Save East Winch and West Bilney!

Save East Winch - Some suggestions

2011-12-11T20:40:00.001Z

"The last thing I want to do, is to move into an area of natural beauty, that will soon be desecrated in the name of progress, and I don't want to have to involve myself in a protest group, just to protect the environment I have chosen to move to".

The best advice I can offer is to research the area thoroughly and draw your own conclusions.

Here's a few suggestions...

Firstly:
• Read the saveeastwinch and the eraseorg website/blogs.
http://saveeastwinch.blogspot.com
http://eraseorg.blogspot.com
This will save you the hassle of trawling through some of the sources below for yourself directly and provide you with further useful links.

Also:
• Talk to local people other than the seller and ask them about the situation.
• Check the local papers (EDP, Lynn News) for current articles and go online to find past articles.
• Try the Norfolk County Council (Planning Department) website.
• Phone the Norfolk County Council Offices and speak to a planning representative. Ask them directly about development in the area and ask them where it is documented.
• Get hold of a parish newsletter/magazine if you can (maybe from the local post office). They contain planning application information and useful contacts (e.g. The Parish Council).
• Speak to (or write to) the local parish council. You could even attend a meeting.
• If you drive around the area, look for prominently displayed signs from protest groups saying "No means No - Stop violating our democracy", "No to the Incinerator", and so on. Review the website displayed underneath the slogan and make your own informed decision.

In the end, it's a personal choice.

Good Luck!

Notice of Public Meeting re: Min 39/40 (Tues, 5th July 19:00 EW Village Hall)

2011-06-19T13:27:00.011+01:00

Nell has booked East Winch Village Hall for a public meeting for 19:00, Tuesday 5th July 2011 to discuss mineral allocation for MIN39 & MIN40 and our response to the latest 8 week consultation period which runs from Monday 20th June 2011 to Friday 15 August 2011.

There will also be an opportunity to discuss the latest developments and concerns re the proposed incinerator.

I have attached a link to the latest mineral allocation documents from the council - you can download the full document here:

http://documents.dareiidream.co.uk/mwdf.pdf

MIN39 is discussed on the ERASEORG blog at:

http://eraseorg.blogspot.com

MIN40's current status is "allocated" - The text from the MIN40 report is produced below:

******************************************************************

Site ref no.
MIN 40
Parish
EAST WINCH
Location of site
Land to the east of Grandcourt Farm
Submitted by
Sibelco Ltd
Proposed use/s
Mineral extraction (silica sand)
Estimated
reserves
3,000,000 tonnes
Allocation / Area of Search
Allocation
Size of site (ha)
52.7

Background information: There are no current mineral or waste planning permission at this site. The site lies immediately to the east of an unworked area of land with planning permission for silica sand extraction. It is proposed that the site forms an extension to the existing pit to the east.

Landscape: The site comprises open gently undulating arable land divided by hedgerows and groups of trees. The site is adjacent to the current Leziate Quarry, and MIN 40 would form a natural extension. The site borders East Winch to the east and two isolated properties to the west and south. Parts of the area probably could be worked and screened satisfactorily but phasing with permitted sites to the North and west would need to be arranged.

Ecology: The surrounding area is of high wildlife value; there would be a need to carry out surveys to assess the size of population of protected species and ensure suitable mitigation if necessary; also there would be a need to carry out a tree survey to establish the location of any veteran trees. The site offers the potential for a high quality restoration to heathland, or a heathland/ arable/woodland network if a suitable scheme can be agreed.

Highways: If the site needed direct access to A47, this would probably be unacceptable to the Highways Agency; an alternative route through East Winch would also be unacceptable. However should the material be conveyored to the existing Leziate quarry site (for processing and onward transportation), the existing road and rail links at Leziate could be used.

Amenity: The potential for health impacts (development of Silicosis) caused by exposure to Respirable Crystalline Silica (RCS) related to certain operations was highlighted by many respondents. Information from the HSE states that ‘Silicosis is a disease that has only been seen in workers from industries where there is a significant exposure to silica dust, such as in quarries, foundries, the potteries etc. No cases of silicosis have been documented among members of the general public in Great Britain, indicating that environmental exposures to silica dust are not sufficiently high to cause this occupational disease.’ High risk operations that have been identified are stone masonry, milling, and drilling which are not operations normally carried out in Norfolk quarries due to the nature of the resource. Milling does occur, but in enclosed processing buildings with appropriate HSE monitoring.

Concerns were also raised about air quality and in particular fine particulate dusts referred to generically as PM10. These are particles with a diameter of less than 10 μm; the principal sources are vehicle emissions, pollen, aerosols, chemicals, sea salt and dusts. These fine particles are a health concern because they can be inhaled directly into the lungs. The particle sizes of quarried sand in the UK are generally larger than 70 μm.

Concerns were raised as to the impacts of noise, dust and vibration etc, this would require an assessment, if impacts are identified suitable mitigation measures would need to be put in place.
Water resources/quality: The site is located on a principal aquifer and the Environment Agency would be likely to object to the proposal if, permanent de-watering of the perched Carstone aquifer is proposed. A Hydrological Impact Assessment (HIA) would be required as part of any planning application to quantify impacts and suitable mitigation. A water supply main crosses the site and site boundaries should be amended to exclude the area where the main is located; alternatively the diversion/protection of the main should be carried out at the developer’s expense.

Geodiversity: It would be useful to have watching brief during extraction in case potential features of interested are uncovered and retaining some open faces as part of the restoration would aid scientific study.
Other comments:

Conclusion: This site is considered to be suitable for allocation subject to conditions including:
29
•
An approved scheme of working and restoration which addresses issues of phasing, landscape, geodiversity and ecology;
•
A dust and noise assessment to identify any potential impacts on nearby properties and appropriate mitigation to address any of these impacts;
•
A Hydrological Impact Assessment to identify any potential impacts on groundwater and appropriate mitigation to address any of these impacts, and;
•
The use of a conveyor and/or internal haul routes to the current processing site.

Site allocated.

**********************************************************
LETTER FROM NORFOLK COUNTY COUNCIL (Text reproduced below)

Norfolk Minerals and Waste Local Development Framework:

Minerals Site Specific Allocations and Waste Site Specific Allocations Development Plan Documents: Consultation on Revised Further Issues and Options

I am writing to let you know that Norfolk County Council is undertaking a further round of consultation, for a period of eight weeks, on the “Revised Further Issues and Options” of the Minerals Site Specific Allocations Development Plan Document (DPD) and the Waste Site Specific Allocations DPD. The consultation will run from 20 June to 15 August 2011 (inclusive), and I would welcome your comments.

The Waste Site Specific Allocations DPD, which will run until the end of 2026, contains the site specific allocations for waste management facilities in Norfolk. A total of 35 waste management sites, covering a range of different potential uses, are proposed to be allocated, whilst 34 sites are considered unsuitable for allocation. The document also contains maps of safeguarded waste management facilities and safeguarded waste water treatment works.

The Minerals Site Specific Allocations DPD, which will run until the end of 2026, contains the site specific allocations for mineral extraction in Norfolk. A total of 25 sand & gravel sites, one carstone site and two silica sand sites are proposed to be allocated. 66 proposed mineral extraction sites are considered unsuitable or unnecessary for allocation. The document also contains maps of safeguarded mineral extraction sites, mineral infrastructure (railheads and wharfage), Mineral Safeguarding Areas and Mineral Consultation Areas.

