IT?WAS interesting to read the views of Cllr Morgan on the proposed Cinderford development and also see the prominence given to it by the Review newspaper.

I attended the public examination of the Forest of Dean Core Strategy and the Cinderford Area Acton Plan on two days and I can report that neither Cllr Morgan nor any reporter from the Review was present on those days. The Inspector made a point each morning of checking whether any representative of the Press was present and there was a general feeling of embarrassment and disappointment in the room when it was discovered that they were not. If someone from the Review had attended then they could have provided the public with a fair and timely picture of the proceedings rather than the unfortunate article that appeared last week.

During my two days at the hearing the number of people speaking against the proposed Cinderford scheme was far greater than those speaking in favour. As the hearing progressed it became apparent that the work done by the Forest of Dean District Council to assess the wildlife importance of the site had been quite inadequate and as a result their proposed measures to protect the wildlife were also considered by many attendees to be inadequate, especially for the bats. In my opinion the importance of this land for wildlife has not been properly presented to the public, even using the knowledge which the council already had.

As the land which has been exploited in the past gradually reverts to more natural habitat then the wildlife has returned. It is now the home of many species which are considered to be of special conservation importance. These include four species of butterfly, four species of reptile (all breeding here), great crested newt and lesser horseshoe bat (the latter two having European special protection.) Of course there are many more species of wildlife than this, a few of which will probably remain unknown until more survey work is carried out.

Cllr Morgan suggests that the Forest as a whole will gain from this development. I would suggest that a relatively few people with a vested interest may benefit greatly but the Forest itself cannot possibly gain from having a new development sprawling nearly two km into its interior. Once the road is built there will be yet more pressure to develop along it. Is the Forest really going to gain by moving the college from an existing site which could almost certainly be refurbished to one being built on un-developed Forest land?

I suggest that people can decide for themselves whether they will prefer to see a piece of forest being so successfully re-claimed by nature or a new road with sprawling development along it.

– David Dewsbury.