cpre oxfordshire voice

Spring 2013

OxfOrdshire vOicewww.cpreoxon.org.uk

Save Port MeadowSupport our campaign

Vale of the White HorseRural character severely threatened

Empty homesThe situation in Oxfordshire

2 CPRE OxfORdshiRE vOiCE spring 2013

OxfOrdshire

vOiceSpring 2013

Features

3 Port Meadow brutalised

4 Oxford City: deal or no deal

5 shedding light on solar farms

6 Rural vale threatened

7 Getting the house in order

8 Ashes to ashes

DIRECTORY

views expressed in the voice are not necessarily those of CPRE Oxfordshire, which welcomes independent comment.

Editor: Jane Tomlinson Cover photo: Ugly buildings now loom at the edge of Port Meadow. Photo: Jane Tomlinson

Articles, letters, comments and suggestions for articles are welcome. Please contact the Branch Office below.

Published May 2013

District ChairmenCPRE Oxfordshire BranchBrian Wood 01869 337904 [email protected]: Chris hone 01295 265379Bicester: Bruce Tremayne 01865 331289 [email protected] & Mapledurham: Judith Crockett 01491 612801. [email protected]: sietske Boeles 01865 728153 [email protected] & Bullingdon: Michael Tyce 01844 339274 [email protected] of White Horse: Peter Collins st Edmund hall, Oxford Ox1 4ARWallingford: Arnold Grayson 01491 837193 [email protected] Oxfordshire: Gareth hammond 01993 881016 gareth.hammond@talktalk

BRanCH OffICECPRE Oxfordshire, Unit 1, London Road, Wheatley, Oxford, Ox33 1Jh (Registered office)T: 01865 874780 E: [email protected]

www.cpreoxon.org.uk

follow us on Twitter @CPREOxfordshire

and like us on www.facebook.com/CPREOxfordshire

CPRE Oxfordshire is registered in England as Charity No.1093081 and Company No. 4443278.

Chairman’s voiceWhen the government decided that centralised regional planning was not working because not enough

houses were being built, we welcomed the principle that decisions would be taken locally. We thought we could work with the second version of the National Planning Policy framework (NPPf), because it was not as awful as the first. But we said we would have to see how it worked out in practice.

Now, the government, in its quest to build houses at any cost, is interfering in the planning process to such an extent that local needs and priorities are being disregarded. Only 161 out of 336 local authorities have adopted local plans, and many of these do not have the five-year land supply for housing demanded by the NPPf. This enables the planning inspectorate to ride roughshod over local wishes by approving applications on greenfield land.

The NPPf came into full force at the end of March, and developers and

owners are falling over themselves to take advantage of this situation and get planning applications in.

We are very concerned that deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg has announced that Oxford will be funded under the second wave of City deals. This appears to be a major expansion of the City without any consultation, by an unelected quango.

CPRE Oxfordshire has taken the first step towards a legal challenge against the planning permission allowing the construction of five-storey University accommodation blocks on land overlooking Port Meadow in Oxford.

Andy Boddington, who you may remember as our Campaign Manager, and who now writes an e-bulletin for CPRE south East says: “The planning system is rapidly becoming dysfunctional and we may well have to have recourse to the courts more often.” Our professional staff team, led by director helen Marshall, is not afraid to face head-on some of the greatest challenges i can recall in my time with CPRE.

Brian Wood Chairman, CPRE Oxfordshire

Parish paths need your helpsome years ago a small number of members became concerned about the state of the footpaths in the county. They surveyed as many as they could and reported their findings to the County Council where they found a need for waymarkers, for stiles to be repaired, vegetation cut back and for any ‘lost’ footpaths to be reinstated. subsequently, the County Council set up a Countryside services Unit responsible for maintaining footpaths and other rights of way; in no small part due to the dedicated work of these active members.

