.

This week (20th January 2015), a consent order has been filed in the High Court – This effectively means that the the Marine Management Organisation (MMO) has conceded that the licence issuing process which led to the current licence was flawed, rendering that licence invalid. This is a great outcome for the Stop Dumping in Whitsand Bay group!

Click here for more

On 26th November 2014, when our clients secured a judicial review, the MMO said that they had found a copy of a document showing that a crucial study that appeared not to have carried out, had been. No original could be found however and the MMO were given a deadline – which expires tomorrow – to produce it.

The report below setting out the case is taken from our October 2014 newsletter.

Breaking News: JR go ahead for Stop Dumping in Whitsand Bay campaign

You may remember back in our June newsletter we reported on a matter that ELF had been involved with assisting a campaign group in Whitsand Bay, Cornwall; “Stop Dumping in Whitsand Bay” who have been campaigning for years to stop the dredging and dumping at sea of hundreds of thousands of tonnes of dredged and contaminated silt, in a marine rich environment. On 7th March 2004 the latest in a series of permits was issued by the MMO under the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009, to Westminster Dredging Company Limited trading as Boskalis Westminster Limited. The dump site lies 800 metres from a newly designated Marine Conservation Zone. In addition the dredging is undertaken in a heavily protected ecological marine environment being both a Special Protection Area and a Special Area of Conservation. We were delighted when Lisa Foster of Richard Buxton’s solicitors and Matthew Reed of Landmark accepted initial pro-bono instructions.

Beggiatoa Bacteria in 6 metres depth at Polhawn Cove. This grows where there is little or no oxygen, normally in so called, dead zones.

We heard yesterday, 8th October, that permission has been granted for Judicial Review proceedings to go ahead. There was some nervousness that the judge would not grant permission on the papers alone. This nervousness proved unfounded. This matter should be of great interest to all those concerned with the protection and regulation of the marine environment. In light of the recently created and designated Marine Conservation Zones, this case may have far reaching ramifications.

My first visit to Whitsand Bay was while on holiday in the early 1980 and I instantly fell in love with the area. I’ve been living on the Rame Peninsula for nearly 20 years now with my wife and 3 daughters. I still look at the area through the ‘eyes of a tourist’ and not a day goes by without appreciating the beauty that’s right here on our doorstep.

The Rame Peninsula has been called the ‘Forgotten Corner of Cornwall’ for a long time. It still is pretty much off the beaten tracks today for the majority of tourists who travel into Cornwall via the A38. In days gone by visitors braved the dangerous Cremyll Ferry crossing, made their way to Millbrook and then got transported to- and down the Whitsand Bay cliffs donkeys. Apart from the chalets on the cliff the area is still relatively untouched. All this beauty is in massive contrast with the continued dumping of dredged spoil in a disused ammunitions dump in the bay, since November 2013 right next to a Marine Conservation Zone!

Premium WordPress ThemesIn 2010 my wife organised the Whitsand Bay beach demonstration. As a result of this a committee was formed in 2011 to look into the ‘outstanding issues’ to do with the continued dumping in the bay. I joined this committee together with 3 other concerned locals. As we all felt the committee had run its course without much result (we did get a stipulation in the license sorted that the dumping needed to be in the deepest corner of the site) and without much support from our MP the locals left in late 2013 to concentrate at what we do best: mobilise the public.

“…without ELF and the expertise they were able to put us in touch with I fear it would have been years more of the same, meetings with officials so they could tick the box, and change nothing.”
My wife organised the January 2014 Rame Head demonstration while the new license was pending. I did attend a meeting in Liskeard to discuss issues with George Eustice, very last minute called by our MP. But… all to no avail. In March 2014 a new 3 year license to dump 367.000 tonnes in Whitsand Bay was granted again by the MMO, despite lots of objections and dumping continued within days.

When I started to take a closer look at the license I discovered that certain parts of the Dockyards were excluded from dredging due to heavy metals in the silt. I asked the MMO if they could let us know these areas were not dredged. As a reply they simply issued a variation on the license and I never found out if they indeed had dredged these areas (and dumped in the bay).

BBC spotlight has been very supportive. This year alone they have dedicated at least 5 spots on the issue, including a feature on the Pink Sea Fan, present in the new MCZ, for which I was interviewed after I sent questions to the MMO and George Eustice. I am one of the five signatories under request for judicial review and without ELF and the expertise they were able to put us in touch with I fear it would have been years more of the same, meetings with officials so they could tick the box, and change nothing.

