Happy to help with anything I can and as previously said glue myself to most things if needed. Beware the 40 year local presence and the behind the scenes networking that will have gone on and will be escalated now with local politicians and authorities. These things are never just about the legal aspects and are very much about who you know. Especillay when livelihoods are involved.

Bearbonesnorm wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 11:54 am It's Ian's company who manage the forest Peter.

Ah !

Ugh. Awful news. Hopefully something else can be found.

Very substandard news and hope its all resolved to your and the other local satisfaction

That's crap news for sure. Really hope this doesn't get through planning.

Sad news.

Surely there must be some wildlife species established there that can't be disturbed? Anyone got any Great Crested Newts that need a new home...

Hoping this doesn't happen.
Happy to object when the planning application is published.

One thing I would say with regards to the valley is it's not an ideal site for wannabe rally drivers with no run off, when they get things wrong it could end up with a spectacular roll down to the valley floor.
Sweet lamb's topography and Carno's iirc, is completely different with space to get it sideways without serious repercussions when things get squirrelly.
Phil Price rally school near knighton is similar, with rolling hills rather than steep drops.

Bearbonesnorm wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 11:54 am It's Ian's company who manage the forest Peter.

Ian B.?[

quote=macinblack post_id=304867 time=1677789014 user_id=3679]
Surely there must be some wildlife species established there that can't be disturbed? Anyone got any Great Crested Newts that need a new home...
[/quote]
Worth looking into.
Worked for our surrounding, when some minor construction was planned which we (girlfriend and self) weren't too content with. Being the genius she is (and holding a mastee of laws), my girlfriend came up with the idea to point out the bats in our neighbourhood. Soon the building poles were removed.

Anyways... sorry to hear Stu. Same here, let us know how we can help.

Getting a screening opinion of whether an EIA is required is a first step. There are consultant's who do this :shudder: I should say I am one who works in this general sphere though it's not my specialty.

Screening determines whether the proposed scheme falls within the EIA Regulations. If it does you move onto "Scoping" which is an exercise to determine what aspects need to be considered in a subsequent assessment. Some fall away easily eg ground contamination (in this scenario) but others eg heritage / archaeology, noise, ecology, visual, amenity etc would probably need baseline studies to be conducted before you could determine whether the proposed development -might- have potentially significant impacts.

If the baseline studies and scoping determine they -might- have significant effects then their magnitude would need to be assessed. This would be undertaken and reported in an Enviromental Statement. Where potentially significant impacts are identified then mitigation measures could be necessary and these are imposed by planning conditions on the proposed dev.

Sorry to bore you all. EIA can be a tool for good, real environmental protection. I'd be remiss if I didn't also admit it can also be used to scupper developments. All these surveys and assessments, whether you think they are appropriate or not, can put real time and money burdens on everyone involved but particularly the applicant.

I can't recall the Regs or schedules precisely but IIRC schedule 1 (or A) specifies particular types of dev eg power stations, pipelines etc where EIA is mandatory. Sched 2 is a more general list of categories but I think somewhere therein there is a pretty broad category of "any potentially significant dev".

If their current operations or other similar development (either in use or type of location) have required EIA then that sets or shows precedent. Most local authorities have planning portals you can search online, tho it takes a little nouse to know what to look for.

Also, bit longer shot, but forestry commission usually have to run all devs thru their OPS1 process. This puts any plans through internal consultation for compatibility with their knowledge of ecology, heritage, operations, engineering constraints etc. Might be a shortcut to identifying potential issues. Getting it shared might be tough but could be subject to Freedom of Information regs.

Requests under FoI can put the fear up some organisations. Quite easy to fall foul of them.

Dave Barter wrote: ↑Wed Mar 01, 2023 9:13 pm Just let us know anything we can do to help Stu. I’m happy to glue myself to anything (apart from Taylor)

Oi

Sorry to bore you all. EIA can be a tool for good, real environmental protection. I'd be remiss if I didn't also admit it can also be used to scupper developments. All these surveys and assessments, whether you think they are appropriate or not, can put real time and money burdens on everyone involved but particularly the applicant.

