Separate names with a comma.
Welcome to Stafford Forum. Please log-in or sign-up and start posting!
Discussion in 'Stafford Chat' started by Gareth, Feb 15, 2016.
It's never about the right thing
It's about the right thing for the few
Doesn't that show that the rugby club will be on some of the yellowy orange bit?
I am not really sure we have a lot of Curlew in the area.
It is not simply a case of throwing back a few coins. This is providing additional wetland that the site is special for. It is a genuine attempt to create an improved environment. Lets not forget the majority of the site will still be grass. There will be increased activity on the site but this is not tarmac over the entire site. We all seek to address the challenges of population growth and the need to develop the much called for additional housing in the UK. This development ensures the majority of this site will remain grass for ever.
We do get Curlew, mostly on migration.
Migration should probably be in the Leave or Remain thread.....
"Between 1994 and 2006, there was a 37% reduction in the number of breeding curlew in the UK, with declines even higher in certain regions. This significant decline is mirrored by many of our wading birds which have suffered immensely from changing agricultural practices, land drainage and development. The Wildlife Trusts are working with farmers and landowners to promote wildlife-friendly practices. We are working towards a 'Living Landscape': a network of habitats and wildlife corridors across town and country which are good for both wildlife and people. You can support this greener vision for the future by joining your local Wildlife Trust."
I guess it is true to say that any time you build anything you take space that something uses. All suggestions to move to a greenfield site elsewhere are equally going to have the effect of building on something. I have seen suggestions to build new changing rooms and additional parking at the current site to have 2 sets of buildings. These would have to go on an area which is currently hedges and adjacent to a well used water culvert. Parking would be still across a road which has already seen at least one child struck by a car. Or go out of town by miles as some suggest and generate thousands of additional car journeys, increased potential for accidents and reduced ability to access by cycling or public transport. Others suggest using other facilities in town - there is no capacity anywhere on additional facilities and national planning does not allow reductions in playing fields so new ones need to be built anyway.
I am not suggesting this is not a complex issue but it is not as one dimensional as some seem to suggest. A key priority must be surely to provide accessible quality sporting and community facilities that support participation in Sport for youngsters, in a location that is in a safe and accessible
Perhaps, when considering this planning application, Stafford Borough Council should "aim to prevent harm to biodiversity, through considering alternative development sites" After all it is in their own Biodiversity Strategy.
Interesting that the species map on the wildlife trust website link provided does not indicate Curlew in the area. Nor does Doxey Marshes Nature Reserve site list as a key species. "The reserve is designated a Site of Special Scientific Interest for its nationally important populations of Lapwing, Snipe and Redshank"
However it is not my aim to get into a debate on what is precisely where but to highlight this is not a one dimensional question.
Perhaps the idea is to expand that range - and quite a lot of the 200 other species recorded are also not mentioned in the rather brief notes on Doxey Marsh.
There you go: http://www.bto.org/about-birds/bird-of-month/curlew
The Midlands is becoming an increasingly important migration stopover and wintering area for Curlews.
On the subject of going miles out of town and increasing car journeys / not being able cycle, do the majority of players come from south of the town center? Even if they do I cycle half way across Stafford daily to work, on nice days across some really picturesque marshland!
Still not ruling out the soon to be mothballed beaconside site to me, and with all the new homes up their including mod you may up your membership.
Are you the new voice of the council, MAL? You're contradicting yourself, so it seems likely. Let's face it, the only reason this application was ever considered is because Lord Sta££ord wants to get richer.
I'm now pointing at a power point projection which I have beamed into the sky above Doxey
For those of you unable to get FM radio waves I would advise you get a colander and line it with tin foil before placing on your head
When you are all ready could somebody say OI!
It lasts approx 15 minutes
I don't like this application. I think the reasons for siting it here are unsound. I think there has not been transparency regarding the involvement of a rugby club director and his role at the council and their support for this. And yes - Lord Staffords interests seem to be the real interest.
BUT I think it is pathetic when someone comes on to the forum, puts an alternative view, and is then accused of being the new voice of the council.
It's an important issue. Make sure sensible objections are made as part of the planning application. BUT PPPPPP grow up and change your tune because it detracts from the imporant stuff.
I won't elaborate too much on the points that @The Hawk has already, excellently, made, but just to reiterate Natural England's actual position -
It seems that both you and the case officer for this application have made the same mistake of misreading 'strong' as 'scant'.
Some of us have known from the start that this is a done deal
However nature has always found a way to correct a wrong
What is not known is how is this correction will occur
Probably flooding !
OK, so in your first para you agree with everything I said, but you still think it's pathetic to have a harmless dig at someone who suddenly pops up here making blinkered comments in favour of the council and rugby club? (Regards to MAL.)
As the planners are ignoring completely the local wildlife trust they are in fact directly going against Natural England's position, to use them as backup is as hilarious as it is obvious they couldn't give a monkeys.
We all know, as Mr Marwood said, that it is a done deal. Lord Stafford will get what he wants because he knows how to convince the decision makers to make the decisions he wants them to make, irrespective of facts (but I suspect not figures £). They should at least attempt to lie convincingly though and pretend to give a shit, they currently give the impression that they've been paid off and don't care that we know it.
Pppp you have a so called harmless dig at everyone you don't agree and accuse them of been on council pay roll or shady and corrupt.
I don't agree with Mal but he/ she is clearly rugby club related or a fan. So just change the tune and if you have something constructive to add/ debate or even humorous then great. But please give the everyone is the take slant a bit of a rest eh!!!!
Back on topic, boooooo for rugby club and planners. This is just a total mess there are far better places for it. In 50 years with developers and planners there will be no doxey marshes.
But consider this site had been selected by not a big faceless out of town developer, but by people from stafford. We all have a roll to play in ensuring green space and that is what makes me angry. Local people should be aware and more considerate