WE now have large housing estates being proposed outside of the planned areas with developers using the 'five year land' supply rule to build where they want, not where we and our planners want.

This follows on from landowners wanting to make the best of the cash cow of substantial financial subsidies, paid for by the taxpayer, to build massive wind turbines here, there and everywhere in our otherwise

attractive rural environ­ment.

While the recent turbine appeal at Coleford was dismissed, we do have an unsightly ultra modern slab of a Tesco store being allowed at appeal against the best efforts of the council and concerned third parties.

We now have serious noises being made at district council as to how the 'large' expense of appeals can be reduced.

One obvious method would be to give in more readily to the developers who wish to spoil our environment.

The question is, therefore, how much do we value our environment and how much are we prepared to spend on defending it both in time and money.

A town councillor ventured the opinion that the Coleford Tesco appeal was a waste of taxpayers' money.

Yet a local survey clearly indicated that a massive majority did not want a store, let alone a bland modern box of a building in the town.

Would that have been the same comment had the appeal been won by the parties trying to protect the environment?

Was the Coleford turbine appeal a waste of money even though the environment was protected in the end?

Both for the turbine and the Tesco appeals, there were many third parties, ie concerned residents, who gave a massive amount of their time, all for free, because the environment is important to them. I doubt if they consider their efforts a waste.

We, the residents of this lovely area, must ask ourselves is the price of fighting to keep it lovely, too high or not?

I know where I stand and hope that the other 79,998 residents will make their feelings felt before our district council make an unfortunate decision.

– Walt Williams, Coleford.