The Minerals Site Specific Allocations DPD and the Waste Site Specific Allocations DPD have been through two stages of consultation: the “Issues and Options” in 2008 and the “Further Issues and Options (Preferred Options)” in 2009.

After the current consultation period finishes, the next stage in the preparation of the Mineral Site Specific Allocations DPD and the Waste Site Specific Allocations DPD will be the publication of the Pre-Submission documents, which is planned to take place in autumn 2011.

The documents are available to view at libraries, Council Information Centres and District/Borough Council offices in Norfolk, and online at www.norfolk.gov.uk/nmwdf. Where possible the County Council would prefer representations to be made directly to www.norfolk.gov.uk/nmwdf; however responses by post, fax and email (ldf@norfolk.gov.uk) will also be accepted. All comments, in whatever form, should be made by 5pm on 15 August 2011.

The following “new” sites, put forward since the consultation in 2009, are included in the current consultation documents.

Site Parish Proposal
WAS 90 Norwich Recycling centre
WAS 91 Hockering Inert waste recycling, waste transfer
WAS 92 North Walsham Anaerobic digestion
WAS 93 North Walsham Composting, anaerobic digestion
WAS 94 North Walsham Composting, anaerobic digestion
MIN 117 Beetley Sand and gravel extraction
MIN 118 Wymondham Sand and gravel extraction
MIN 119 East Winch Sand extraction

Yours sincerely

Caroline Jeffery
Principal Planning and Policy Officer
Planning Services
Public Protection
Environment, Transport and Development
Direct dial telephone number: 01603 222193
E-mail: caroline.jeffery@norfolk.gov.uk
Norfolk County Council
General enquiries: 0344 800 8020 or information@norfolk.gov.uk
www.norfolk.gov.uk

Interview, BBC Norfolk 4th April 2011, 07:15am

2011-04-08T20:01:00.003+01:00

Please click on the title of this article to hear the interview in full.
You can also click on the link below. Thank you.
http://soundcloud.com/neilpaddock/save-east-winch-interview-on

You Deserve The Truth!

2011-04-03T10:09:00.004+01:00

Sometimes music says it best. My son James created this piece of music recently for a school project, and I think it's appropriate and fitting to be used to highlight the Save East Winch and West Bilney Campaign.

Simply because as a fellow resident of Norfolk, as far as local quarrying and proposed incinerators are concerned:

You Deserve The Truth.

Radio Interview with Chris Goreham, BBC Norfolk 4th April 2011, 07:08am

2011-04-03T08:12:00.015+01:00

On the eve of my interview on BBC Norfolk tomorrow 4th April 2011 at 07:08am, I have provided a transcript below based on a letter I wrote in 2009 to a reporter at the BBC who was requesting evidence for the "Save East Winch" cause. To date I have never received a response.

With reference to our conversation on Respirable Crystalline Silica, I have provided links to the actual online sources and extracted quotes of particular interest. You will note that these are UK & US Government sources and thus should be taken seriously.

What I fail to understand is that although information exists in abundance stating the risks and consequences of both intense and prolonged exposure to Respirable Crystalline Silica (RCS), no mention of risk is made when planning applications are considered, for example for Grandcourt Quarry, the HSE person present had no documented health concerns or objections whatsoever and permission to go ahead was subsequently granted.

If you had to live for 20 or 30 years in close proximity to a number of silica sand quarries, would the information I am sharing with you below be of concern to you?

I am reminded of the quotation attributed to German philosopher, Arthur Schopenhauer regarding the truth:

“All truth passes through 3 stages. First it is ridiculed, secondly, it is violently opposed, third, it is accepted as being self-evident.”

Lessons from the Past
We can learn lessons from the past. Unfortunately, all too often, history repeats itself with tragic consequences, resulting in unnecessary suffering and lives being cut short.

i) Thalidomide
The 1960s Thalidomide scandal could have been avoided if proper account had been taken of risk and thorough testing been carried out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thalidomide

ii) Smoking
In the 1970’s, there was no TV ban on advertising cigarettes. They had appeared prominently in 1940s Hollywood movies many years before. Nowadays the dangers of both smoking and passive smoking have been recognized with warning labels on cigarette cartons saying “Smoking Kills” and smoking in UK pubs and restaurants is no longer permitted. The realisation that passive smoking was dangerous came too late for popular entertainer and “Record Breakers” host Roy Castle, whose untimely death in 1994 was attributed to cancer from passive smoking from all his years of performing music in smoke filled bars and clubs. He had never once put a cigarette to his lips.

http://www.roycastle.org/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Castle

iii) Radiation
A film by the US War Office in my possession on the Atomic Bomb dropped on Hiroshima in 1945 states that the Bomb did not create radiation on the ground as it exploded before it impacted, pushing the radiation upwards. Scant consolation for the relatives of the hapless film crews that were sent out to “ground zero” days after the blast to record the damage, and to the relatives of many thousands of victims of radiation sickness in Japan after the blast.

Even the famous film actor John Wayne succumbed to stomach cancer in 1979 attributed to Nuclear testing carried out in the US desert where he used to make his western movies.

Clearly, there are many more examples of environmental dangers I could refer to.

My point is this:

Let’s not earmark East Winch as the next tragedy waiting to happen.

So Is Silica Sand Really Dangerous?
If it is, then why aren’t there people going around with illnesses shouting from the rooftops about it? Good Question.

In my 25 years experience as an accountant I have come to realise that companies predominantly focus on one thing:

The survival and preservation of the company, through a good public image and the ability to make and sustain profits and share prices.

iv) Compensation
Bad publicity damages company credibility and puts companies at risk, so some companies have developed a strategy to minimize adverse publicity by paying dissatisfied customers or victims of accidents or illnesses compensation in return for their confidentiality.

This means that the affected worker keeps quiet about it, because if they break the terms of the confidentiality agreement they are required to sign, they have to repay the compensation.

This could range from giving away spare vacuum bags in trivial cases of an underperforming or broken vacuum cleaner to significant financial payments to enable, say, a sick employee to pay for private hospital treatment to compensate them for the onset of an industrial illness. Could this explain why people aren’t coming forward?

v) Fear
It could also simply be fear of possible reprisals from within the community that keeps people quiet who might otherwise speak out. They could also damage the livelihoods of friends and family who still work within the business and feel they are betraying them.

vi) Adverse Events & Drug Safety
People who have an adverse reaction to a drug have been known to receive financial compensation from a company before the event is publicised and taken to court. Budgets are set aside to allow for this.

vii) Keeping Up Appearances
I know of one unhappy worker in a large company who admitted that they were forced to lie to external agencies by their boss about the extent of the impact of an environmental error, which resulted in an illegal chemical discharge into the local river. They had to lie to keep their job.
They decided to lie.

viii) Erin Brochovich
Erin Brochovich sensationally and successfully brought an action against Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) of California in 1993 for contamination of local groundwater with harmful metals in a groundbreaking legal case. A film was made about it starring Julia Roberts in 2000.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erin_Brockovich

So, without pointing fingers, you may accept at his stage that it is at least plausible that a company would seek to protect its public image and could use any of the methods I have already described, including choosing to withhold what it considers to be detrimental information. Exactly how far does each one go to achieve that? That is a matter for the directors.

I would hope that by the time the truth becomes self-evident, that it has not cost the people of East Winch too dearly.

My wish would be that we can protect our children from those amongst us who will: (a) put their own commercial interests above the health and safety of the local community and... (b) conveniently turn a blind eye to the evidence.

