Granite Post links.

Granite Post links issue 88
Will local pupils be walking to school in Liskeard? The full story here soon.


Granite Post links issue 87

Banks still winning the "monopoly game"

The increasing use of bank cards to pay for purchases is costing local businesses a lot of money
In St Cleer, the Market Inn has informed customers that their preferred method of payment is cash.
"But obviously, we accept cards if that is not possible," said landlord Carl White.
In the first seven months of 2023, bank-card transactions cost the business £2,080.
He told Granite Post:
"The trend for using card and moving more to a cashless society is and has been on the increase since we took over the Market. I'd say currently itís approximately 70/30 in favour of card."
Customers understand the dilemma.
ìIt's a good topic of conversation and highlights an issue we are all faced with," said Carl.
The electronic system that card transactions rely on is not always smooth-running.
"The technology is great when it is fully operational, but power cuts or a drop in wifi and it is rendered useless.
"This is a problem we all face from time to time so if people carry cash with this in mind it helps. Others in the trade are also sick of the bank fees relating to card processing. It should not be this expensive."
Will these fees affect bar prices?
"It is definitely something that we will have to bear in mind moving forward as a business.
"The cost of everything is rising but that means also that fees will rise and ultimately the banks win the game of monopoly."
Carl describes an interesting side-effect of card-use:
"If £50 is spent as cash then it remains £50 no matter how many times that £50 note is used. If you make 100 transactions, then that £50 is no longer within the community or society but rather is eaten up as bank fees."
Food for thought eh?

Snooker Club re-opens and is seeking members

St Cleer Snooker Club is back open! Refurbished, renewed and looking for new members.
The man behind the revitalisation of the club–in the Old Liberal Club Building in the village–is Nigel Emms.
"We already have 14 confirmed members and many others have shown interest," he said.
He has overseen and organised a huge amount of work to get the club back into action.
Amongst work done includes: handbasin added to toilet which has been completely re-tiled and decorated, the old scoreboard (once covered in paint) has been brought back to its original state, brand new electrics (all cased for easy maintenance), a renewed floor, new carpet tiles, and total redecoration.
The ceiling still needs attention and the snooker table needs recovering.
In total, the renovation will cost between eight and ten thousand pounds, all of which Nigel has funded. The club will eventually repay him most of his investment.
It is a project close to his heart.
"I wanted this club here for the people of this village. The building was built by the men of this village in 1906 and the original deeds state it should be sold if the club was disbanded and I had no intention of letting it go. It's for the village and it should stay here," he said.
Membership – which includes a key to the building - costs £27 per year and there is a charge to play. Nigel is hoping to build up a strong enough membership to start a team to play against other clubs.
The work has been carried out by a mixture of professionals and volunteers. They include Martin Bunkum and Alan Snell (floor), Dan Holder (electrics), Neil Sisley (carpet tiles), Shane Gamble (painting), Franklin Powell (plastic boards and door work), Baz Bevan (plastering), Carol Bevan (curtains) and Mark Henshaw who refurbished the original scoreboard. Nigel himself has beavered away at all kinds of tasks.

Nigel Emms

Ranger days at Trethevy Quoit

Link for the forms:

https://app.etapestry.com/onlineforms/TheCornwallHeritageTrustLimit/trethevyranger.html


Granite Post links issue 86

Late June 2023
Little Gimble planning application for kennels.

The planning application has now been refused by Cornwall Council. Have a look here (mind you, I have tried twice and each time it has been unavailable - Ed):

Click here for the link

Some background reading...
Re: PA23/00102 Change of use of part of barn to kennels and stables (at Little Gimble)

Kevin Johnson MBE, Chairman of St Cleer Parish Council wrote to Cornwall Council on 7th May enquiring about the progress of this application. Here is his letter.

Dear Davina,
I write this as the Chair of St Cleer PC and as a representative of the 157 members of the public that have taken the time and effort to comment upon this planning application.
I don't bring this issue to your attention lightly since I am aware of some of the staffing and resource difficulties in the planning department.
This planning proposal is however exceptional in many regards not least of which in the level of public interest, passion, personal impact on nearby neighbours and the broader impact upon the community.
There are 157 public comments (82% objection) and there is the very strongest PC consultation (objection) that I have ever seen or been required to submit. The PC public meeting was attended by an exceptional number of interested parties and the atmosphere was highly charged but remained constructive and productive.
It is, so far as I can see, the greatest number of public comments on any St Cleer parish planning application in recorded history and the application is 8 weeks past the determination deadline - it is on this basis that I seek your
intervention.
I have maintained a reasonably close liaison with the Ward Cllr and I have left 2 voicemail messages for the case officer over a period of several months but not received any call back.
Of course I appreciate that not every planning application can receive a tailored response and feedback, and I personally have tried very hard to move St Cleer PC's planning consultations to a better place than previous, but
in this example I do believe we need a higher degree of officer communication than might be expected on a routine application.
For the parish council and the community, please consider providing an update and status report on the progress of this application.