The county’s rights of way are now well cared for by the current Countryside

Access Team. But with cutbacks in the council’s budget it will be increasingly difficult to maintain the current standards. There is a need for the work of the team to be supplemented by local people willing to help look after the rights of way in their parish: to act as the eyes and ears in their parish and annually walk their footpaths and report any problems they find.

TaKE aCTIOn If the idea of helping out in this way appeals to you and you would like to know more, please contact Gordon Garraway, CPRE Oxfordshire’s consultant on rights of way on 01235 522958 or email [email protected]

Join the debate. Join the campaign. Join CPRE 3

GEORGE TOMLiN

sON

CPRE seeks Judicial Review on Port Meadow – please help!

Over the last few months, those familiar with the beautiful and historic landscape of Port Meadow have watched in shock and horror as one of the ugliest and most appalling developments the City has even seen has gradually risen up to dominate the skyline.

Oxford University’s new accommodation blocks on Roger dudman Way are on the very edge of Port Meadow. five storeys high, with no redeeming architectural features, they block the ancient views of the City and make a harsh and intrusive impact on the meadow itself.

Purpose-built student accommodation can of course be a positive step, taking the pressure off the private rental market, and CPRE had no objection to the initial plans for three-storey blocks. however, the size and scale of the current buildings is completely inappropriate. it is ironic that it comes at a time when Oxford Brookes University has just announced significant cuts in staff hours due to the large number of empty student rooms.

At first, CPRE and others questioned the consultation process that had allowed this planning permission to go through

unchallenged. But as we have dug deeper, the facts have become more and more concerning.

A freedom of information request has revealed that the City ignored a report by its own heritage Officer, Nick Worledge, which said there was ‘no justification’ for the harm that would be caused by this development.

After the report, the University lowered the development by just four feet! This was apparently sufficient justification for the City planners not to share the heritage Officer’s report with the councillors asked to vote through the application.

in addition, mitigation plans include the planting of inappropriate species on Port Meadow and were drawn up without proper consultation.

CPRE Oxfordshire’s Chairman Brian Wood said: “We have given the University every opportunity to re-consider and voluntarily lower the height of the buildings by two storeys. We have given the City Council every opportunity to use their powers to suspend or revoke the planning permission whilst an Environmental impact Assessment is considered. Neither institution seems willing to take any responsibility for this disgraceful situation. The approach seems to be to keep stalling until the building is completed and presented to local people as a fait accompli.

“That is just not good enough for a City that should be leading the way on protecting and enhancing its environmental heritage rather than giving the world the impression we don’t care.

“Legal advice we have received suggests that, however unintentionally, City Council planners may have acted unlawfully at key moments in this planning process. With reluctance, CPRE Oxfordshire has therefore instructed a solicitor to seek a Judicial Review of the planning decision on our behalf.”

As a charity with limited resources, taking on two such major institutions as the City Council and the University will not be easy. Together with the Campaign to save Port Meadow community group, CPRE Oxfordshire is launching a fundraising appeal to help cover the legal costs involved in the campaign.

CPRE Oxfordshire director helen Marshall said: “Our message to the people of Oxfordshire is that it is not too late. if you feel passionately, like we do, that Port Meadow should be protected for future generations, please support our fundraising appeal and add your voice to the campaign.”

“…a Stalinist row of graduate accommodation blocks along

the edge of Port Meadow, looming arrogantly above its tree-

line, rudely hogging the views towards the dreaming spires.

I have watched it rise for months in horror and disbelief.”Diarmaid McCulloch, Professor of the History of the Church at Oxford University The Times, 25 March 2013

TaKE aCTIOn!Please help us save Port Meadow. Make a donation:

OnlInE www.justgiving.com/portmeadow

BY TExT PTMW99 £10 to 70070 to give £10

OR uSE THE EnClOSED fORM if no form, call 01865 874780


The other district councils would be represented on the board, but are likely to be outnumbered. We have asked repeatedly about whether a majority decision of the board will be carried, even if a local district is opposed, but there is no clear written ministerial or other guidance on this.