This is in addition to the anecdotal evidence of the local man who has lost 13 of his relatives to cancer. The link? They all worked in or lived near the sandpits. He attributes their loss to silica sand. Furthermore, he estimates 75% of the people he worked with are now dead. Also he tells me 6 people on “Millionaire’s Row” have died of cancer. A transcript of our interview I recorded outside East Winch Village Hall is attached further on in this note.

Additionally, last year I found an article on the BBC news about a man who worked for a mineral company and successfully sued for damages. He was awarded about £6,000. (The costs were about £14,000).

Not much compensation in my view for his vital organs being damaged beyond repair.

I have enclosed most of the sources (further on) that I uncovered about 18 months ago. It makes for scary reading.

What now follows is a brief summary of the events that took place when we first became aware of the quarry plans and the health risks associated with silica sand.

Cancer & Silicosis Risks to Villagers from proposed local Quarrying Activity at MIN40, East Winch, Norfolk

Norfolk County Council has proposed several sites in the local area for Mineral and Waste Allocation, which is likely to lead to a substantial number of new quarries and rubbish dumps across East Winch and West Bilney, as well as the rest of West Norfolk. We originally actually found out by chance, despite it being called “a consultation” – more about that later.

As relative newcomers to the village, we knew nothing about the extent of local quarrying until 10th March 2008, when we were made aware of a substantial quarry (which most of the residents we met with had no knowledge of) 400m north of East Winch village. The quarry is quite obvious when you look on www.multimap.co.uk and type in PE32 1NP and look to the north of the village in “Aerial” view. It closely resembles a moon crater or asteroid impact crater.

Up to 3 million tonnes of Silica sand, described by Sibelco [formerly known as W.B.B. Minerals] as "a mineral of national importance" could be extracted from MIN40, directly to the west of East Winch.

So why are we worried?

Because exposure to silica sand, or more specifically, Respirable Crystalline Silica (known as RCS for short), is dangerous to health.

Who says?

US Sources
According to the Report On Carcinogens, 11th Edition, published by U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Toxicology Program

Respirable Crystalline Silica [i.e. the dust created by silica sand quarrying] "is known to be a human carcinogen." (1) [i.e. it means that it causes cancer in humans]

UK Sources
Health and Safety Executive (HSE) Construction Information sheet No 36 Revision 1 states:
“Health effects: Breathing 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.”(2)

We became aware of planning being approved for a site 600m to the west of East Winch, at Grandcourt Farm (Middleton) approved in 2004, again without a large number of local residents knowing about it. Although technically, the notices may have been up for their 2 week period whilst we were viewing our new property in 2005, we missed the opportunity to object.
Only two objections were ever received for Grandcourt Farm.

The document that brought all this to our awareness was Norfolk County Council's document for Mineral Allocation sites, where 3 million tonnes of silica sand would be mined in close proximity to the village from a site known as MIN 40, being the land to the east of Grandcourt Farm (now called Grandcourt Quarry) which would, according to the most recent drawings in the council’s blue book, reduce the “buffer zone” between the village and the other quarries down to 150m if this is granted full planning permission.

[Originally, one vigilant and proactive resident spotted the council notice whilst walking his dog, attended a meeting with the council and was granted an extra month for us to object to the MIN 40 proposal. If not for his timely intervention, this site too could have gone through to the next
stage without any objections.]

In conclusion, although MIN 40 is still only at the proposal stage, given that we already have an active quarry to 400m the north of the village and planning granted for the one 600m to the west which at the [original] time of writing, October 2009, has been worked on by clearing trees and moving earth for over a year now) we believe we already have enough quarries to deal with as it is!

Substantial tracts of local land have been falling like dominoes all around us, due to be swallowed up for quarrying and landfill, and officials appear to have rubber stamped these huge deals without any planning or safety objections.

And we as local residents and taxpayers who have the most to lose, have been the last to know!

Is this ethical? Is this sustainable? Is this justifiable? Aren’t the people of East Winch entitled to enjoy their basic human rights? Are Sibelco prepared to admit to the risks? Or will they simply choose to hide behind the cloak of commercial confidentiality? “The answer is blowing in the wind.” – Bob Dylan

Risks To Health – The Evidence

The Report On Carcinogens, 11th Edition as referred to above, states:

"The link between human lung cancer and exposure to Respirable Crystalline Silica was strongest in studies of quarry and granite workers"

And also:
"Residents near quarries and sand and gravel operations are potentially exposed to respirable crystalline silica." (1)

The people of East Winch stand to lose not only their DEFRA sponsored conservation walks and beautiful scenery and local wildlife (nowhere to walk the dogs or let the kids play) but also potentially their health and their very lives due to increased exposure to respiratory crystalline silica, which is known to cause respiratory illnesses such as silicosis and is linked to cancer.

“In humans, respirable crystalline silica persists in the lungs, culminating in the development of chronic silicosis, emphysema, obstructive airway disease, and lymph node fibrosis.” (1)

Sibelco’s slogan is "Working Together for Mineral Solutions".

Most of East Winch’s residents don’t want this mineral solution to become their “final solution.”

Also consider the unique wildlife that will be destroyed or displaced such as our local skylarks, hares, and so on, much of which is on the UK Biodiversity Action Plan (which means it should be protected by the Government). Skylarks were present at all the Proposed Mineral Allocation Sites I visited back in April 2008.

“Am I Affected?” & “What Can I Do To Help?”
By the time the original deadline had lapsed on April 25th 2008, East Winch (with the help of the recently formed East Winch Action Group [E.W.A.G.]) had delivered over 100 individual written objections to the proposals to Norfolk County Council and a signed petition objecting to the sites at both East Winch and West Bilney. We set up an online petition which has to date attracted around 150 signatures. We also set up a website www.saveeastwinch.com as a useful information
source and organised a number of local residents’ meetings at East Winch and Leziate with local councillors and MPs in attendance, to consider the issues raised by the proposed quarries.

Now the selection of “preferred sites” has raised its head again in October 2009 with MIN40 still being included in the latest document issued and we now have 8 weeks to raise any objections or concerns.

Having revisited the links and documentation attached, I remain convinced that the long term risks to health are our number one concern.

I would like Sibelco to take our concerns seriously and provide us with information to demonstrate and prove that any risks outlined below are being actively considered, managed and minimized, rather than simply denied or dismissed without any justification.

I have seen a tendency for some individuals to simply deny the evidence and say things like “Silica sand is safe while it’s still in the ground.”

Seems a good enough reason to me to leave it there!

Local Opinion
I have been accused of "blackmail" in the village magazine and scaremongering simply by drawing attention to this information [evidence] about RCS, silicosis and the links to cancer enclosed here. Sibelco have denied the risks in the Lynn News newspaper under the headline “Firm Dismisses Cancer Threat”.

Remember:
“Precautions taken to control the risk of potential exposure to RCS will serve to control the risk of fibrosis.”

“Precautions taken to control the risk of fibrosis will serve to control the risk of lung cancer.”

We encourage anyone directly affected by these or similar proposals to contact us at the email address below and everybody else to actively support us by signing the respective e-petitions on our websites [NB which are now closed].

You can also leave comments directly under the articles on the “Save East Winch (and East Bilney)” site, and we strongly encourage you to do so.

Finally, please spread the word and pass on this message to your friends to enlist their support.

Thank you.

Let's Keep Norfolk Green!

"Don't Quarry - Be Healthy!"

