All photographs on this website are shown by courtesy of Lachlan Fraser

4th April 2012: Dorset County Council has issued a revised Renewable Energy Strategy document - it can be accessed through the Dorset For You website. The 66 page document was issued on 30th March, with a response required by 2nd April - but the only response option indicated on the response form was 'to endorse the strategy'! This process is totally unacceptable - not only for us, as 'stakeholders', but for the Councillors who are meeting on 4th April to decide whether to adopt it. It is quite offensive to give so little time for a considered response. We (SOS and Save the Vale) put in a joint holding response, shown below:

            SAVE THE VALE ASSOCIATION (ALSO REPRESENTING SAVE OUR SILTON)

         BOURNEMOUTH, DORSET & POOLE RENEWABLE ENERGY STRATEGY TO 2020

Save the Vale note the efforts made by DEP and Councillor Cattaway to recognise concerns raised during the previous consultation period and the changes made to the strategy. While we recognise that some comments have been incorporated into the current revision, we hope and expect that there will be further opportunity to comment. Requiring responses with endorsement as the only option is unreasonable. We understand that the DEP perceive that targets have to be met and that future Government policy has to be considered. We also realise that as this policy will be ongoing, current Officers and Councillors may not be those implementing the strategy and therefore all wording and intent need to be very clear.

We note the intention to continue using Regen. Our concerns about Regen SW were made clear at a meeting with Miles Butler and their continued use to help produce this document undermines confidence in both methodology and delivery. 

Not having had time to fully consider and discuss the document with our members, SAVE THE VALE wishes the following initial concerns to be taken into account:

1. Non designated countryside, much of which lies in North Dorset, will be vulnerable to clusters of Wind Turbine developments due to the method used to arrive at the renewable energy targets.

2. Although mention is made in Para 1.5 of the unique environment of the area, local planning decisions will hold sway and the situation at Silton has shown the result of such an approach. A clearer landscape protection definition is required as part of this paper for use in Local Plans. 

3. The use of the on line statistic of 85% of responders supporting a target of 15% as quoted in Para 4.4. has been shown to be seriously misleading due to the small sample and devalues the paper by its continued use. For example, Christchurch which was largely unaffected by the projected on shore wind turbine figure was over represented in the sample whilst North and West Dorset which would be the most affected, were significantly under-represented. As pointed out previously, the wording was vague in relation to renewable energy eg ‘How strongly do you support or oppose the use of renewable energy?’ and unlikely to draw an opposing response.

4. Reference is made in Para 4.7 to the use of onshore wind as a resource and although consideration of the impact on landscape is made, there is no reference to wind speed. If the low figure that has been proved at Silton is used rather than the national average, then it throws even more doubt on the use of wind in Dorset. Regen has not made reference to this aspect of decision making. The result will be a false assumption of the total renewable energy available.


5. Targets are referred to although in Para 4.1 it is acknowledged that there are no longer top down regional targets. The figure of 15% is referred to many times even though it is acknowledged that half that target will be met by ‘national level’ contributions locally.

6. Figure 11 on page 32 of the Roadmap shows that projects both operational and in the pipeline will meet national targets but there is no mention of this in the paper.

7. It is difficult not to perceive the bias as towards wind when little effort has been made to explain why tidal energy has not been explored further.

8. In Priority Area three, reference is made to the training opportunities for councillors and officers, but it is not clear if these have taken place yet. If not, then both groups are being asked to endorse a strategy that they might not fully understand. It is also noted that only Cabinet councillors are asked to endorse the strategy whilst all Councillors will have to share the reactions to the strategy whether those are negative or positive once it is implemented.

CONCLUSION: although efforts have been made to assuage concerns that were viewed as somewhat ‘over the top’ at the time by the writers of the earlier drafts, there are still many points that cause concern and fail to give confidence that landscape impact has been fully considered and alternatives explored.
For this reason Save the Vale regretfully cannot endorse this Strategy, and requests that time is granted for a more considered response from us and other stakeholders.