If you know what you are doing the consultants reports can give the client the answer they want

As what everyone else has said Stu and Dee, happy to help in whatever capacity I can!

riderdown wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 12:15 am

Sorry to bore you all. EIA can be a tool for good, real environmental protection. I'd be remiss if I didn't also admit it can also be used to scupper developments. All these surveys and assessments, whether you think they are appropriate or not, can put real time and money burdens on everyone involved but particularly the applicant.

If you know what you are doing the consultants reports can give the client the answer they want

I agree. Like most assessments the outcome / conclusions / recommendations of documents produced on behalf of the client are usually influenced by the brief or client's intentions.

Of course i'd say, as a consultant, that professional integrity prevents or minimises this. Which is true, to some degree

In reality it's in the areas where subjective judgement is required that "getting the answer the client wants" can occur. Also, mitigation measures are all very well but there is often limited enforcement or checking once approved or the planning process has been completed.

In any event it has the potential to be useful in this instance if it applies (or just if the applicant has to show it does not).

Thanks for the encouragement and support all.

When we first moved here nearly 20 years ago, one of the old boys said to me "remember, you don't really own it, you're simply custodians of it" obviously he was quite right, so rest assured there'll be no backing down - a stance reinforced after the owner of the rally school said "the reason I'm drawn to this valley is because it's so beautiful". The irony contained in that statement is more than enough to fuel any fight

That's the attitude Stu! I haven't been to the Towers (yet) but it's clear you've established something pretty special down there. As is abundantly clear from the many previous posters' sentiments, we're all rooting for you and Dee and hope you emerge victorious against The Man.

Bad job this and no mistake. I’m sure the Spirit Horse group down in the valley floor won’t be happy and may have a word to say on their religious activities being negatively affected.

Bearbonesnorm wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 12:35 pm- a stance reinforced after the owner of the rally school said "the reason I'm drawn to this valley is because it's so beautiful". The irony contained in that statement is more than enough to fuel any fight

Reminds me of John Prescott's green belt quote: "It's a Labour achievement, and we mean to build on it"

And another quote: "Take paradise and put up a parking lot", J. Mitchell.

Escape Goat wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 8:31 am Sorry to hear this Stuart. If there’s an online petition to sign at any point, you have our support. I hope nothing comes of this and you can carry on living there.

Seconded.

Sh!t news Stu.

Following on from what was said about bats - as someone who's seen construction projects massively changed and indefinitely delayed due to flora and fauna I'd say an ecologist would be the first person to get on board. If they can demonstrate the presence of any protected species then you've got potential obstructions to getting approval for a change of use. There might be someone local who'd be willing to donate an afternoon of their time for a good cause. Failing that I'm sure we could get some cash together to pay to get one in and get a report written.

Damn, not good news but as others have said there's probably a long way to go yet. Following.. with fingers crossed for you both and the area.

If I remember correctly didn't you put up a picture of a Pine Martin in the yard last year ? It appears they and their habitat are supposed to be properly protected .
I realise that this is probably a stupid idea but isn't it possible for the wind farm and the rally school to coexist somehow .

I realise that this is probably a stupid idea but isn't it possible for the wind farm and the rally school to coexist somehow .

The issue will be the plethora of contractors who will need to access the site, wouldn't what to write the RAMS for access if there is an active rally Scholl on the same roads

So Pine Martins, Kites, Otters and Red Squirrels amongst other “protected species”
On the doorstep and a good possibility of becoming an AONB, getting an ecologist
And possibly an endangered species biologist in support could all be advantageous,
Also the new Environment act of 2021 lays down very stringent guidelines for land
Development ?

The issue will be the plethora of contractors who will need to access the site, wouldn't what to write the RAMS for access if there is an active rally Scholl on the same roads

Aye, shame the same concern isn't available for walkers, cyclists, horse riders etc.