Local Contacts:
East Winch Action Group (EWAG):
www.saveeastwinch.blogspot.com

ERASE – Exploited Region Against Silica Extraction
www.eraseorg.blogspot.com
erase.org@tiscali.co.uk

neilpaddock@gmail.com
01553 842385

Transcript of Interview by Neil Paddock (NP) with Local Man (LM), 13th April 2008
(NB The names have been omitted to maintain privacy)

NP: “Could you state your name please?”

LM: (Name Witheld)

NP: “(Name repeated) Could you just tell us a little bit about your experiences
round here and er… why you are here today?”

LM: “Shall I start at the beginning? Well I’m here because I lost my father (1) in the late fifties with cancer. He worked at the sandpits. From the… during the war. The latter part of it that is.

A few years later, my brother (2) lived near the sandpits, he died at 49 of cancer.

The next one was my eldest brother’s nephew (3), he was 28. He worked in the sandpits, He died at 28.

I then lost 3 uncles, that worked at the sandpits (4 5 & 6). After that I lost another nephew (7) who worked at the sandpits.

Now recently, My brother (8) who was in his late eighties, Ashwicken, he died two year ago, cancer.

The other brother (9) from Middleton , he worked at the sandpits, he died last year.

My Aunt and Uncle, who lived at Bawsey near the sandpits, they both died of cancer (10 & 11).

Now I lived at erm XXXX Farm near the sandpits with my ex wife she moved away –
about two year ago she got cancer of the throat, she died (12).

My Daughter XXXX, 50, she has now got cancer of the throat.

My sister XXXX at Ashwicken, who has lived there from the day she was born, she’s
sixty odd, she’s opposite the quarry down at Ashwicken, she’s been diagnosed with
cancer, she’s been treated for 3 years.

And I’d say 75% of the people who worked in the pits died of cancer.
And I know of 6 down Millionaire’s Row if you know where that is? They call it Millionaire’s Row – there’s about 6 died down there. That’s it.”
NP: “So (Name Withheld) what do you attribute to these deaths?”

LM: “Silicon Sands. I worked there, you know, yeah.”

NP: “Is there a lot of dust blowing around when you work there?”

LM: “You cannot see – last Wednesday when we had the wind, my sister could not see
across the road.”

NP: “And presumably this blows into people’s houses does it ?”

LM: “It’s in the house all the time she’s always wiping the windowsills down”

NP: “And so where does your sister live?”

LM: “Ashwicken.”

NP: “Right next to one of the largest…”

LM: “300 metres [corrects himself] 30 metres away from the quarry, large quarry.”

NP: “And how long have they been extracting sand from that pit?”

LM: “I think it about 4 years, it’s on that list yeah.”

NP: “So you have been in the area, your 75 years old…”

LM: “I’m 75, I was born at Ashwicken, Yeah.”

NP: “How many relatives was it in total that you feel have been lost to cancer? I
think it was 13, is that correct?”

LM: “Yes 13 and the wife, (and daughter).”

NP: “Well clearly this is a tragic story and obviously I extend my sympathy to you
personally, man to man…”

LM: “Thank you.”

NP: “You know we thank you very much for coming forward with this information, I got involved in this initially because of the damage to the countryside and the surrounding areas…but I can see already there is a much broader issue we need to address, things where, you know, the truth hasn’t come out until now.
We’ll do everything we can to bring this into the public domain, so thank you for coming forward…”

LM: “That’s quite all right, you’re welcome.”

***End of transcript***

Online Sources:

(1) http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/cis36.pdf

Silica

HSE information sheet

Construction Information Sheet No 36 Revision 1

“Health effects
Breathing 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. Similarly, accelerated silicosis, which can progress to death within a decade, has been associated with high exposures to silica in sand blasting. 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. Sufferers usually become house- or bed-bound and often die prematurely due to heart failure.

Silica may be linked to lung cancer. If this is the case it is most likely that it occurs as a progression of lung fibrosis. Precautions taken to control the risk of fibrosis will serve to control the risk of lung cancer.”

(2) http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/toc11.html

http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/eleventh/profiles/s161sili.pdf

“Silica, Crystalline (Respirable Size)*

Known to be a human carcinogen
First Listed in the Sixth Annual Report on Carcinogens (1991)

Carcinogenicity
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 causal relationship between exposure to respirable crystalline silica and increased lung cancer rates in workers exposed to crystalline silica dust.”

“Hazardous human exposure to respirable crystalline silica, primarily quartz dusts, occurs mainly in industrial and occupational settings (discussed in “Exposure”). The link between human lung cancer and exposure to respirable crystalline silica was strongest in studies of quarry and granite workers and workers involved in ceramic, pottery, refractory brick, and diatomaceous earth industries. Human cancer risks are associated with exposure to respirable quartz and cristobalite but not to amorphous silica.”

“The findings in humans are supported by studies in experimental animals demonstrating consistent increases in lung cancers in rats chronically exposed to respirable crystalline silica by inhalation or intratracheal instillation. No lung tumors were observed in hamsters exposed to quartz by intratracheal instillation. Single intrapleural or intraperitoneal injections of various forms of respirable crystalline silica caused lymphomas in rats (IARC 1997).”

“Additional Information Relevant to Carcinogenicity
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. Respirable crystalline silica stimulates (1) release of cytokines and growth factors from macrophages and epithelial cells; (2) release of reactive oxygen and nitrogen intermediates; and (3) oxidative stress in lungs. All these pathways contribute to lung disease.”

(4) http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/silicacrystalline/index.html

“Silicosis is a disabling, nonreversible and sometimes fatal lung disease caused by overexposure to respirable crystalline silica. Silica exposure remains a serious threat to nearly two million US workers. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) reports that each year more than 250 die from silicosis and hundreds more are disabled. There is no cure for the disease, but it is 100 percent preventable if employers, workers, and health professionals work together to reduce exposures.”

Silicosis Dr Rob Hicks

http://www.bbc.co.uk/health/conditions/silicosis1.shtml

“WHAT CAUSES IT?

Silica in crystalline form is toxic to the lining of the lungs. When the two come into contact, a strong inflammatory reaction occurs. Over time this inflammation causes the lung tissue to become irreversibly thickened and scarred - a condition known as fibrosis.

WHO'S AFFECTED?

People who work with these materials, as well as foundry workers, potters and sandblasters, are most at risk. Other forms of silica, such as glass, are less of a health risk as they aren't as toxic to the lungs. Men tend to be affected more often than women, as they are more likely to have been exposed to silica. Silicosis is most commonly diagnosed in people over 40, as it usually takes years of exposure before the gradually progressive lung damage becomes apparent.”

Siliocosis & Asbestosis http://www.healthandsafety.co.uk/silasb.htm

Conclusion:

"Residents near quarries and sand and gravel operations are potentially exposed to
respirable crystalline silica." (1)

We believe that the health considerations stated above are valid (given that they come from UK & US Government sources) and that no local agency or business involved in this matter has to date given them (or us) the consideration they (or we) deserve.

The people of East Winch are hardworking taxpaying people who deserve the support of local officials and the government and should not be treated as guinea pigs (or laboratory rats for that matter) in a long term commercial experiment.

We do not want to be written off in years to come as “collateral damage” in order for the county to meet a government quota.

Commercial interests have predominated here, not the interests of the local residents and the health of their children.

The nature of contamination of the lungs through PM10 particles of RCS can be an extremely gradual process over many years, so the victim does not notice at first.
It’s a subtle, invisible enemy.

We know the sand blows around and settles, but what becomes of the airborne
particulates? Do we simply unknowingly breathe them in? How often?

Have scientists agreed on appropriate standards for levels of PM10s?