-0-0-0-0-0-0-


SAVE THE VALE ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING

 MINUTES

SAVE THE VALE 2011 AGM
FRIDAY 17TH FEBRUARY 2012
ARTHUR MORISON HALL CUCKLINGTON

1. APOLOGIES: Apologies were received from Jenifer Bullock, Andrew Cranfield, Lilian Elson, John Payne.

2. RESIGNATIONS: There were no resignations

3. MINUTES: of the 2010 AGM were agreed.

4. MATTERS ARISING: Deputy Chairman, Brian Trueman reported on the outcome of the action taken on the issue of the field in the Village that had been bought and occupied by a local family. A consortium has now purchased the field from the previous owners and a satisfactory resolution has been reached.

5. COMMITTEE REPORTS: The Chairman repeated his warm welcome to members and commented on how much better it would be if we did not have to be here! Nine years ago it was thought the matter of Ecotricity’s plans for wind turbines would be resolved and the Association would not be necessary-not so. The Chairman summarised the action the committee members have taken in relation to Silton Wind Turbines, several smaller scale wind turbine applications, gypsies and travellers sites and the Dorset Renewable Energy Strategy. The Chairman warned of the almost certain rise in energy costs in future and the need for everyone to take all measures they can to save energy and use renewable resources where possible. The Chairman expressed his despair at the inability of Whitehall to provide and workable energy policy and the continuing dependence on wind. A recent Grid ‘Nism’ went unreported, this is caused when there is a severe shortage of power, the shortfall was 500MWs.
The Deputy Chairman reported on the Masha Estates development where SSDC has issued a Stop notice on activity on the site and ordered removal of equipment and accommodation, this has not yet been done. (Since the meeting it has been confirmed that the site has been cleared and the hedge will be reinstated. Thanks are due to Andrew Cranfield for his perseverance in this matter.) He also reported on the final stages of SOS group action against Ecotricity; the appeal starts on February 28th, if Ecotricity win this is it will be the end of the road as a Judicial Review is not financially viable. He spoke vehemently of the unfair loading of the planning system in favour of the developer and the decision making being carried out by an unelected official with no local knowledge.
Committee Member Lachlan Fraser spoke of the Gypsy and Traveller consultation the Dorset undertook; he attended the exhibition and on behalf of members responded to NDDC. The tone of the response was to acknowledge with reluctance that a settled community has advantages to both local society and law and order. The response included a recommendation that swift and timely eviction should take place when there is illegal occupation and that council tax should be paid by those on legal sites.
The Treasurer reported that the Association has a balance of £6857.42. In an attempt to reduce postal and copying costs there will be a drive on the
use of email and to this end members are being asked to provide details for future use.
Committee Member Dee Worlock reported on the visit to DCC with Chairman Campbell Dunford to follow up the Renewable Energy Strategy for Dorset, Bournemouth and Poole. The Association had expressed serious reservations about the promulgation, recommendations and conclusions of the report – concerns that included the lack of transparent independence of two members of the organisation used by DCC. Following a meeting with Miles Butler, and the consideration of other sources of concern, the Strategy has been revised and updated. This update includes the observation that there are sufficient renewable energy sources to meet ‘targets’ without the deployment of wind turbines throughout the county.

6. ELECTIONS: The resignation of Stephen Harrison was accepted with regret; Stephen was thanked for his contribution that has always been constructive and balanced. Two new committee members were elected: Peter Williams and Andrew Cranfield. The remaining Officers and Committee members were re-elected unanimously.

7. SMALLER WIND TURBINES: The Chairman asked members for their views on how the Committee should respond to applications for smaller wind turbines in our area, after some discussion it was agreed that each application would be considered on its merits and appropriate action taken. It was noted that there are up to 50 possible applications in the pipeline.

8. COMMUNICATIONS: as noted previously, there is a drive to get all members’ email addresses on file in order to save costs and facilitate speedy communication on urgent issues. (Members not present are asked to communicate this information to the Secretary).

9. ANY OTHER BUSINESS: a letter from Mrs L Elson was read to the members to note the appreciation of their efforts in objecting to applications for inappropriately sited wind turbines in the South Somerset area.

10. A MOTION FOR THE ASSOCIATION TO JOIN CPRE: a motion was put to the membership by Secretary Dee Worlock proposing that the Association joined CPRE as an organisation member to allow the Committee and membership to use the expertise of another Campaign group with a wide range of skills and contacts. This could help the Association in future challenges. The motion was seconded by Brian Trueman and accepted unanimously by the membership present.

