Reply from Tom Cutbush, 17th July 2008

Dear Mr. Paddock

Questions from the East Winch Action Group on behalf of the Residents of Each Winch

Thank you for your e:mail dated 30th June 2008 and attached letter of the same date.

Your questions are very wide ranging and many can only be answered by a thorough visit to our operations or by joining the rest of the community in our open and regular liaison meetings.

For many years our company has hosted local liaison meetings on a regular basis. Elected members from all local councils are represented and actively participate. Indeed our last meeting took place in April of this year and 22 people attended. I would encourage you to liaise with your local parish clerk who can put you in touch with your local representatives in time for our next meeting, currently scheduled for October 2008.

I would like to take this opportunity to inform you that colleagues are currently planning an open day (including site tours) at our King’s Lynn site during this coming September. The Company hosted a similar event last year which was very well supported by the local community and indeed the feedback has been extremely positive. The dates and times of the forthcoming event will shortly be advertised locally. You and members of your action group will be made welcome and my colleagues will make every effort to answer as many of your questions as they can. If we gauge a need after the open day, we could produce a local newsletter dealing with the key issues raised.

If after our open day you still have areas of concern please directly contact our UK Resources Director, Gary Stringer, who will endeavour to deal with any of the outstanding issues.

Yours sincerely,


T.C. CUTBUSH

Letter to Tom Cutbush, WBB Minerals

Two weeks ago, a letter drafted by the command action group within EWAG was sent to Tom Cutbush, Managing Director of WBB Minerals, and copied to Gary Stringer and our local MP's and councillors. No reply has yet been forthcoming.

Here is a transcript of the letter:

QUESTIONS FROM THE EAST WINCH ACTION GROUP ON BEHALF OF THE RESIDENTS OF EAST WINCH

"Dear Mr Cutbush,

I am writing on behalf of the East Winch Action Group (EWAG) and seeking clarification on recent correspondence your company have either submitted or been quoted upon in both local newspapers and the Parish magazine (Voice of the Villagers). As you are aware we are a resident’s action group representing in excess of 200 signatories from the village of East Winch and are directly apposed to most of your proposed extraction sites within the village boundaries. In particular MIN 40 (land to the east of Grandcourt Farm, Middleton).

Of extreme concern to us are some of the risks associated with the extraction of silica sand and predominantly the onset of silicosis or respiratory related cancers such as mesothelioma. We are aware of local people having worked in or living close to the Leziate sites over the last decades dieing prematurely from respiratory related diseases.

We are a small rural community and enjoy a rightful peaceful and healthy life away from the smog ridden industrial centres. We have a small school and a church which will be less than 50m from the edge of your proposed MIN 40 site and a large conurbation of houses with many children and elderly residents which potentially can be as little as 10m from the boundary of and open quarry.

Your company has already or is in the process of reducing vast swathes of open country side around East Winch to polluted sand pits which could take generations to restore to its original state (Which incidentally in most cases does not appear to be part of your planning). Aerial photography of the area presents the most accurate representation of what is happening to our area. Unless unchecked all of the countryside around East Winch will be excavated for sand and the village will be an island. Currently the villagers enjoy limited country walks enjoying the country its flora and wildlife, the excavation of sand at MIN 40 would preclude this right and most of the flora and wildlife could vanish forever.

Similar considerations and detrimental effects also apply to local villagers in respect of other proposed sites discussed with Norfolk County Council, as part of the recent consultation process, including MIN 39, amongst others.

QUESTIONNAIRE

Committee members of EWAG have been appointed to represent and voice the concerns of local villagers in respect of your proposed mining operations.

Therefore can you please can you directly answer the following questions:

1. There are synthetic alternatives available to silica sand and a lot of other countries/companies are recognising their effects on health are now using these. Have you considered the benefits of using synthetic alternatives? If not why not?

2. There is much publicised correspondence concerning the effects of Silicosis produced by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and in particular PM10 particles. When sand is initially excavated can you state categorically that no particles the size of PM 10 or smaller are produced. Irrespective of the quantity or control measures put in place? YES or NO?

3. Why are you proposing to put a silica sand excavation site (MIN 40) so close the village boundaries of East Winch in direct conflict with human habitation? Will you withdraw your submission of the MIN 40 site from your proposals?

4. When excavating silica sand in its raw form at the site face do you provide members of your company with personal protective equipment? If yes, what type is it and what is it to protect against? Do you issue face masks or other protective devices to prevent the inhalation of dust?