So given the inherent uncertainty, would you want to live next door to a 3 Million
tonne silica sand quarry?

(That’s 1 of 3 within 1000m metres of the village, don’t forget!)

Where you and your family are “potentially exposed” to RCS every day, for decades?

From at least 3 different sources?

Why should the residents of East Winch with our limited resources have to bear the burden to prove that this is dangerous?

When Sibelco have the manpower and the resources to prove that it is safe by demonstrating keen risk management and allowing access to their internal procedures for independent audit.

My message to Sibelco is simply this:

Mr Cutbush, Prove it’s safe. If you can. Or at least demonstrate that you recognize the risks and are actively managing them. Would you knowingly put your family at risk of “potential exposure” to silica sand or anything else considered to be harmful without first quantifying the risks? I doubt it.

“There is no cure for the disease, but it is 100 percent preventable if employers, workers, and health professionals work together to reduce exposures.”

Regards

Neil Paddock Chairman
East Winch Action Group
18th October 2009
Note: The views expressed in this note are that of the author alone. It is hoped that they coincide with the views of the East Winch Action Group Committee and the majority of the residents of East Winch but this cannot be guaranteed.

Why Quarrying Silica Sand may be bad for your health...

2011-04-02T12:54:00.004+01:00

There are at least two good reasons why you might not want a large local mineral company quarrying silica sand on your doorstep.

1) Cancer Risks
2) Silicosis Risks

The council appears determined to give us both a quarry in East Winch and also a potentially dangerous incinerator at Saddlebow in King's Lynn, despite concerted opposition from local people. There was even a vote against it which appears to have been completely ignored.

I have attached a link to a report REPORT ON CARCINOGENS, ELEVENTH EDITION (issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Toxicology Program) so you can read about just how dangerous Respirable Crystalline Silica (or RCS - the dust created from Silica Sand Quarrying) can be.

An extract from the beginning of the document follows below:

1) CANCER RISKS

"Carcinogenicity
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 causal relationship between exposure to respirable crystalline silica and increased lung cancer rates in workers exposed to crystalline silica dust."

And...at the bottom of page two...

"Nonoccupational exposure to respirable crystalline silica results from natural processes and anthropogenic sources; silica is a common air contaminant. Residents near quarries and sand and gravel operations are potentially exposed to respirable crystalline silica."

The link to the full report is here:
http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/eleventh/profiles/s161sili.pdf

This may explain why a local villager has lost 13 of his relatives to cancer who either worked in or lived near the sandpits.

There are also risks of contracting Silicosis.

2) SILICOSIS RISKS
Ironically, the Government, apparently intent on harvesting Silica Sand from in and around the King's Lynn area (and wiping out the nature walk at "MIN40" in the process) have issued this document highlighting the dangers of silica sand, and the risks of silicosis via The Health and Safety Executive.

The document, [HSE information sheet on Silica
Construction Information Sheet No 36 Revision 1] states:

“Breathing 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.”

http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/cis36.pdf

Here's a picture of a healthy lung...
http://www.sy-klone.com/mm5/graphics/00000001/photos/news_case_studies/health/LungSection_healthy.jpg

Here's what a lung looks like with silicosis...
http://www.sy-klone.com/mm5/graphics/00000001/photos/news_case_studies/health/LungSection_Silicosis2.jpg

I have attached the links to the original article so you can see where these came from.
http://www.sy-klone.com/mm5/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=SI&Product_Code=NW-R-AIOH-RCS&Category_Code=NW

"Dead workers aren't fashionable,"

2011-03-20T18:16:00.006Z

"Sarah Butler, 6:44, Sunday 20 March 2011

Asda (NYSE: WMT - news) , Diesel, Matalan and Primark are among a group of companies being criticised for selling jeans made using sandblasting, which can cause illness or even death.

The pressure group, Labour Behind the Label, said these companies continue to use sandblasting to give denim a "worn" look, despite the danger that silica dust from the sand can get into workers' lungs. British companies including New Look and Marks & Spencer (Dusseldorf: MA6.DU - news) also say they have banned the process. Levi's and H&M (Stockholm: HMB.ST - news) stopped all use in December

"Dead workers aren't fashionable," said Sam Maher, co-author of Labour Behind the Label's Killer Jeans report, which will be published on Monday.

"The trend for killer jeans must be phased out by companies and rejected by consumers with immediate effect." It is also calling on retailers and brands to compensate workers who have been made ill by operating sandblasting machines in the past."

They couldn't give a monkeys about dead villagers.

So what will they hit us with first, the quarry or the incinerator?

Review the article for some information about the dangers of silica sand by clicking on the title of this post. You can also click on the link below.

Just what exactly are we paying our council tax for?

http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/Top-chains-urged-ban-tele-3797296291.html?x=0

Proposed Incinerator

2010-07-12T21:41:00.002+01:00

I received an email today and thought it best to share its contents:

"According to Dr Dick van Steenis MBBS and Michael Ryan, a civil engineer, [the proposed incinerator at Saddlebow] is likely to cause all the problems that every other incinerator of its type is causing wherever they are built, ie foetal abnormalities, baby deaths, cancers, heart attacks and strokes, especially downwind ie to the east. Whilst the council have tried to make it sound as if it is the answer to all our problems of landfill, Michael Ryan has ascertained from the Department of Health that no government health studies have ever taken place around incinerators, a fact echoed by the Health Protection Agency. In fact the HPA even recommend that no investigations take place (See their words in Hansard 30th November 2009).

I have invited Dr van Steenis to address a public meeting on this subject on 20th July at 7pm in the Methodist Church, London Road, King's Lynn (opposite the police station). I have invited MPs and councillors to attend and it is to be chaired by Lord Lester. Please can you inform anyone you know who may be interested. It could be that it will be necessary to use an adjoining room at the venue which has loudspeakers fitted, due to a large number of people attending. (We hope this will be the case really)."

Object by December 11th 2009!

2009-12-05T23:56:00.002Z

Once again, Norfolk County Council is looking at taking "MIN40" forward as a site for silica sand extraction, despite all our objections back in April 2008.

Residents of East Winch should have recently received a two page letter asking them to object once again to these proposals by December 11th.

This is the second "Consultation Period" for the site.

PLEASE ACT WITHOUT DELAY, AND SEND YOUR OBJECTIONS INTO NORFOLK COUNTY COUNCIL BEFORE THE DEC 11TH DEADLINE!

Minerals and waste sites allocations meeting today

2009-09-14T05:43:00.001+01:00

This is a reminder that the the draft preferred sites documents/consultation are scheduled to be discussed by NCC Cabinet on 14 September 2009.

MIN 40 is on the list in Green.

July Air Quality Update Correspondence

2009-08-16T15:32:00.002+01:00

Please find below correspondence back in July 2009 between myself and Dave Robson re Air Quality Monitoring:

*******************************************************************************

Neil

Unfortunately while the Air Quality Monitoring Station has been on site since November, it broke down during the relocation/ recommissioning. This fault was fixed but there was a long delay in getting the parts replaced. It now appears that a different part has gone wrong. We are currently in discussion with our supplier over what repairs/ parts are required.

Because of the problems with the AQMS, a newly acquired dust monitor has been co-located since the beginning of July. We are planning on downloading this monitor on a monthly basis and will of course publish the results when we get them.