11. CPRE SPEAKER: Richard Nicholls, Chairman of Dorset CPRE then spoke to the members about the work of CPRE nationally and in Dorset. Some of the areas covered by CPRE in the past year covered building on green field sites, urban sprawl around Bournemouth, DCC Renewable Energy Strategy - in which the organisation was instrumental in the publicising of the proposals for 180 turbines in the county. Also mentioned was quarrying on Portland, a drive on litter, fly tipping and a plan for a seminar on localism when the NNPF is finalised. Mr Nicholls also stressed the access that the organisation has nationally to Government departments through its Chief Executive Shaun Spiers. A very full and useful briefing for which many members expressed their thanks.

Dee Worlock February 2012
d.worlock@btinternet.com


-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-

See the 'News' page: An excellent article in Farmers Weekly of 25 February; also a full copy of the letter from 106 MPs demanding a review of the subsidies paid to wind power station developers.

Also on the same page, an excellent and well reasoned article by Christopher Booker in the Sunday Telegraph, 11th September, and a couple of other recent press articles: on Germany's decision to phase out nuclear power, and on the so-called 'Localism' bill.

The Save the Vale Association is a group of mainly local residents concerned to preserve the nature of the Blackmore Vale. We are not against all development - clearly the country must change to reflect the changing nature of society. But we believe that any development should be in sympathy with the area, and there have been several inappropriate planning applications which we have opposed.

The Association was set up in 2002 to oppose an application by Ecotricity for two 120m high wind turbines in Cucklington. This was turned down by South Somerset District Council. Ecotricity has since put in two further planning applications, first for six turbines near Silton and then for four on the same site. Both have been unanimously rejected by North Dorset District Council Development Control Committee, but the developer has the right to appeal this decision, and we are currently waiting to see if he does so. A separate action group, Save our Silton, was set up specifically to oppose these applications, which are outside the Blackmore Vale, but we are supporting their case. Turbines of the size proposed would be totally out of scale and character for this tranquil, rural site, which supports a number of tourist businesses.

We are always pleased to have new members who share our concern. If you are interested in joining, the rules of the Association and an application form are shown on the next page.

Stoke Trister in the Blackmore Vale 

We are currently engaged on a number of issues:

  • Opposition to the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Renewable Energy Strategy paper. Dorset County Council is currently processing a document setting out the way in which it could 'do its bit' to meet the UK's binding but unrealistic obligation on renewable energy. It considers a number of scenarios, the median of which envisages 180 Wind Turbines in the area. Although the County Council claims that this is by no means a binding strategy, we are greatly concerned that, if the paper is accepted as a working document by the Councils, it will inevitably influence planning officers in future decisions. The process so far has been conducted with very little public participation, and with no press coverage. We aim to change both of these. The consultation period is open until the end of September, and we are urging members and anyone interested in 'saving the Vale' to write to Dorset County Council.

Read an excellent article by Simon Jenkins on the 'localism bill' - go to the 'news' page.

There is also a link there to the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Renewable Energy Strategy paper, which the Council now tells us isn't really a strategy! What is it then?

There is also a copy of a letter sent by StV to Dorset County Council.

  • Assisting the Save Our Silton organisation, set up specifically to oppose an application for four 120m high wind turbines near Silton, in a gloriously rural and peaceful area where tourism and agriculture are the main occupations. The first of these would certainly be devastated if the application goes ahead. It has twice been refused, unanimously, by North Dorset District Council, but the developer, Ecotricity, is now considering whether to appeal to a Government inspector. Note that, had the application been accepted by the Council, SOS would NOT have had a right of appeal! For further details on this, see the Save Our Silton website (www.saveoursilton.org)
  • Helping to oppose an application for a fish farm in a totally unsuitable field between Wincanton and Buckhorn Weston. As the area has no running water and is in an area subject to frequent flooding, we believe that this is not a serious application, but is a cover for other intentions. A STOP ORDER is currently in force.

A peaceful footpath deep in the Vale

A typical scene in Hardy country