Hartlebury Common Tranquil heaven is now a graveyard (From Kidderminster Shuttle)

Hartlebury Common Tranquil heaven is now a graveyard

7:00am Wednesday 9th January 2013 in Letters

HARTLEBURY Common is the graveyard that once was a little piece of heaven just off the A4025.

It is just heartbreaking to walk along the top of common and see the desecration of such tranquil beauty – now so quiet with no morning song from the birds or the call to their beds in the evening. Only the harsh noise of the traffic! So many friendships have been forged over the years, both two- and four- legged variety, appreciating the quiet beauty of our common, plus the many visitors who drive to the area just to enjoy it.

Walk back along the bottom of the common and the stark reality rips at the heart and we shed a tear for what we have lost and will never see again. The common bows its head. It has lost it’s soul. So sad.

The ‘experts’ have robbed us of our local much-loved treasure. They would not listen to us when their intentions were made public – refusing to take questions.

Why is it that these meddling bureaucrats feel they have the right to destroy so much of our local heritage and spoil the enjoyment of so many ordinary folk?

ESME TURTON Worcester Road Titton, Stourport

Comments(13)

Stephen Brown says...
12:27pm Wed 9 Jan 13

Here Here, well said.

But it's all about the money as we know.....

Report this post »

somerford says...
11:12pm Thu 10 Jan 13

What a load of rubbish! What a load of tripe!
I live on the edge of Hartlebury Common
and it already looks so much better. Give it a little time and we will see the benifits but it will never please the 'diehards'

Report this post »

Mary79 says...
3:35pm Fri 11 Jan 13

somerford, what? it looks so much better already? are you sure you live on the edge of the common and not in a parallel universe?

Report this post »

jon cooper says...
6:09pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Sadly, there is very little understanding on the ecological value of Hartlebury Common and the surrounding heathlands in and around Worcestershire. I'm certainly no wildlife expert, but after discussing Hartlebury Common and Wyre Forest's Burlish Top with a local Ranger, it was a revelation to find out that both 'heathlands' are without doubt unique. There is no way whatsoever that any Ranger would sit back and see major work being done on Hartlebury Common unless it wasn't necessary to preserve the area for generations to come - as a 'Heathland'.

Report this post »

rokyflow says...
9:01am Sun 13 Jan 13

To say of Hartlebury Common and Burlish Top that 'both Heathlands are without doubt unique' seems rather a contradiction in terms! Hartlebury Common was originally woodland, the conditions for heathland were artificially created by clearing and grazing many years ago. Unfortunately it is possible to change just about any natural environment to something that it originally was not with manpower and money. The only consolation is that in generations to come when the money has run out Nature will always be the strongest force and trees will once again grow on Hartlebury Common.

Report this post »

stour67 says...
12:59pm Sun 13 Jan 13

If the ranger did not say the work was needed he would be out of a job so it's in he's self interest to promote this,and wonder what the cost is for this destruction,being as we are being to told there's no money.Lived in stour for over 50yrs,and see the town destroyed so called experts,The've done more damage to stourport than the bomb did that was dropped in the war

Report this post »

jon cooper says...
1:00pm Sun 13 Jan 13

The JNCC says:-
"Lowland heathland is a priority for nature conservation because it is a rare and threatened habitat. It has declined greatly in extent during the last two centuries – in England it is estimated that only one sixth of the heathland present in 1800 remains – and it still faces major pressures".

It really does appear that the work being carried out on Hartlebury Common is not to destroy; but to actually preserve. Again, knowing the passion that exists between the rangers who oversee our natural habitats, i simply can't envisage them simply sitting back and watching changes taking place if it wasn't absolutely necessary.

(PS: It may be of interest to seek out the meaning of 'Heathland') ...

Report this post »

Stephen Brown says...
3:47pm Sun 13 Jan 13

The cost of the work, according to the grant given, is £368,000.

Money talks - and that is what this is all about. In order to get that money, and run with an 'off the shelf' plan preferred by Natural England and the EU, the council HAD to submit to this type of work. To do that they had to go through the usual 'consultation' process that as we know from other matters locally is anything but consultation in a manner that is transparent and open or takes the views onboard of local people. It was a sham right up to and through the so-called public inquiry. The Local Govt Ombudsman was next to useless in this process as there were clear breaches of the council's own protocols to get to the end stage, as ever.

Management of commons is a controversial subject but nowhere will you find any scheme that these days incorporates local wishes reflective of local heritage because that does not get the money under an 'agreed' formula. There are alternatives which are reflective but they are never adopted.

Why?

Money talks.

Having done extensive research and consulted University and ex-Natural England experts there was agreement that the current form of commons management, as it appears here, could have been adapted to suit local concerns, including all the trees that they have chopped down.

So why diodn't that happen?

Money talks.

Frankly, and personally, I would take with a pinch of salt what a council employee tells me about the need or otherwise of such a type of management, he/she needs to keep their job. The fact is there are alternative forms of management available but it is not in the council's interest to promote that fact. And I am not anti commons management, I am just anti this type of management.

Once the money runs out, we will be back to square one, probably worse, as none of this factors in the effects of climate change on commons heathland.

Report this post »

jon cooper says...
5:09pm Sun 13 Jan 13

Stephen Brown says:-
"I would take with a pinch of salt what a council employee tells me about the need or otherwise of such a type of management" ...

After witnessing and gathering the real truths in issues that have evolved in recent months, i would rather NOT take the views of a local ranger "with a pinch of salt".