Large scale development with no public consultationThe deal mentions considerable development which is not covered in any district council development plans, such as extension of science parks and another 8,000 houses. if decisions on this are made by the City deal Board, what say will the public get?

Oxford Green BeltMuch of the proposed City deal area is Oxford Green Belt, and yet this is not mentioned once within the document!

Oxford Northern GatewayThe deal proposes introducing ‘simplified planning’ processes for the Northern Gateway. This would be of huge concern to the surrounding community, especially given the threat to the integrity of Port Meadow, a site of special nature conservation.

an alTERnaTIVE

One possible alternative is to reinstate the previous County structure Plan arrangement which was discontinued to make way for the now defunct south East Plan. This involved

Oxfordshire County Council setting the development parameters within which district and City Councils worked. This was not only democratic but covered all, not just part, of the County and was therefore a more complete plan. surely this would be a more democratic way of achieving the City deal objectives?

CPRE Oxfordshire director helen Marshall says: “We have written to deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg asking for answers to our concerns. We fear that this is just a way of pushing through development that has not been accepted as part of normal, democratic planning applications.”

Plans for an Oxford City Deal hold the lure of money for infrastructure and development, but at what cost to the Green Belt and local democracy?

City deals are a Government initiative to provide funds and enhanced decision-making powers to an area in return for commitments to development. Oxford City led a consortium of Oxfordshire County and district councils and other organisations to submit an Oxford City deal for consideration. in february 2013, deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg approved the outline bid which is now subject to more detailed negotiations before final agreement.

The proposed deal wants to create a ‘science and knowledge-based economy’. it covers Oxford and the surrounding area as far out as Bicester and harwell, including the Oxford Green Belt and Port Meadow. The Oxford City deal was prepared behind closed doors with no public involvement. CPRE campaigners were even told that information on the deal did not exist, just a couple of weeks before the bid was submitted!

WHaT WORRIES uS

An unelected quangoThe deal would be implemented by an unelected board, set to be dominated by City players including the City Council and the University, both of which are major landowners.

Oxford City: deal or no deal?JAN

E TOMLiN

sON

TaKE aCTIOn!

Please ask Cities Minister Greg Clark, your district and county councillors and your MP (for contact details see www.theyworkforyou.com or contact CPRE Oxfordshire):

• Whatsaywillthepublichavein any developments proposed under the Oxford City deal?

• Willissuesbedecidedbyamajority vote of the Board even if the relevant Local Authority is strongly opposed?

• WhyisthemodeloftheCountrystructure Plan not being used?

for more information see: http://bit.ly/XQv1X6


While solar panels are less visually intrusive than wind turbines, being only a few feet off the ground, they are extremely inefficient, especially in our climate and at our latitude. As a result, huge areas have to be covered with panels to generate any significant amount of energy. Unless very sensitively positioned these are an unacceptable blight on the landscape. increasingly people are realising that it is a very inefficient use of precious land which, even if not high agricultural quality, would probably still be better used for crops or recreation or left fallow as a wildlife habitat.

Like wind energy schemes, solar farms require huge subsidies, paid for by taxpayers, to make them attractive to developers. This is done by the Government forcing power suppliers to use an ever increasing percentage of very expensive renewable electricity, or pay a fine if they fail to do so. Currently wind energy is costing all of us twice as much per unit as ordinary electricity – and solar energy has to be subsidised twice as much as wind.

A recent application for a solar farm in Oxfordshire (subsequently withdrawn) would have covered 74.5 hectares (180 acres) of agricultural land in the Green Belt. There would have been 50,668 panels producing about 9.5 million kw/hours. Renewable energy promoters like to measure output as ‘homes powered’, so given that the average home uses 4,500 kw/hours a year, the solar farm output

meters. Put this into the calculations and you find that we’d need to cover 78,000 acres – 12% of the total area of Oxfordshire – with Pv solar panels.

so it’s not just the economic cost, the environmental cost of solar farms is considerable; it would mean losing vast areas of countryside under row upon row of shiny glazed panels, for very little return.