5. Why do your employees use water to dampen the ground when excavating silica sand in its raw form from an open cast mine? Is this to control dust? As your representatives have quoted at recent council meetings sand particles are too large to be breathed in and in windy conditions they will fall within 50m of being picked up into the air!

6. Has any member of your company ever been sick with any form of respiratory disease which could be associated with the mining of silica sand whether proven or not? If yes can you provide statistics? Obviously we are not asking you to divulge names and break medical in confidence rules. Statistics are an open source deliverable and can be issued.

7. Health and Safety. Has your company (WBB Minerals) ever been in breach of any Health and Safety Executive Laws or guidelines irrespective of how small? Has your company (WBB Minerals) ever been made the subject of a Health and Safety Enforcement notice irrespective of type or perceived importance can you provide full details? If the answer is yes can you provide dates of the notice were issued and the date of compliance.

8. A recent survey with local estate agents has revealed that the scale of excavation you are proposing around East Winch and in particular MIN 40 will have a direct effect on house values within the village. If this is proven beyond doubt to be the case what compensation packages will you put in place to reimburse the households for financial loss due to your company’s activities?

9. How have you worked with the communities in the past to ensure that your processes do not interfere with community life including excessive noise and light pollution? What assurances can you give to ensure there will be no noise pollution from your excavation activities irrespective of what is deemed to be acceptable standards?

10. Do you work with or have regular contact with the East Winch Parish Council or have you had direct contact or meetings with the East Winch Parish Council at any time within the last 5 years?

11. We have seen mineral extraction proposals for MIN40, etc. Can you confirm these will be the last excavation proposals within East Winch, Gayton, Middleton, Bawsey, Leziate and Grimston. YES or NO? If Yes, where are these areas and what are your future plans?

12. It is noted that part of your restoration plan at Grand Court Farm Middleton is to create another lake. Will the water be polluted with any chemicals as a result of the excavation process? If YES. What?

13. Can the newly created lake(s) support all forms of life associated with inland bodies of water?

14. Can you give absolute assurances that the current biodiversity status of MIN40 which includes all wildlife and topography will not be affected in any way?

15. Will any of your activities result in irreversible loss of wildlife habitat or biodiversity?

16. What is your position as regarding Respirable Crystalline Silica (RCS) being “a known human carcinogen” [Source: US Toxicology Report on Carcinogens, 7th edition] and that people living near quarries are “potentially exposed to Respirable Crystalline Silica?

17. We understand that Dave Robson from Environmental Health has been to visit your company during June 2008. Can you give assurances that you will cooperate with him fully in order to allow him to assess the level of dust emissions from your open cast sites, processing centres and the local haul routes (including road and rail)?

Whilst this list of questions is not exhaustive at this stage we are hoping that by you answering the questions as directly and honestly as possible we will be in a better position to evaluate the EWAG’s position and may help allay some of the wider communities’ fears. We are hoping that by opening direct dialog with you as a company we can achieve some sensible outcomes. However, a point to note the MIN 40 site is non negotiable at any cost as far as EWAG are concerned nor is any area of your activities which may have a direct effect on health or wellbeing of the village. We look forward to hearing from you."

Engineer's report on local historic buildings

I met up with Brian Morton MBE, of the Morton Partnership on Thursday.

Brian is a consulting and civil engineer and has been asked to write a report on the potential effects of local quarrying on old buildings, such as East Winch church.

As I understand it, any local digging could easily upset the water table. That is, digging a big hole during quarrying operations will drain water away from its current location. Water currently resides in compacted sand which often sits under and acts as the foundation of local historic buildings, where traditional foundations do not exist. Once the water has drained away, the sand dries out.

Once the sand is dry, it crumbles, and no longer supports the structures which would happily sit on a bed of damp sand for hundreds of years.

So, imagine building a sand castle, on the beach. Using a bucket to create the shapes of the turrets and so on. You have to use wet sand to do this.

If and when it dries out, the sand castle will crumble back into individual sand grains.

As you can imagine, this drying out can be devastating for a local buildings such as All Saints at East Winch and for local historic listed buildings such as Hall Farm House (Above).

Brian will write a report and all being well, I will be able to update you on his conclusions.

Slowworm found locally

One of our concerned residents found this at the beginning of July.

"It may be too late but I was stopped walking my dog tonight by the bloke with the whippet and terrier (don’t know his name). Just at the top of the pig track he found what he thought was a baby adder, but I believe that it is a juvenile slow worm (looked it up on Google), doesn’t make a huge difference as both are protected under the countryside act 1981. Please find attached a photo. Hope this helps."

