- I do hope the lowland heath review group will consult with everyone not just those likely to support NE and deal with all the issues as previously raised by me and others in the south

Says Bob Milton

And so it goes on. The issues are side stepped or ignored. The upland review has nothing to do with existing public access rights in its remit. The massaging of condition surveys or the selection of the most appropriate for the target is unacceptable in a democracy.

There is some confusion re the registered common land areas which do not include the quarry areas. But the welfare issues and damage to the SSSI at Castle Bottom through inappropriate grazing is much like that at Odiham common a few years ago. Duel criteria do seem to be applied in dealing with large corporations, the Forestry Commission and HCC in this case on both sides of the parish boundary.

I do hope the lowland heath review group will consult with everyone not just those likely to support NE and deal with all the issues as previously raised by me and others in the south

In this area the issues are complex given the non registration of the 134 acres in breach of a Court Order [1988], the obstruction of Welsh Drive BW 11/16 by the airfield and British Car auctions, the continued use of WWII airfield built on Blackbushe common, the obstruction with what is taken to be complicit direction by NE and HCC the Highway authority of some 9 rights of way across the common, the signing of the HLS agreement without a legal agreement with the commoners and incorporating fencing prior to consultation with the public whose rights to air and exercise are to be compromised.

The intricacies of stewardship here and on many other sites of stewardship being paid for statutory duty for example the Local authority land owners and the MoD / D Estates have not been addressed. Likewise the payments for fencing, gates and cattle grids where there is already public access ie public highways contraty to NE and the CAP regulations seems to keep being missed out of any review. Perhaps you could advise me of the name and contact details of the monitoring officer as is required before any application for judicial review is made.

These examples are not just limited to this site as can be seen from the decisions of the PI on Hartlebury [s9 vesting is not legal freehold and so HLS can not be paid]and Hednesford commons, Hawkesbury where the NE officer seeks to give legal advice on equestrian rights under a scheme of regulation as also happened at Padworth, Preys Heath where the MoD built hangars as part of the war effort on the common only to gift them to another government department for intervention and subsequently for industrial use with no exchange land, the saga of the West Penwith Moors carries on without any attempt by NE to address the issues and Wetley Moor is a book on its own for the abuse by all involved.