The new National Planning Policy framework is pro-development and pro-renewable energy. But it also recognises the importance of protecting the countryside and the need for the benefits of development to be weighed against environmental harm. it says: “The fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open. When located in the Green Belt, elements of many renewable energy projects will comprise inappropriate development. developers will need to demonstrate very special circumstances if projects are to proceed. such very special circumstances may include the wider environmental benefits associated with increased production of energy from renewable sources”.

Renewable energy is good in principle, but not at any cost to the countryside and the amenity of its residents. Our position is to support applications for commercial arrays of solar panels only in non-prominent locations on existing structures.

faCTSl A solar Pv panel converts the sun’s

radiation into electricity although inefficiently even in full sunshine.

l A panel’s rated output assumes full mid-day sunlight on the equator. Oxfordshire gets much less than that. (solarelectricityhandbook.com/solar-irradiance.html)

l solar panels performance in summer, when the sun is in our hemisphere, is usually reasonable, but its falls away to insignificance in winter and to nothing at night.

l Electricity can only be used when it is generated, it cannot be stored, so to keep the lights on, back-up from ‘normal’ (usually gas-fired) power stations is required. These become less efficient as they stand-by when renewables are on stream, thus increasing their cost too.

Shedding light on solar farmsby Michael Tyce, Chair of CPRE ThameThe sight of photovoltaic (PV) panels on the rooftops of houses is now commonplace. And for individual, domestic users they may make good sense because of enormous subsidies available, which the rest of us pay through our electricity bills. It’s the same with industrial scale solar farms. They create very significant environmental and amenity damage for meagre returns.

It is true that the underlying power for

solar, the sun, is free, and the same goes for wind.

But this is true of all fuels. The cost lies in extracting and converting them, and

the cost for solar is very high indeed.

would have been able to power 2,000 homes, but not in winter or at night. This equates to a tenth of an acre of solar panels per household. There are 260,000 homes in Oxfordshire so providing them all with solar power would require 26,000 acres of countryside to be covered with solar panels.

But two thirds of the electricity we use – for travel, street lights, shops, offices and industry – does not go through domestic

JANE TOM

LiNsON



You can drive at 60mph on the lane between Cassington and Bladon

Rural communities in the Vale of White Horse District are trying to fight off huge numbers of inappropriate planning applications as developers take advantage of gaps in the local planning system.

The vale district Council is the unenviable position of having no up-to-date Local Plan and an inadequate five-year housing supply. This means many of the normal restrictions are overruled, allowing through developments that would not normally be considered.

The vale of White horse district Council has recently been consulting on its draft Local Plan which will guide development in the area through until 2029.

Peter Collins, Chairman of CPRE vale of White horse district, said: “in 2011, there were 50,000 homes in the district. The draft Plan allows for 13,294 new houses in the vale between now and 2029. This is an increase of more than a quarter. You simply can’t cater for that sort of growth without seriously threatening the rural nature of the vale.”

We are particularly concerned about:

• Lackofappropriatesupportinginfrastructure huge increases are planned to didcot, Milton, sutton Courtenay and Wantage and Grove,

without sufficient promise of decent highways, schools or other infrastructure. This will have a knock-on effect everywhere, particularly in the rural villages.

• Transport & highways The draft Plan focuses on the need for improvements to the A34. however, it makes little to no mention of the A420 or the A338, both of which will bear the brunt of increased traffic.

• The impact on small villages The draft Plan refers to ‘supporting modest growth in the smaller villages to help meet local needs and to improve their sustainability’. What, we wonder, is ‘modest’ growth? how will the ‘needs’ of smaller villages be assessed? how appropriate would it be, as the Plan suggests, to locate residential care and nursing homes in smaller communities?