Thanks for the photo, and I encourage everybody to email me similar pictures of local wildlife which can be published here.

Norfolk County Council Online Consultation

Whilst cruising google I found that our objections and comments have been put on three files for download at the link shown above.

You will need to register and provide a password to access the files.

Once you have logged in you can search for your representations (objections) and see what has been written against each site.

For example:

OBJECT Mr Neil Paddock
MINERALS SITE ALLOCATIONS ISSUES AND OPTIONS DOCUMENT
- MIN 40 - East Winch

Summary:
HEALTH RISKS Health issues from "respirable crystalling silica (RCS) known to be a human carcinogen" and "residents near quarries - are potentially exposed to (RCS)."Please refer to East Winch Action Group correspondence EWAG/L1/08, EWAG/L2/08 for additional information (and appendices).Report on carcinogenic, 11th edition - Extracts"Respirable crystalline silica, primarily quartz dusts occurring in industrial and occupational settings, is known to be a human carcinogen, based on sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity from studies in humans indicating a casual relationship between exposure to respirable crystalline silica and increased lung cancer rates in workers exposed to crystalline silica dust.""Respirable crystalline silica deposited in the lungs causes epithelial injury and macrophage activation, leading to inflammatory responses and cell proliferation of the epithelial and interstitial cells. In humans respirable crystalline silica persists in the lungs, culminating in the development of chronic silicosis, emphysema, obstructive airway disease, and lymph node fibrosis.""Health effectsBreathing in the very fine dust of crystalline silica can lead to the development of silicosis. This involves scarring of the lung tissue and can lead to breathing difficulties. Exposure to very high concentrations over a relatively short period of time can cause acute silicosis, resulting in rapidly progressive breathlessness and death within a few months of onset.More common is progressive silicosis, usually because of exposure over a longer period. This causes fibrosis (hardening or scarring) of the lung tissue with a consequent loss of lung function. Victims are likely to suffer severe shortness of breath and will find it difficult or impossible to walk even short distances or upstairs. The effect continues to develop after exposure has stopped and is irreversible. Suffers usually become house - or bed-bound and often die prematurely due to heart failure. Respirable crystalline silica is known to be a human carcinogen, based on sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity from studies in humans indicating a casual relationship between exposure to respirable crystalline silica and increased lung cancer rates in workers exposed to crystalline silica dust."Health - silica sand extraction produces dust (RCS) which is known to be a human carcinogen. This will create an unacceptable risk to residents "Residents near quarries and sand and gravel operations are potentially exposed to respirable crystalline silica."

Wendy Twite's Article from the June Parish Magazine

By popular request, here is Wendy Twite's article, and a few choice cuts follow below:

"It sounded to me and others like blackmail."

Perhaps Wendy would care to explain what she and "others" meant by the heading in the May Issue "Cancer & Silicosis Risks to Villages from local Quarrying Activity" sounding like Blackmail.
According to Wikipedia, "Blackmail is the crime of threatening to reveal substantially true information about a person to the public, a family member, or associates unless a demand made upon the victim is met. This information is usually of an embarrassing or socially damaging nature. As the information is substantially true, the act of revealing the information may not be criminal in its own right nor amount to a civil law defamation; the crime is making demands to withhold it."

Ok, so are we (all) blackmailers?

I would agree that the information about the cancer and silicosis risks is substantially true - refer to US Toxicology Report on Carcinogens 11th edition which states: "Respirable Crystalline Silica [RCS] is a known human carcinogen." and "people living near sand quarries are potentially exposed to RCS".

However, it can't be blackmail because that would involve making demands to withold the info...

and... 1) we haven't demanded to withold it (that is, to keep it a secret), and 2) we haven't witheld it, because the links and the articles are all available on this website, and on official sites such as that of the Health and Safety Executive.

So in conclusion, although Ms. Twite is entitled to her opinion, accusing local groups of criminal activity (blackmail) is chronically inaccurate and missing the point. And its pretty offensive.

I can only conclude that she is "dreadfully dreadfully" misinformed.

And by the way, in my book, if somebody says something is dangerous, and it is, they are telling the truth. The last time I looked that was not breaking the law. But killing people by poisoning is, under most circumstances.

"No sand extraction would be near houses."


If that's the case, how come MIN40 backs onto East Winch?

And how near does it have to be? If sand can be blown onto our cars from the Sahara, what are the odds that silica sand can be blown a few hundred metres from Ashwicken, Grandcourt Farm, Min40 or Leziate, and for the dust to get inside people's lungs?

I could go on, but I am going to spend some time with my kids. Bye for Now.