Kevin Johnson MBE
Chair
St Cleer Parish Council

This is the response:

Morning Kevin,
Thanks for your email.
As you have quite rightly pointed out, resource is a big issue in our team at the moment and as a result, applications are taking considerably longer than normal to determine. This situation is far from ideal, and we are trying hard to recruit new members of staff, but much like the wider, national picture, this is proving difficult.
I appreciate your request for an update on the application, but can I respectively suggest that the application is simply running it’s course, under the circumstances we now find ourselves in.
Rest assured, if as officers we intend to recommend the application for approval, contrary to the Parish Council’s consultee comments, then we would be in contact with the clerk in accordance with the Local Council Protocol in
the normal manner.
If however, we chose to recommend the application for refusal, this would proceed under delegated authority and the decision and officer report will appear on public access in the normal way.
I appreciate and agree with your suggestion that the application has raised a higher than normal level of interest within this particular Parish. However, the very activity the proposal would support is nationally, arguably internationally controversial and a large number of the comments submitted do not raise material planning considerations, but instead represent an objection to the
activity itself. As you will appreciate, those matters do not represent material planning considerations. Instead we must focus on the relevant planning policy and the matters over which the planning system can consider, for which there are a number of representations to address including those concerns regarding the impact of the proposal on the amenities of neighbouring residential
occupiers.
We would not as a matter of course provide regular updates to the Parish Council, in the same vein as we would not provide regular updates to those who have made representations. We simply do not have the resources to be able to do this under normal circumstances, let alone the current situation. Instead, for the Parish Council, any update on intended recommendation which is contrary to the Parish Council’s consultee response would be through the Local Council Protocol. We must consider and process our applications
in the normal way, using established procedures (both national and local). We cannot treat this application any differently to another (in terms of process), simply because it has received a large number of representations and involves an activity that is controversial.
I hope the above is of assistance in explaining the situation and expectations. In addition to keeping an eye on Public Access, do the Parish Council receive a weekly list of decisions? Alternatively, if necessary, we will be in contact in accordance with the Local Council Protocol.
Kind regards
Davina Pritchard
Group Leader Area Teams 7 and 8
Development Management – Regulatory Services
Cornwall Council
Tel: 01872 322222
Davina.Pritchard@cornwall.gov.uk

Kevin then wrote to Cllr. Phil Silva regarding the response. This was on the 31st of May

Dear Phil,
we are just 2 weeks shy of 3 months past the determination deadline for this relatively simple application.
Given the level of public interest and mindful, but despite, Davina's comments below, this can't be an acceptable situation for CC.
All of those people that took the time to attend the PC consultation and / or submit comments online deserve better than this.
To be fair, I think St Cleer PC is fairly passive on the planning front, we're not constantly on the case about all and sundry but this one deserves more attention than it appears to be getting.
Any chance you could seek a progress report?
Kevin
(No reply to this as yet but we will post it if it comes in.)

You might also want to follow this link which looks at potential noise pollution from this proposed development.

https://planning.cornwall.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=consulteeComments&keyVal=RO0TXZFGFRT00


Granite Post links issue 84

What's a bryophyte?
Click here.

Protecting our countryside
Find out exactly which local areas are protected by looking this map.
Click here.


Ash trees threatened throughout the parish
Colin Robbins wrote to us from his home in Minions on the subject of Vanishing Cornwall.

“Just outside Minions, beside the lane to Henwood, a stand of beautiful ash trees. Beyond, the valleys of the Lynher and Tamar rivers, sometimes glacier-white with early-morning mist, and tiny fields stretching to distant Dartmoor. But in December the trees were reduced to three pathetic stumps. Why, and by whom, I wonder?”

At Granite Post we have made inquiries. And we heard back from the Duchy. See below*. But it set us thinking generally about ash dieback locally. Here are some facts.