Regards

Dave

Dave Robson MCIEH
Chartered Environmental Health Practitioner
Principal Officer -Environmental Quality & Licensing Section
Environmental Health & Housing Department
Tel. 01553 616302
From: Neil Paddock [mailto:neilpaddock@googlemail.com] Sent: 10 July 2009 23:22To: Dave RobsonSubject: Re: Air Quality Update

Dave

Thanks for the update

I wanted to know if the equipment had been installed and if so, for how long it had been up and running.

It doesn't sound like its been operating breakdown free for very long - could you advise how long its been located?

When is the new unit being installed/co-located?

At what point do you anticipate having any readings for analysis?

Regards

Neil Paddock

From: Dave Robson
Sent: Friday, July 10, 2009 10:04 AM
To: Neil Paddock
Subject: RE: Air Quality Update

Neil

Thank you for the email.

As mentioned before we have relocated an Air Quality Monitoring Station to measure PM10 at Brow of the Hill, Leziate. Unfortunately since it was relocated we have suffered from several breakdowns, including returning the analyser to the supplier and waiting for spare parts from the USA.

To ensure that we are collecting data as agreed I have arranged for a newly purchased Dust Monitor to be co-located. This machine will also measure PM10 levels. We do not have any monitoring results at present, but when we have collected data I will be happy to let you have a copy of the results. An Officer visited the site on Monday to check that the monitor was operating correctly and noted that the PM10 level at that time was around 20 um/m3 against the national air quality standard of 40 um/m3 .

Do you have any specific queries that you would like to discuss?

Regards

Dave

Dave Robson MCIEH
Chartered Environmental Health Practitioner
Principal Officer -Environmental Quality & Licensing Section
Environmental Health & Housing Department
Tel. 01553 616302
From: Neil Paddock [mailto:neilpaddock@googlemail.com] Sent: 09 July 2009 17:56To: Dave RobsonSubject: Air Quality UpdateImportance: High

Hi Dave

Could you please provide me with an update as to what happened recently with the air quality testing at WBB Minerals / Sibelco UK?

I have heard nothing since about November last year

Thanks

Minerals and waste sites allocations

2009-08-16T15:26:00.000+01:00

The draft preferred sites documents/consultation are currently scheduled to be discussed by NCC Cabinet on 14 September 2009.

The Agenda will be published 7 days before the meeting - here is the link to Cabinet Papers:

http://www.norfolk.gov.uk/consumption/idcplg?IdcService=SS_GET_PAGE&nodeId=479&Committee=Cabinet

The Agenda has items in blue which then link you to the report relevant to that topic.

News Update

2009-07-08T11:18:00.000+01:00

I have written the following in response to a recent enquiry:

Things have gone very quiet at the council - (Borough Council of Kings Lynn and West Norfolk) they were due to come up with a list of preferred sites which will be used for all future quarry proposals. This has not yet come to light to my knowledge.

The company with the most pressing interest is called Sibelco UK (Formerly WBB Minerals) who have acquired a site in Middleton formerly called Grandcourt Farm and would at some point in the future (probably within the next couple of years or so), be looking to East Winch (a site called MIN40 directly to the West of the village) for a proposed extension to their already substantial operations at that site.

The best person to talk to about this would be Gary Stringer, Resources Director at Sibelco UK on 01270 752698

http://www.sibelco.co.uk/

As for the landfill site, this is already going ahead at Blackborough End and the recent plan was apparently an improvement to what had previously been applied for, and has gone through without any substantial opposition. The existing site does result in some rubbish being blown onto the A47 but does not appear to directly affect the residents within East Winch village itself, although those nearer Blackborough End e.g. at Carrpit Cottage the operations are likely to be close enough for it to be a nuisance in years to come.

My own personal objection to the landfill site

2009-01-19T13:31:00.002Z

"Any extension of the existing landfill site into East Winch is unacceptable. The residents already have to tolerate quarrying and landfill operations with more proposed and further encroachment so close to local residents is completely unacceptable. East Winch resident's quality of life will suffer - additional dust & noise caused by heavy vehicle traffic and landfill machinery, unpleasant smells from rubbish, especially during summer, wind blown rubbish being blown onto roadside hedges and into resident's gardens all year round, and the potential of rubbish being distributed across the site at a height to be both highly visible and be a practical nuisance as described above. This type of encroachment on the village I believe to be in violation of our basic human rights as residents and will not be tolerated or welcomed by the people of East Winch."

Please add your own comments either in writing or online at the link below:
https://ptweb.norfolk.gov.uk/planning_applications/representation/default.asp?RecNo=6044&ApplicationNumber=C/2/2008/2028

IMMINENT LANDFILL THREAT TO EAST WINCH

2009-01-18T21:33:00.015Z

I would have liked to have picked a happier topic for the start of 2009, but this is what came up instead. NOTE: LINK NOW ADDED BELOW DIRECTLY TO WEBSITE.

http://ptweb.norfolk.gov.uk/planning_applications/read/PlanAppDisp.asp?RecNum=6044

Note that you can also comment directly on the above proposal at the link below:

https://ptweb.norfolk.gov.uk/planning_applications/representation/default.asp?RecNo=6044&ApplicationNumber=C/2/2008/2028

I have been made aware of an application by Middleton Aggregates for a large extension to their landfill site at Blackborough End, further encroaching on East Winch, behind the equestrian centre and Carrpit Cottage.

East Winch Quarry/Landfill site

Land off East Winch Road

Grid Ref; 56790 31560

Dated 16th January 2009

Drawing Ref: MW(MA)6(4)

*** NB Closing date for representations is 6th February 2009 ***

Please write in to Norfolk County Council stating that you vigorously object to this proposal before the deadline, and encourage friends and neighbours affected to do the same.If Grandcourt Farm and MIN40 were not enough, It appears that the council will not be satisfied until East Winch disappears from the map under tonnes of foul smelling rubbish!

Please help to stop this madness!

You can also Email mawp@norfolk.gov.uk

The web site can be accessed on http://www.norfolk.gov.uk/

"A copy has also been deposited with the clerk of your local parish council." I trust that the Parish Council will also object to these proposals prior to the deadline.

21st November Meeting

2009-01-18T21:33:00.010Z

Thanks to all who attended a successful meeting.

Henry Bellingham MP and councillors Heather Bolt, Alistair Beales, Janet Murphy attended, as well as Parish Council members, East Winch Action Group (EWAG) representatives and local residents.

An update on the MIN40 proposal was given by EWAG, the Parish Council and Henry Bellingham expressed his views on local quarrying.

More details to follow in a future post - watch this space...

EWAG is NOT a mining company...

2008-11-07T21:02:00.005Z

Contrary to what this Important Notice says in the recent November 2008 "The Gayton Group of Parishes" on Page 13.

I'm told that Middleton Aggregates is sometimes known as MID-AGG so I suppose EWAG could be misunderstood to be East Winch Aggregates...only it isn't!

EWAG stands for East Winch Action Group, and we are opposed to further quarries in East Winch...

What is the East Winch Action Group (EWAG)?

EWAG was set up to oppose further silica sand quarrying and landfill sites around the villages of East Winch & West Bilney, in West Norfolk, England.

There also follows (from the same issue) Wendy Twite's account of the Open Day at WBB / Sibelco (who actually are a mining company!)

You can click on the text to enlarge it...

THE QUARRY - By Susan Paddock

2008-10-31T08:47:00.003Z

The long dark nights are pierced
By fierce halogen
And angry dust is lifted by
The lazy wind
To violate the air
And settle everywhere.
Our fleshy temples glitter with wickedness.