Report this post »

Withe67 says...
7:29pm Sun 13 Jan 13

Jon,

I fear you're wasting your time here. Sadly, closed minds just aren't interested in facts, and this is exploited by those who, appear to have, underlying political agendas. Thankfully, the work has gone ahead, despite these ill-informed opinions.

Report this post »

Mrfade says...
9:31am Mon 14 Jan 13

Heath land is supposed to be as rare as the rainforests or such like.
Natural England don't however seem to know their backside from their elbow. Neither do WCC.
The common is just 2 km from the proposed incinerator, and would be pretty much level with the proposed stack. Levels of nitrogen oxide to be emitted from the stack ( along with arsnic and lead etc) will equate to 7km of a ‘typical motorway’ per hour 24/7. This is from Mercia Waste's own briefing notes, which have not perhaps been read by NE or WCC.
I’m no scientist, but nitrogen oxide with fertilize the soil which will apparently harm the heath land, a point raised by Natural England in Nottingham re the Rufford Colliery incinerator proposal.
Great Crested Newts have also been removed from the incinerator site before a licence was issued.
Natural England have told residents to call the police if they think a crime has been committed.
Here is a money saving idea, get rid of Natural England, a truly pointless organisation.

Report this post »

Stephen Brown says...
11:46am Mon 14 Jan 13

On the contrary Withe67 it seems to me that facts are getting conflated with opinions to suit agendas and I include the pro-lobby in that. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil.

Similarly Jon, the 'real truths' you speak of are opinion, and if you choose to believe one person over another that is up to you but it doesn't make it so.

Report this post »

A hartlebury local says...
3:12pm Thu 17 Jan 13

Mrfade wrote:
Heath land is supposed to be as rare as the rainforests or such like.
Natural England don't however seem to know their backside from their elbow. Neither do WCC.
The common is just 2 km from the proposed incinerator, and would be pretty much level with the proposed stack. Levels of nitrogen oxide to be emitted from the stack ( along with arsnic and lead etc) will equate to 7km of a ‘typical motorway’ per hour 24/7. This is from Mercia Waste's own briefing notes, which have not perhaps been read by NE or WCC.
I’m no scientist, but nitrogen oxide with fertilize the soil which will apparently harm the heath land, a point raised by Natural England in Nottingham re the Rufford Colliery incinerator proposal.
Great Crested Newts have also been removed from the incinerator site before a licence was issued.
Natural England have told residents to call the police if they think a crime has been committed.
Here is a money saving idea, get rid of Natural England, a truly pointless organisation.

To Mrfade and anyone else reading, the proposed works have not come about recently not dreamt up in the last 6 months, but back in 2008 when a local consultancy was asked to evaluate the site in line with the application. Sure the incinerator was on the cards but the works couldn't be stopped because there may have been an incinerator constructed. The heathland needed preserving and nothing should get in the way of that.

The fact that it needed work was noted in May 2007 when the SSSI status of the common was accessed. This was when comments like the following were written on the official report "scattering of trees that need further work to remove." "Lacking in plant species associated with heathland." "Scrub encroachment is becoming an issue" "Grazing needed to acheive some form of recovery."

In regards to Stephen's comments about consulation, I was aware of the plans in 2008 and kept myself updated throughout that process. It was advertised in all the appropriate places, those that claim it wasn't done clearly didn't care to take notice before the work started and have then cried foul when it did. Legally the council did all it was required to do and did.

[quote][p][bold]Mrfade[/bold] wrote: Heath land is supposed to be as rare as the rainforests or such like. Natural England don't however seem to know their backside from their elbow. Neither do WCC. The common is just 2 km from the proposed incinerator, and would be pretty much level with the proposed stack. Levels of nitrogen oxide to be emitted from the stack ( along with arsnic and lead etc) will equate to 7km of a ‘typical motorway’ per hour 24/7. This is from Mercia Waste's own briefing notes, which have not perhaps been read by NE or WCC. I’m no scientist, but nitrogen oxide with fertilize the soil which will apparently harm the heath land, a point raised by Natural England in Nottingham re the Rufford Colliery incinerator proposal. Great Crested Newts have also been removed from the incinerator site before a licence was issued. Natural England have told residents to call the police if they think a crime has been committed. Here is a money saving idea, get rid of Natural England, a truly pointless organisation.[/p][/quote]To Mrfade and anyone else reading, the proposed works have not come about recently not dreamt up in the last 6 months, but back in 2008 when a local consultancy was asked to evaluate the site in line with the application. Sure the incinerator was on the cards but the works couldn't be stopped because there may have been an incinerator constructed. The heathland needed preserving and nothing should get in the way of that. The fact that it needed work was noted in May 2007 when the SSSI status of the common was accessed. This was when comments like the following were written on the official report "scattering of trees that need further work to remove." "Lacking in plant species associated with heathland." "Scrub encroachment is becoming an issue" "Grazing needed to acheive some form of recovery." In regards to Stephen's comments about consulation, I was aware of the plans in 2008 and kept myself updated throughout that process. It was advertised in all the appropriate places, those that claim it wasn't done clearly didn't care to take notice before the work started and have then cried foul when it did. Legally the council did all it was required to do and did. A hartlebury local

Report this post »

Hartlebury Common Tranquil heaven is now a graveyard (From Kidderminster Shuttle)

Letters RSS Feed

Hartlebury Common Tranquil heaven is now a graveyard

click2find

Jobs

Dating

Homes

Cars

About cookies