First, Cornwall Council.
They monitor the spread of the disease across Cornwall.
Council staff are kept abreast of the problem and some officers have special training. An ash die-back action plan guides the council’s own actions and helps others to cope.
The council makes clear:
“It is important to note that all trees on private land are the responsibility of the landowner. This responsibility extends to the maintenance, felling and removal of diseased trees.”


Ash Dieback in St Cleer
St Cleer Environmental Group’s Simon Humphreys gave us the low-down.
Ash dieback is a disease caused by a fungus which originated in Asia. It came to Europe about 30 years ago and has devastated the European ash which has no natural defence against it.
Noticed in East Anglia around 2010, we first saw symptoms on ash trees in St Cleer around 2016.
Foliage dies back from the tips of the branches in the spring but many trees partially recover during the summer with new growth replacing the dead leaves.
Trees can tolerate this level of infection for quite some time but each year that they have to replace lost foliage, they become a little weaker. Young trees, with few reserves, die within three or four years. Mature trees may last much longer but only a small proportion are likely to survive for more than twenty *years. As few at 10% are likely to survive in the long term.

Ash trees are found in large numbers right across the parish. Many are relatively young trees which have grown up in hedgerows in the gaps which were left by elm trees which died during the 1980s. A few ancient trees can be found in hedges which have been cut and coppiced countless times through the centuries.
Always taller than oak or beech, it is the largest tree in our landscape. Losing 90% of these trees over the next few years will be a major blow for a whole range of lichens, mosses and insects which are all dependent on ash trees. These in turn support hundreds of birds and bats right across our parish.
There are an estimated 150 million ash trees in the UK, along with 1.8 billion seedlings and saplings (Forestry Commission). Ash is also a very common tree across Cornwall. 
Ash is highly successful at establishing in a variety of habitats. It self-seeds very well and is salt tolerant. This means it is able to establish in coastal locations. It makes up a significant part of our woodlands and hedgerows, and frequently is found on Cornish hedges. Ash trees often provide large canopies where other tree species may struggle in Cornwall. Nearly 1000 species are known to be associated with ash, including birds, mammals, insects, fungi, and lichens. Some are only associated with ash trees and so are in danger of becoming extinct due to the effects of ash dieback.

Simon Humphreys:
“Currently we are advised to leave infected trees along wherever we can. We don’t know how tolerant these individual trees may be, and they may survive for longer than we predict. It is much more difficult to decide what to do with ash trees which are close to buildings, roads or rights of way. Landowners are liable for the safety of their trees so in most cases they would be best advised to have them felled. The more advanced the disease becomes, the more difficult and dangerous it becomes to cut them down, so many owners decide to have the trees felled without being able to see how tolerant they may be in the medium term. It is likely that for the foreseeable future, we will continue to see large numbers of ash trees being removed from gardens, streets and along footpaths. This is the only safe course of action. Where the risk to life and property is low, we can leave some trees to struggle on as best they can.
We can replant some of the lost trees, some diseased trees are already being outgrown by neighbouring sycamore or oak. Over time, the tolerant survivors will cross with other survivors to produce future trees which will be almost completely resistant to the disease. We look forward to seeing these trees once again in just 50 – 60 years’ time.”

*A Duchy spokesman told us: "We manage a programme of tree safety inspection works as well as a significant programme of tree planting annually and would only fell trees affected by Ash Dieback in high risk areas for safety reasons.
“It is unclear from the information provided whether the trees specified in the original enquiry are on Duchy land
“Where Ash Dieback is identified, the Duchy will on occasion take the difficult decision to fell roadside trees on the basis that trees can very quickly become a safety risk.”

To report diseased ash trees that may be a danger to users of land or buildings within the control of Cornwall Council call:

0300 1234 222


Kennels for 48 hounds on the moor?

Dog poo fact-pile
It is not a pleasant subject. But it is totally relevant to this issue.
The average dog excretes 0.75lbs of poo every day.
A foxhound is a large dog and probably produces at least 1lb daily.
A lump of dog poo can take up to a year to fully break down.
Pathogens the poo contains are disease-causing microorganisms that can contaminate water resources, making them unsafe for swimming or drinking.
So that is 48lbs per day, amounting to 17,520lbs per year. That is roughly eight imperial tons* a year.
Or, if you have a dog with a metric digestive tract, 7947 kg. equalling 7.947 tonnes.
And none of it will be picked up.

*The dogs will probably deposit some of their poo in the kennel/yard. So the amount left on the moor might be in the region of four tons a year. Difficult to be accurate.

