Objection to Planning Application 24/00665/FUL
Tips for writing your objection
- Draft your comments in a word document first so that you can copy and paste directly into the portal (it only gives you less than 2 minutes to complete your comment)
- Keep to facts and questions
- Feel free to focus more fully on just one or two aspects that mean something to you
- End with a personal note explaining how you currently use the forest, or how you might be impacted
- It’s always helpful to refer, where possible, to supporting evidence: reports, research and links to organisations
Some points to consider for your comments:
1. Economic Benefit – the proposed site is within half a mile of Darwin Forest, an incredibly similar business, which is well established and locally owned. Darwin Forest will be directly and adversely affected by the plan.
Darwin Forest’s official letter of objections references a predicted downturn in occupancy of up to 50%, resulting in a net negative impact on employment. Darwin Forest currently employs 187 people. An additional ecotourism site within half a mile of an existing one makes no economic sense. Felling more than 1,300 trees to construct a new site that threatens the business and jobs of an existing site owned by a local family can only be read as putting the prospect of profit ahead of local people.
2. Carbon Loss – the felling of the amount of trees (looking to be near to 1,300 trees) over the area proposed will set back Derbyshire County Council’s progress towards net zero. An independent audit should be undertaken to establish the future loss of carbon capture from the felled area, as well as the loss of carbon from the disrupted soil of the site. Even if saplings are planted in the place of matured trees, it would take decades to reach the same level of carbon capture as is currently in place.
Derbyshire County Council – Our journey to net zero carbon >
3. Flood Risk – Throughout much of the year, there is standing water at Farley Moor. Trees provide the most effective flood prevention by slowing and absorbing rainwater and preventing erosion.
It is important to recognise the economic impact of potential future flood damage. These costs will have to be covered by the council. There are also additional costs, such as reworking the flood plan and preventative measures to mitigate additional flooding. Farley Moor sits above Matlock and the water table is already saturated. Concreting over woodland will displace much of this resource and water will drain into the valley towards Matlock and Darley Dale.
For more information visit the Clean Rivers Trust >
4. Biodiversity – the extensive felling of trees over the last 12 months (started during the nesting season) has already had a significant impact on the number and variety of birds and insects, which include some rare species. Further destruction and disturbance of the habitat is likely to exacerbate this loss of biodiversity. An independent biodiversity survey should be required to determine the full extent of biodiversity and species loss. Under the current plans up to around 1,300 trees are due to be felled. It is also worth mentioning that even when saplings are planted in the place of mature trees, they do not directly replace or replenish the pre-existing biodiversity. Replacement trees often produce monoculture forests. This is the opposite of biodiversity.
Note: Forest Holidays’ own application forecasts an 8% biodiversity gain when the legal requirement is 10%. Derbyshire Wildlife Trust are opposed to the development.
5. Public Access – whilst the developer claims continued public access to the forest, the recent felling of trees has seen no regard for the repair and restoration of the many and ancient footpaths that cross the sites. Restoring a footpath that goes through secluded and quiet wild woodland to one that crosses a car park is not comparable. There are easier access points around Darwin Forest for mobility impaired visitors. For many local dog walkers, Farley Moor is one of the very few local sites where dogs can safely run off lead without the danger of traffic. This would completely disappear with the proposed development.
6. Wildness & Wellbeing – it is well known that forests and wild spaces benefit mental health. At present, the site is walked and cycled by many locals and visitors for a variety of reasons, mental health being one of these. With mental health services offered by Derbyshire County Council under severe pressure, the accessibility of wild, woodland areas is an indispensable resource that must not be lost.
Derbyshire County Council’s own suicide prevention and wellbing initiative promotes walking and engagement in nature. Whilst this project is presented as providing tourists with the opportunity to enjoy nature, the reality is that it would entail the destruction of woodland to construct multiple buildings and a car park. This cannot, in reality, enhance anyone’s experience of nature.
Derbyshire Mental Health & Suicide Prevention on Facebook >
7. Transport & Infrastructure – the development plan includes the construction of a car park for 249 cars. The increased volume of traffic will cause air pollution and further congestion in Matlock. Much of the woodland’s rare lichens made a return during lockdown. These lichens are very sensitive to pollution and are part of the makeup of the biodiversity of the natural surroundings. The roads around this area, especially Farley Lane, are often subject to flooding and icy conditions. There is an existing traffic and road quality issue in Matlock (locally referred to as “Grid-lock”): the infrastructure of the surrounding area cannot sustain this development.
8. Lack of Taxable Economic Benefit – the application for the development, although under the name Forest Holidays, is owned by Sykes Holiday Cottages (“Sykes”), a company backed by Vitruvian Partners. Virtuvian Partners are a private offshore equity company. Not only will any profits not be made locally, any taxes are unlikely to benefit the UK economy.
Forest Holidays was created in the 1960s by the Forestry Commission, which still holds a 14% share in the company. In December 2017, a company called Phoenix Equity acquired 42% of Forest Holidays for £110m. The government has granted a private company exclusive access to exploit a public land bank. There will be no competitors, no rival bidders and no limit to its growth. The Forestry Commission denies that it is engaged in privatisation, despite actually holding shares in the relevant private company.
Will we stand by and watch the privatisation of our forests? | Simon Jenkins | The Guardian >
9. FSC certification – as a question as to whether the timber felled can be counted as sustainable under the guidelines of FSC when it cannot be replaced like for like and in the same way. If not this amounts to deforestation. (https://uk.fsc.org/what-is-fsc/fsc-certified-forests). The saplings that have been planted in the place of felled mature trees are of one species. This creation of monoculture forests is to the detriment of our indigenous woodland.
If you come across any other supporting information or links please post them on the Facebook page – Save Farley Moor – or send them to savefarleymoor@gmail.com