CPRE Oxfordshire has been working closely with the small village Alliance, a new network representing many of the vale’s smaller villages, and we have held public meetings to share information across parishes and to raise these concerns.

helen Marshall, CPRE Oxfordshire director, said: “it will probably be another year before the Local Plan is adopted and we can get back to plan-led development rather than a developers’ charter. Meanwhile we are doing our best, with limited resources, to advise and support rural communities in the vale that are fighting to protect their identities and in some cases, even their very existence.”

Mapping the threat

Rural vale under threatGreat Coxwell, faringdonThe tiny and ancient village of Great Coxwell (population fewer than 300) has survived Norman Conquest, the Reformation and the plague and is now threatened with another great battle. It is facing two planning applications for 600 houses. If these developments go ahead, it would effectively join the village to nearby Faringdon, and its unique character would be lost.

With support from the Western vale villages Consortium, CPRE Oxfordshire’s PR manager Jane Tomlinson has created a Google map showing all the applications for four houses or more that have been submitted to the vale over the last year, along with the strategic development sites proposed in the draft Local Plan.

See more at http://bit.ly/12kc3rW

Take action!

Lookoutforandrespondtothesecond draft of the Vale of White HorseDistrictLocalPlan,dueoutfor consultation later this summer. Please support our work to help protect the rural character of the Vale. Find out how to volunteer, make a donation or, if you’re not yet a member, please join us and add your voice to the organisation that stands up for the countryside. Visit www.cpreoxon.org.uk/join-us or phone 01865 874780.

JAN

E TO

MLi

NsO

N


We often hear about the frenzy to build new homes in Oxfordshire. But what about the thousands of houses standing empty?

There are many reasons why a house may stand empty. some have fallen into disrepair. Many are privately owned or have been inherited. The owner may lack the cash or the skills to repair and manage the property. Many new developments have high vacancy rates, and their investor-owners are waiting for rental and market prices to rise. some belong to cash-strapped councils, or businesses who struggle with time and resources to refurbish after tenants move out.

in a crowded land like England with a growing population, the pressure for homes is intense. But the housing market is stagnant, and there is little money available for borrowing. so each house that stands vacant and unused for long periods is a wasted resource. so isn’t it time we did the logical thing first: make the best of what we already have of our county’s empty housing stock?

Getting accurate figures on the number of empty homes is tricky. There are no central records, and for councils that do collect data, definitions of an empty home vary, as do the dates of collection of figures. in 2012, Empty homes (www.

emptyhomes.com) estimated there were 6,414 vacant houses in Oxfordshire (Cherwell 1,508; Oxford City 1,290; south Oxfordshire 1,359; vale of White horse 1,106; and West Oxfordshire 1,115). We tried to collect figures from district councils. Cherwell said it had 567 and Oxford City 455. And vale of the White horse had no data at all. These numbers differ from Empty homes’ figures because different parameters are used to collect data.

so the picture is far from clear. But let’s not get bogged down with numbers. Even if there were only 500 empty homes in the whole of Oxfordshire, that’s perhaps 2,000 people off the housing list and into their own home at last. That’s 500 fewer new houses that need to be built and acres of land saved from the bulldozer.

The New homes Bonus, announced by the Government in december 2012, is a cash payout of more than £660million to councils in England to increase the number of available homes. This includes funding to help councils bring thousands of long-term empty properties back into use. Although it’s still too early to assess the impact of this, it’s a great start and long overdue.

Until very recently property owners could get reductions in the council tax payable on an empty home. This madness

effectively acted as an incentive for keeping properties vacant. Changes to council tax rules which came into effect last month in The Local Government finance Act 2012, allow councils to charge up to 100% tax on a property depending on circumstances at the council’s discretion. so for example, a property being refurbished ready for occupancy may still get a substantial discount.

The changes also allow local authorities to set an empty homes premium for long-term empty properties of up to 150% of the normal rate of tax. This is new and very welcome as it should encourage landlords to do the right thing with their property.