Danger to cattle, horses, poultry – and humans!
Prof. Michael Moore is a Consultant Environmental Toxicologist, Molecular Cell Pathologist & Systems Biologist, amongst many other things. He lives in Callington.
He has carried out extensive research into parasite-induced liver disease in cattle, sheep and humans.
Responding to the news that 48 hounds might be kennelled and exercised on the moor, he said this:

“There is considerable risk for infecting cattle with the parasite Neospora caninum. This single celled organism is shed by dogs in their faeces, which can then infect cattle. 
“There are no approved treatments in cattle and horses, but antibiotics may be helpful in dogs. The disease (Neosporosis) is largely untreatable and at present incurable.
“Neosporosis causes abortion of calves and can cause serious disease in adult cattle that will require infected animals to be destroyed. “Furthermore, infected cattle will spread the disease throughout the herd resulting in the loss of the herd and considerable financial loss to the farmer.

“The parasite generally has no effect on infected adult dogs, although it can have neurological effects that cause paralysis of the limbs, with weakness in the hips and hind legs (paraparesis) in puppies. “Consequently, dog owners will not know if their dogs are infected unless they develop symptoms. 
“There may also be some risk to cattle and horses drinking water that has been contaminated by rainwater runoff containing the parasites from dog faeces on the moorland. 
“Neospora has recently been found to infect domestic chickens and house sparrows (Passer domesticus), which may become infected after ingesting parasite oocysts from the soil.  
“In my personal opinion, it would be highly irresponsible of the Hunt to release their hounds on moorland where cattle and horses were grazing.”
Prof. Moore has also told Granite Post that the problem is of increasing concern. He says:
"The parasite has now made the species jump from cattle to humans, and is now found in farmworkers, although the effects on humans is as yet not fully understood."


Kennels proposal: Make your voice heard!
(See end of this article for guidance)

St Cleer Parish Council overwhelmingly rejected an application to develop kennels for 48 hunting hounds at Lower Gimble.
Twenty local residents attended the planning meeting when chairman Coun. Kevin Johnson invited them to speak. He urged them to stick to planning matters rather than hunting in general.
All the local attendees were against the proposal. There was widespread concern for the environment, disturbance of the peace and the negative effect on visitors and local businesses. Two people from outside the parish had more positive views.
At the end of the discussion the chairman proposed objection to the application on the grounds of smells, disturbance of peace, noise, land and water pollution and critical conflict with the needs of conservation.
The motion was carried with eight councillors in favour and one against.
The council will also seek the view of the moor commoners.
In his report to Cornwall Council, the chairman said people living nearby the kennels and residents of Common Moor would be critically affected and residents of St Cleer, Darite, Tremar and Minions could also suffer.
The application was submitted by East Cornwall Hunt Kennels. Amongst objections voiced at the meeting were:
Noise: The volume and frequency of noise from 48 dogs would be intolerable at times. The open-ended barn to be used as the kennel would act as an echo chamber. The noise from the current kennels at St Neot was heard clearly despite being two and a half miles away from the village of Common Moor and beyond. The kennels would not be sound-proofed and a perimeter stock fence would have no effect on the noise level.
Excrement: People walking their dogs on the moor are currently expected to pick up and take away faeces. There would be no chance of this happening with 48 hounds exercised on the moor once a day.
Disturbance: Whilst walkers with or without dogs are asked to be respectful of wild and farms animals, this would not be the case with 48 hounds running free. Peace and tranquillity would be ruined forever.
Pollution: Daily deposits of canine excrement would be massive, causing disturbance to the natural balance of the living environment, a toxic threat to wildlife, very unpleasant conditions underfoot for walkers and contamination of waterways.
Danger: Hunting dogs would pose a very real threat to the safety of wild animals, ponies, cattle, sheep and their young, and to people – particularly children. One person would be in charge of the hounds on their daily exercise. There would be no chance of them all being under control at all times. Even with the hounds housed at St Neot, it was not uncommon for loose individuals to be seen trotting through village streets and neighbourhoods.
Environment and visitors: We are lucky enough to live in a beautiful and peaceful area – qualities that many people travel many miles to enjoy. For a large part of every day all that would be lost. Many people would be scared by such a large pack of dogs and many visitors would be put off coming. Local businesses would suffer.