Tonny Steenhagen

Ihave always loved Whitsand Bay, for as long as I can remember, going to Polhawn with my family as often as we could. I have also always felt very close to nature, we are part of nature and I recognised from a young age, how everything is connected, and that if each of us could do something small to help, then the world to be a better place. By caring for the natural environment, people, wildlife, then things could be better than we have so far made them. Whitsand Bay is being dumped on. That is what I heard and saw from Dave Peake, five or six years ago. I saw such devastating photos of how the silt was destroying some of the wildlife and pristine sea bed. I heard Dave’s impassioned plea to save the beauty he had known since a child also.

Beggiatoa Bacteria in 6 metres depth at Polhawn Cove. This grows where there is little or no oxygen, normally in so called, dead zones.

While out walking around Rame Head, soon after in June Spring Equinox 2010, I saw a seal, and the realisation that it could be effected by this dumping, this beautiful mammal, I knew I had to do something, Dolphins, Seals etc are at the top of the Foodchain, like us Humans, what about our children, what were the dangers? The fact that we knew that there were unseen cocktails of toxins within the silt dredged from busy ship yards in the Tamar and we did not know what harm it could do, because nobody had tested the dangers of the mixtures. A science lecturer told me that when the TBT present in the silt is dredged up and mixed with oxygen, that this changes it to a far more dangerous toxin that could enter the food chain. All this went through my mind and heart as I watched the seal, and I knew I had to do something.

I pictured a line of people standing together hand in hand across the shore of Whitsand bay. I knew I had to try, to offer out to the community and organised it, for this to happen. It did happen in July 2010, and it was poignant, and beautiful. Please see the videos below:

The dredging continued, so at an obvious point when the new license was about to be renewed in January 2014, I put out to the community to stand again Click here to watch the video. This time at Rame Head. The impact of this has led to the Judicial Review, through many lovely determined people putting in massive effort with the community behind them. We stand as a community together and we will stop this terrible act of irresponsibility. I wholeheartedly believe that.

Deb Hoskin

Where do I begin…?

kayakI kayak the river Dart as a hobby and I am a voluntary coach in the sport so have a reasonable amount of knowledge on the salmon and trout spawning ground on the Dart. I have been concerned about the dredging of the Tamar smelt hot spots, as we all know that this is the main source of food for the salmon as they travel up the Dart to spawn.

Historically for me, Whitsand Bay has been an inspirational and magical place to grow up. Since 1962 when I was born, it became part of my life alongside that of my Parents, Grandparents and the rest of my family. Enjoying the natural environment and the wonders of Mother Nature. Fishing off the rocks off Rame, boating and our summers were always spent at Whitsands in the chalet.

P1020991My Grandfather was one of the first few to build two chalets at Tregonhawke. Needless to say I am very passionate about the place and feel it is our duty to protect the natural environs of such a beautiful awe inspiring piece of our planet. Having travelled extensively around the world it is Rame and the Whitsand Bay that pulls me back.

My Background is that I am very local, having lived in Millbrook all my life and I am a local business women who cares about the local environment. I began talks with Dave Peake a local diver about 10 years ago and we later formed a group becoming the campaigners to Stop the Dumping in Whitsand Bay. We were meeting officials such as The Plymouth Harbour Master, Defra, MOD, MMO and other official representatives on a regular basis to try and find an alternative. This became fruitless after 18 months but rather than give up the campaign we sought outside help.

Terri came along to one of our group meetings and for once we felt like we were given a window of opportunity to do something constructive. Terri, ELF & Buxton’s Solicitors have all helped us in achieving a Judicial Review against the MMO. I have to say we never in a million years thought that this would be an historic moment when the judge granted this to us. Without the help of these people we would still be trying to achieve this first hurdle, hopefully they will be with us as we go through what could feasibly be more hurdles to come.

I have been amazed at the tremendous support from local people and people from afar who have lived in the area and moved away as they have donated to our fundraising campaign. It is wonderful that there are people who care about the damage that the dredged spoil deposited in our bay is doing.

We are not opposed to the dredging but it has to be done in the correct manner as there are processes to be adhered to. If the dredged spoil is good enough to be dumped at sea surely in this day and age it could go for land fill and be of some use instead of killing off marine life. Thousands of tonnes of dredged spoil have been dumped on the sea bed smothering and suffocating fish and fauna – this is not acceptable.

I would like to see a moratorium on the dumping in the bay for at least 30 years so we can study what Mother Nature can restore.

Julie

Photos courtesy of the Stop Dumping in Whitsand Bay group