We may not know precisely how many homes stand empty in Oxfordshire but the fact is that there are hundreds, and probably thousands. Getting empty houses occupied won’t, on its own, provide all of the homes we need. But surely it’s the first thing we should do before we start building on green fields?

CPRE Oxfordshire thanks volunteer Sharon Creese for her help researching empty homes.*Sources available

Getting the house in orderhE

LEN

MAR

shAL

L


FACTS l The Government reports that

there are more than 700,000 empty homes in England, 270,000 of which have been empty long-term, that is for more than six months

l in Oxfordshire in 2012 there were up to 6,400 vacant houses*

Ashes to ashes in Buckinghamshire in a batch of trees imported from the Netherlands. Over the past year outbreaks have been noted across the south east, including in newly planted landscape trees at a housing development site in south West Bicester near the wood planted by CPRE to celebrate our 80th anniversary last year. The diseased trees have been removed and replaced with other native species.

The National Planning Policy framework: one year onResearch by CPRE has shown that the National Planning Policy framework (NPPf), introduced just over a year ago, has had a devastating effect. CPRE President sir Andrew Motion has described it as ‘ground breaking in all the wrong ways’.

CPRE’s evidence shows:

• Therequirementtosupplyat least five years’ worth of ‘deliverable’ sites for new housing is being used to push through unnecessary and damaging development in open countryside.

• Greenfieldsitesarebeingdeveloped when suitable brownfield sites are available.

• Localismisbeingunderminedbecause councils have not been given enough time to get up to date local plans in place.

A survey by The Guardian reveals that 75% of local authorities are intending to cut planning budgets, some by up to 50%. for more information see http://bit.ly/129lrlQ


The country is about to suffer another serious attack on its trees that could be as damaging as dutch elm disease, which killed 25 million UK trees from the late 1960s. This time the victim is the ash tree, which makes up about 20% of our woodland. Ash is often seen as a hedgerow tree with a high conservation value. its airy canopy allows a rich diversity of ground flora to thrive, it supports over a 100 species of insects and a wide variety of birdlife. Bullfinches love to feast on its black spring buds, and because an ash can live for centuries it provides habitat for owls, woodpeckers and nuthatches to nest in its hollows. The loss of our ash trees will be disastrous.

Ash dieback disease is caused by the windborne fungus Chalara fraxinea. The fungus was first reported in Poland in 1992. since then the pathogen has been found in many other European countries, reaching the Netherlands in 2010. in denmark it is estimated it has killed 90% of the country’s ash population. in february 2012 the fungus was found in the UK for the first time

COURTEsY ThE fOOd ANd ENviRONMENT REsEARCh AGENCY (fERA), CROWN COPYRiGhT

The outlook is bleak, and it may well be that we shall suffer losses as high as denmark’s. All the fraxinus species are at risk, including special variety amenity trees like the scented flowered Manna Ash (Fraxinus ornus) and the brilliantly autumn coloured Raywood (Fraxinus angustifolia). The hope is that, because the ash reproduces by seed, unlike the elm which mainly reproduces through clones, certain ash trees will show resistance to the disease, and the seed from these can be nurtured to produce an immune population. But this takes time. Meanwhile, as spring progresses, it looks as though we shall witness a radical and most unwelcome change to our countryside.

Moth Clark

Ash trees are often used for nesting by nuthatches

Spring garden visitCPRE members enjoyed a private visit to the garden of well-known horticulturalist Sue Bedwell in April. Sue’s garden in Bletchingdon was bursting with spring colour. Thanks to Sue for hosting this event.

Planning our green spaces by Sarah Milliken, CPRE Oxfordshire member


New volunteers soughtAfter many years with CPRE Oxfordshire’s Banbury district group, Jean Tarver is stepping down as secretary which leaves the position vacant for a new volunteer. We’re also looking for a new campaigns and publicity volunteer for henley district.Can you help? Let us know!