St Cleer Parish Council statement to Cornwall Council planning portal.
Comment Date: Mon 30 Jan 2023
St Cleer Parish Council do NOT support this application:

At an exceptionally well attended PC meeting on the evening of 25 Jan 2023, 23 members of the public, predominantly from the hamlet of Common Moor, engaged in a well-considered discussion where the focus was valid planning concerns rather than the broader, emotive issues associated with the hunting debate. The public discussion prior to commencement of the PC consultation extended to over an hour with opportunity for all to express their opinion. 
Whereas the overwhelming majority of attendees were expressing opposition to the application, the discussion was structured in such a way as, as far as was reasonably practicable, to allow alternate speakers for and in opposition of the planning proposal by inviting the 3 supporters of the proposal in attendance to speak in response after each comment in opposition.
The PC heard from a business owner providing holiday accommodation which relies upon the quiet rural nature of the area to attract repeat customers seeking tranquility and peace and that the potential for excessive noise was considered to be a terminal threat to the business.
The PC also heard from residents who expressed concern for a significant increase in HGV horse and hound transport traffic over and above that which currently exists at the site, not only in relation to the transport of the dogs to a hunt but also with the potential for hunt members to use the unsuitable roads for congregation at the kennels in preparation for operation of the hunting activities. Access is via a narrow, unclassified country lane and the associated moorland and village unclassified, single track moorland roads. 
There was a high degree of concern expressed in relation to dogs escaping and / or causing distress to sheep which graze nearby public access open common moorland, the hazard associated with dog faeces which would be impossible to control or pick up being detrimental to human and livestock health and the risks associated with attacks on domestic pets by pack hounds engaged in the hunt where it is impossible to control or prevent them from entering private land - there is a documented history of hunt dogs attacking domestic pets in Cornwall.
Both the increased transport on unsuited roads and the risk of harm to the public from uncontrolled pack hounds is directly relevant to the PRoW (footpath) which forms a part of the access to the proposed development site and the adjacent Caradon Trail which links directly to the site access track. 
Contamination of nearby domestic ground source water supply was highlighted as a concern.
The welfare and general ability to peacefully enjoy their own domestic properties, most notably in the immediately adjacent hamlet of Common Moor (but with potential adverse effect of noise pollution reaching as far as the main settlement of St Cleer village, Darite, Tremar and Minions all being within range) was stated as an obvious precedence and priority over animals being housed for the recreational enjoyment of others. It was suggested that a previous planning constraint to a maximum of 8 dogs at this site was a direct consequence of this consideration by the planning authority.
It was suggested that the development would not constitute a sustainable rural enterprise since it was proposed within the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and Bodmin Moor International Dark Sky area and that it was in close proximity to, and would impact upon, adjacent Special Areas of Conservation, National Nature Reserve and Sites of Special Scientific Interest Impact Zones. Furthermore, the proposed site is surrounded on 3 sides by County Wildlife Sites all of this detail being defined in the Cornwall Council interactive mapping system.
The PC considered all of the public comments including those from supporters of the application and reached a majority decision to oppose the planning proposal on the basis that:
- the proposal represents unacceptable noise, disturbance and smells resulting from dog noise, excrement management and inability to effectively manage dogs faeces on public open space moorland and the associated bio hazard to livestock, contamination of nearby ground source water supply to domestic properties. 
- the proposal did not satisfy the duty to conserve open land - disturbance of ground nesting birds
- the proposal did not satisfy the need to safeguard the countryside or protected species of plant or animal
 the ‘need’ for the development did not outweigh the considerable harm it represents to local residents and business.
And that these elements are contrary to the St Cleer Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP) Policies:
14 Habitat and Biodiversity, 18 Green Tourism development, 24 Transport and Communication 

How to make YOUR voice heard
Garry Ffitch Goodwin, who lives in Common Moor, has urged parishoners to have their say on this issue. He writes:
PLEASE TAKE TIME TO ADD YOUR COMMENTS ON THE CORNWALL PLANNING DEPARTMENT PLATFORM.
 
Go to the web page below.
 
http://planning.cornwall.gov.uk/online-applications/
 
1:  Choose the planning and building control tab.
2:  Then the view or comment on a planning application 
3:  Next search for a planning application 
4.  Type in the search bar PA23/00102 or little Gimble 
5.  Click the application dated 16th January 2023
6.  Choose the comments tab you will then be asked to login (if you don’t already have account)
7 Choose the sign up now tab, agree and continue tab; enter your email and follow the instructions.
 All this is a bit drawn out but please don’t be put off.

Previous links>