Muddy, bloody steel screams and shrieks
Drowning out the silence of the birds and beasts
That fled or died of grief.
Scarred and broken,
The earth beneath
Cries for relief.
No comfort for the weeping wounds.

The young and strong
All move away.
The old, the weak, the sick
Will stay,
Await their fate,
And watch the village die.

Is this what we want?

2008-10-31T05:16:00.013Z

This is land that WILL be lost at Grandcourt Farm...

The digging has already started to the West...

This view will be lost forever...

That is why we are objecting...

To more of these...

Surrounding our village...

Laying waste to the countryside...

Destroying arable land in times of world food shortages...

Making protected species like skylarks homeless...

They would do this to our green and pleasant land...

In fact, they have already done this at Ashwicken, just next door.

They are heading this way!

Our message is simple...

Yes, simply this...

Review of WBB Open Day, Saturday, 11/10/08

2008-10-25T09:22:00.006+01:00

"There were balloons tied up at the entrance in bunches at the gate entrance, and a friendly leaflet about the company and the site handed out as you drove in. Nice shiny new Sibelco signs have been installed, replacing the earlier old and shabby WBB Minerals ones. A sand pit was provided for the kids (no shortage of sand obviously), a large marquee set up with conservation and archaeology experts available showing specimens of local wildlife (a young grasssnake and some historic pottery and coin finds from the King's Lynn site)."

For those of you who want to read the rest of my review of the WBB/Sibelco Open Day

Please click the link below:

http://eraseorg.blogspot.com/2008/10/review-of-wbb-open-day-saturday-111008.html

Regards

Neil Paddock
Chairman EWAG
Webmaster ERASE & SaveEastWinch Blogs

Councillors to attend meeting 21st November

2008-10-25T07:59:00.003+01:00

I have approached our local councillors to attend the joint update meeting on 21st November at East Winch Village Hall. They are:

Councillor Janet Murphy, Member of Borough Council of King's Lynn and West Norfolk for Priory Ward
http://www.west-norfolk.gov.uk/Default.aspx?page=23748

Councillor Alistair Beales, Member of Borough Council of King's Lynn and West Norfolk for Gayton Ward (Bawsey, Gayton, Leziate)
http://www.west-norfolk.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=23737

Councillor Heather Bolt On "Min 40"...

2008-10-25T07:21:00.006+01:00

I have been forwarded this text from Councillor Heather Bolt, who has confirmed her attendance the "Joint Update Meeting" at East Winch Village Hall on Friday 21st November 2008 at 18:30 (6:30pm)

You may wish to come along and ask Heather some questions.

See Heather's details at Norfolk County Council by clicking on the title of this article:

It reads:

The current 'Plan' shows investigation areas that may have potential for mineral extraction and indicates broadly where further testing of mineral resources should be concentrated. It is intended as guidance to operators and an indication of where they may NOT apply. There were NO allocation areas in the last plan - this is a new departure and a more positive indication of where pp would be given. The only allocation for Sibelco in the Draft plan is Min 40 at East Winch.

regards

Heather

http://www.norfolk.gov.uk/consumption/idcplg?IdcService=SS_GET_PAGE&nodeId=68&Surname=NCC_CLR_Bolt&Submit=Search

It can be done!

2008-10-25T05:49:00.003+01:00

Campaigners have successfully halted a wind farm after 4200 signatures were collected.

Click on the title to read more...

Update Meeting with Henry Bellingham, MP

2008-10-23T21:32:00.007+01:00

Date: Friday, 21st November 2008

Time: 18:30 - 20:00 (6:30pm - 8:00pm)

Venue: East Winch Village Hall

EWAG will put the case for East Winch against proposed extensions to local quarrying!

For more details on Mr Bellingham, see below:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/mpdb/html/429.stm

WBB Open Day...Was it all hot air?

2008-10-16T19:51:00.011+01:00

Here's a selection of pictures from the Open Day:
You can click on any of them to enlarge them

1) Getting some practice in in front of the bulldozers!

2) Sibelco's friendly and informative leaflet handed out to visitors

3) A young grass snake brought in by a local environmental consultant

4) Part of the King's Lynn operation

5) The children's sandpit and bouncy castle!

6) A WBB/Sibelco Balloon, this informal camel logo also appears
in their sheds on the crates (see below)

More photos on the ERASE site at:

http://eraseorg.blogspot.com/2008/10/review-of-wbb-open-day-saturday-111008.html

WBB Open Day, Saturday, 11/10/08

2008-10-07T01:00:00.002+01:00

Just a quick note to say that there will be an open day at WBB Minerals on this coming saturday, 10:30am - 3:00pm

A good opportunity to find out what they are up to and ask questions...

I hope to see you there on Saturday!

Update from Norfolk County Council

2008-09-21T09:05:00.003+01:00

People have been wondering when a decision will be made on Min40 and other local proposed sites - Here's an indication from Norfolk County Council from a recent email in connection with our written objections to the proposals:

"Please contact Planning Services by email: ldf@norfolk.gov.uk or phone: 01603 222193 or 01603 222483.

The Core Strategy and Development Control submission document is now planned to be published in November 2008, with the opportunity to comment during a six week period. This will be followed by an Examination in Public in 2009.

The Minerals Site Allocations and Waste Site Allocations Preferred sites consultation stage is now planned for early 2009. We will send further correspondence to everyone on our consultee database once a definite consultation date has been agreed with the regional Government Office."

Reply from Tom Cutbush, 17th July 2008

2008-07-21T23:18:00.004+01:00

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

2008-07-13T18:00:00.003+01:00

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

2008-07-13T14:59:00.005+01:00

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

2008-07-13T14:52:00.003+01:00

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

2008-07-05T12:14:00.003+01:00

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

2008-07-03T19:36:00.004+01:00

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.

Mr Anonymous rides again...

2008-06-30T19:48:00.004+01:00

Comment from Anonymous:

"Anybody interested in why a local man has 13 dead relatives who all worked in or lived near the sandpits? 13 coincidences? or is the truth too terrible to contemplate?"*

"Newsflash Mr Author, everyone dies at some point, and yes everyone that works at the sand pit will die , 1/3 of which will probably be to cancer but this is no different to the 50 odd million people of the UK. Mrs Twite is right this is scaremongering at the lowest level."

***

Mr (or Mrs.) Anonymous, thanks again for your enlightening comments.

I may not have made it as obvious as it could of been. The point I was making is NOT that the man's relatives were all dead.

All 13 relatives mentioned died of cancer.

ALL OF THEM.

That's more than 1/3rd (33.33%) - That's 100%.

That's statistically significant.

I take it from the tone of your note that the current levels of preventable cancer related deaths (every 52 seconds) are perfectly ok with you then, an inevitability, which we should just accept and do absolutely nothing about. As far as you are concerned, that's just the way it is and we can't change it, right? After all, we are all going to die at some point anyway, so why bother?

If I "scaremonger", and save or prolong one life over the next 30-50 years as a result, I'm ok with that.

In my opinion, people are more important than minerals, silica or asbestos.

I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. My conscience is clear.

However, its not just my opinion...remember this?

IMF / News article
Preventing occupational cancer

"A new cancer prevention guide, reveals that over 600,000 deaths a year – one death every 52 seconds – are caused by occupational cancer, making up almost one-third of all work-related deaths.
GLOBAL: A worldwide epidemic of occupational cancer is claiming at least one life every 52 seconds, but this tragedy is being ignored by both official regulators and employers."

refer to http://www.imfmetal.org/main/index.cfm?n=47&l=2&c=15708

There's a lot of "scaremongering" about isn't there?