Oxford City Council’s Green spaces strategy 2013-27 sets out a 15-year plan for the management of parks and open spaces in the city. it was substantially rewritten after significant input from Oxford City CPRE. it includes a detailed action plan to help the City Council create the quantity, quality and accessibility of green space in the city, and describes how green spaces can contribute to the health and wellbeing of Oxford.

The action plan will be reviewed every year by the Oxford City Green space Network, a new body established by the Leisure and Parks department of the City Council, whose members includes Oxford City CPRE, the Wildlife Trust and the Oxford Preservation Trust. The Green space Network will work to protect and enhance Oxford’s green spaces during this period of financial austerity. it will identify local needs, co-ordinate resources and work with partners.

Green infrastructure

Green infrastructure is the network of urban and rural spaces such as parks, waterways, cemeteries and woodlands. Green spaces like these create a range of environmental benefits for local communities. Oxford City CPRE is now active on the steering group of the Oxfordshire Green infrastructure strategy. This strategy is being produced in response to substantial housing growth planned for the county. it will consider the relationship between proposed new developments and existing and proposed green spaces. The strategy will be embedded within local plans and policies.

The mapping work has already been completed, and the first draft of the strategy, which focuses on biodiversity, access and rights of way, will be released for consultation very shortly.

JAN

E TO

MLi

NsO

N

NEW TRUSTEES SOUGHTWould you like to use your skills, expertise and passion for the countryside to guide and shape the work of CPRE Oxfordshire?

We’re looking to appoint new Trustees. Please contact us for more information about these important voluntary roles.

Come and find out more about how we work at our AGM on 29 June in Wallingford. See back page for more details.


Mud, flood and coldby Angus Dart, CPRE’s farming consultant

Arable farmers had a pretty miserable harvest in 2012. Much of the grain, produced under wet conditions with reduced sunlight, did not fill well and was very small and light. Many buyers are claiming it is below contract specifications and are penalising producers accordingly, which has taken the shine off higher prices. Growers of root crops also had a torrid time and some were unable to successfully harvest potatoes. Huge quantities of mud on public roads hampered progress.

All this directly affects livestock farmers; prices for purchased feeds based on soya, oilseed rape and grain have been at record levels. This has been caused by increasing global demand continuing to outstripping supply and generally poorer harvests globally. Many cattle farmers had to house their animals for the winter sooner than normal due to waterlogged fields. They then started using their reduced winter feed stocks of hay and silage sooner than they would have liked. The unhelpfully cold spring is now really putting pressure on these feed supplies as there is little grass growth to encourage turning animals out to graze.

By Christmas 2012 the harvest of summer 2013 was already beginning to look like a financial write-off. Many farmers myself included had not completed planting autumn sow cereals. While it is possible to plant wheat until the end of February, with declining yield potential, opportunities to do this have been virtually non-existent.

All crops have been very slow to emerge from cold wet seedbeds, they seem to lack vigour and have not enjoyed a period of good growing weather since planting. They have remained vulnerable to slug damage all winter. Slugs, of course, have been particularly active in the damp conditions. Older farmers would say their wheat crops should be able to

‘hide a hare in March’ but it’s late spring and the crops are still low.

Looking closely at fields that appear green at first glance, it is possible to find patches of little crop, due to problems with flooding, slug damage and generally poor emergence. These areas will at best produce little come harvest, so even if the rest of the field yields well these patches only serve to markedly reduce the overall average yield. It is uniformly consistent crops that produce better than budgeted yields and thus good harvests.

There has been a rush of demand for spring planted alternatives. UK supplies have quickly dwindled and Europe sourced seed has become incredibly expensive. The weather has managed to delay this option too so later spring plantings have a reduced time to grow and develop which can again potentially reduce yield.

Flooding seems to have been in the news for too much of the last year; what was once a rare event has become the norm. Common sense suggests that flooding is caused by the water in a ditch or river coming out of the channel it should be contained within. Watercourses naturally move silt and debris along in their flows. If no maintenance occurs and these deposits are not periodically removed then the water level is forced to run at an increasing height and eventually these channels cease to be beneficial drainage arteries. Over the last few decades it has become fashionable to ignore the removal of these silts from our ditches and rivers, work that had been carried out for hundreds of years previously. In this scheme farmland has been considered a worthless but handy place to park excess water for increasing lengths of time.

This year has shown that the CPRE has been consistently right to remember the value of farmland and the countryside for the long term.



suggest a supporterWe urgently need to increase our influence countywide and campaign on really positive subjects, but we can’t do that as effectively as we would like without new supporters. Will you help us?

We all know people who share our passion for the countryside but our natural reticence can make it awkward to promote CPRE to friends, neighbours, colleagues and family. That’s why we would like you to suggest someone you know who you think may be interested in CPRE’s work so that we can approach them. We will send them a personalised introductory letter which will say you thought of them. We promise there will be no hard sell and if we get no response we won’t contact them again.

Who will you suggest? Please fill in the slip below.

There is surely no one better placed than you – our current members – to inspire others to join us in protecting the county we love. Thank you.

Suggest a supporter

Your name .........................................................................................................................

Membership number (if known) ...................................................................................

Your address ......................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................

.................................................................................... Postcode .......................................i would like to suggest this person as potentially interested in the work of CPRE Oxfordshire:

Their name ........................................................................................................................

Their address .....................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................

.................................................................................... Postcode .......................................

Their relationship to you:

friend colleague neighbour family

other (please state) ..................................................................................................Now cut out this slip and send it to: Becky Crockett, CPRE Oxfordshire, Unit1,LondonRoad,Wheatley,OxfordOX331JH Or email this information to [email protected] personal information is treated confidentially in accordance with the Data Protection Act.

Welcome to GarethGareth hammond is new chair of CPRE West Oxfordshire district committee

Gareth says: “i’m not a planning expert and i’m not a local government mandarin, but i am passionate about our countryside and want to do what i can to protect it. You only have to go abroad to be reminded when you return that our undulating landscape of fields, hedgerows and woodlands make this country such a great place to live.

“if Government is determined to sacrifice the rural environment on the altar of economic growth via lax planning laws, we need to be vigilant. Our children and grandchildren will not thank us for the blight of urban sprawl. Our success in defeating the planned Cogges Link Road shows what can be done. inappropriate housing development is a constant threat, which we must guard against. On the other hand the nightmare congestion on the A40 is something i believe can only be tackled through road improvements.

“i have lived in Church hanborough for 15 years, am a life member of the National Trust and the Oxford Preservation Trust, a member of the Wychwood Project since its inception, and a member of CPRE for 28 years. This is thoroughly eclipsed by my eminent predecessor, Gill salway, whose 48 years membership of CPRE and the whole of this millennium as chairman shows a remarkable commitment, which we should all applaud. i urge you all to join me in both celebrating and protecting our countryside.”

Gill Salway hands the reins of West Oxfordshire

to Gareth Hammond.

Jane Tomlinson

Oxfordshire Voice

Published biannually by the Oxfordshire Branch of the Campaign to Protect Rural England.

design: Rob Bowker T: 01491 825609 Print: severnprint Ltd with vegetable inks on recycled paper using renewable energy.

Branch Office

CPRE Oxfordshire, Unit 1, London Road, Wheatley, Oxford, Ox33 1Jh (Registered office)

T: 01865 874780 E: [email protected]

CPRE Online

Oxfordshire: www.cpreoxon.org.uk

Twitter: @CPREOxfordshire

www.facebook.com/CPREOxfordshire

National: www.cpre.org.uk

AGM papers will be available to download from our website from 8 June, or contact the CPRE Oxfordshire office, details below.

cpre oxfordshire voice

Documents

planning applications

planning permission

planning inspectorate

planning process

oxford ox1

edge of port meadow

centralised regional

local wishes