The asbestos time bomb in our schools

2008-06-28T08:08:00.015+01:00

I recently read this article in the Daily Express, 24th June.
You can refer to the campaign website run by Richard Lees for more details by clicking on the title of this article or go to http://www.schoolasbestosaction.co.uk

Also see Michael Lees' website at the following address:

http://www.asbestosexposureschools.co.uk/

As those of you who attended the Leziate Meeting (and the more recent East Winch Parish Council meeting) will know, my father Eric died in December last year of an asbestos related cancer.

For readers of this site you may also remember that a worker dies of a cancer every 52 seconds (according to the International Metalworkers Federation).

So, we live in a free country, and we can think what we like?

If you read Wendy Twite's article in the recent voice of the villages she essentially accuses EWAG and other local groups of "scaremongering" and "spreading misery" and unhappiness.

Wendy, get real!

If there's a choice between profit or safety, what wins out most of the time?

Safety?

If there's a clean up needed, is it easier to ignore it, or spend the cash?

Do you get a clean up, or a cover up?

Look at Bawsey Lake as an example (and the article on eraseorg.blogspot.com) where the original mining company involved and the council have effectively washed their hands of it.

In the above article from the Daily Express, Michael Lees, who lost his wife to mesothelioma at the age of 51, is not to my mind, scaremongering or spreading misery. He is raising awareness of a vital issue that has affected him personally at a fundamental level. His partner is dead.

Does every body have to have a family member die before they will get up off their arses and stop watching Eastenders?

It is the short term focus of the government on cash and the complacency, reticence and reluctance of the general public to stand up and be counted and to be heard that adds to this problem.

Remember that maxim about the truth - "First it is ridiculed, then it is violently opposed, finally it is regarded as self evident."

Remember people used to think the earth was flat!

Asbestos Kills. Silica Kills. Asbestosis Kills. Silicosis Kills. Cancer Kills.

Wake up, and get your head out of the sand.

Or people will look back on our generation and say:

"What a bunch of losers! They did nothing about the poisons in their environment. Anything for a quiet life! They were exploited and they paid the ultimate price. They didn't heed the warning signs. They did what's considered Normal for Norfolk - Nothing! And the costs are still being met by future generations, who have to clean up their mess when it could have all been so easily dealt with at the time. Well, Good Riddance to them, That's what I say."

So, anybody want to find out if their local school is made out of asbestos?

Or is what happens on TV, to Dirty Den and Bet at the Rovers or in Big Brother more important?

Anybody interested in why a local man has 13 dead relatives who all worked in or lived near the sandpits? 13 coincidences? or is the truth too terrible to contemplate?

That local landowners will sell out and effectively be signing your death certificates. (And profiting directly and massively at your expense in the face of your tumbling property price in the process!)

But why make things difficult for them, when you can all be friendly and talk about flower arranging and other 'paramount' parish council business?

Or there's always DENIAL. You can tell us all as story, such as...

"My family worked in schools/mines full of asbestos/silica/whatever and it never did them any harm..."

Well, I for one am not convinced.

I saw some impressive video footage recently of 1000's of courageous women running for breast cancer, a lot of whom had their own story to tell.
But the run itself, however commendable, only raises awareness, without addressing the root causes, which are toxins in the workplace and the environment which are allowed to stay there or be introduced there in spite of compelling evidence (such as that on the website of Heath and Safety Executive-HSE) and legal requirements (in the case of asbestos) for their removal.

Chet Holmes says that of 70,000 chemical compounds introduced since the war, that only 3% have been tested for long term effects. So 97% of them remain in the environment as a potential threat.

One thing that jumps out at me from the express article is:

"My concerns were met with indifference."

That's been my experience too.

Indifference, denial, even ridicule.

This is a real ongoing danger. Yet another toxic time bomb, in the same way that the extraction of silica sand next to our village is a potential toxic time bomb. There is compelling physical evidence and statistics that support this. Facts. And we all stand to be the victims, the casualties, the "collateral damage" if we do not act. As Cliff Smalley (of the Save Pentney Action Group) said at Leziate: "Is it a fight." And the fight goes on. And it is a fight we need to win.

PS if you still think this is a load of fuss about nothing, check out the "Safe Shopper's Bible" on Amazon, which tells you what products are chemically safe and which ones aren't. Or go back to watching Eastenders, where all the real drama is!

Dust Emission Update from Dave Robson

2008-06-28T06:44:00.001+01:00

I recently received this update from Dave Robson, Principal Officer -Environmental Quality & Licensing Section, Environmental Health & Housing Department:

I visited WBB minerals on Wednesday [18th June] to go over the issues raised. We have discussed matters with and have asked for further information from WBB. We were unable to visit all areas and will need to go back at a future date to look at the Grand Court Farm area in particular.

Once we have a better understanding of the new production areas we can consider in detail if monitoring is required. We are also chasing further information about environmental exposure to silica.

I will contact you when further information becomes available.

2008-06-22T11:46:00.000+01:00

How about some progress councillors?

2008-06-22T10:41:00.003+01:00

At our sailing club meeting at Leziate at the end of April, I asked Ian Monson to look into the height of the rubbish dump at Blackborough End. Further to reminders from myself, as of last week, we are still waiting for a response although he is apparently "looking into it".

Similiarly, I have as you know, been involved in correspondence with Dave Robson from Environmental Health and Dave tells me that we will be meeting with WBB Minerals this month to discuss air quality testing.

Thing is we still don't have a date.

So if we are indeed being poisoned by the works at Grandcourt Farm and Ashwicken and every second counts, then our requests do not appear to have been taken very seriously.

So what is going on? Delaying Tactics? "Other Priorities?"

I find it ironic that people who are paid with our money (taxes) can dawdle for so long about matters that don't directly affect them, though they potentially have calamitous conseqences for the rest of us.

It may be that a good old fashioned protest with placards and chanting may be needed after all.

After all, it worked for HAWITAGE! (see the link).

The gentle email approach has not to date bourne much fruit.

Other News

I have been given (yet) another contact to chase up the reinstated bridleway, and in order to pursue who destroyed the trees at Town Close in contravention of the Wildlife and Countryside Act, we need to know who the owner is. There are three to choose from. Perhaps the Parish Council will tell us.

WADING THROUGH TREACLE

A colleague at work has used the expression "wading through treacle (backwards)" to describe the issues he faces during his daily grind. It would appear that dealing with the council yields the same sort of results (or lack of them).

Grimston Congham and Roydon Residents Association

2008-06-22T10:33:00.001+01:00

"The Residents Association's AGM was held on May 8th and the committee was re-elected. The treasurer's report was accepted and the committee's expenses approved. The meeting was addressed by Mr Neil Paddock who is leading the campaign against the threat of quarrying at East Winch. He warned of the risks of fine dust inhalation (silicosis) by workers and local inhabitants. He urged against complacency regarding out local Commons and suggested that all the groups fighting mineral extraction should join forces."

EWAG Wants You!

2008-06-04T23:52:00.004+01:00

United we stand!

OK, so lots of you want lakes... Why?

2008-06-04T22:06:00.006+01:00

I notice that the poll for having lakes at Grandcourt Farm is almost split down the middle, which surprises me, frankly.

I am wondering what the attraction is. From our meeting at Leziate Sailing Club, we heard that Bawsey Lake is in poor condition, acidic, with not much living in it and it's dangerous to swim in.

Also, on the ERASE website, you will see that the council are apparently powerless to do anything about it. A contract lapsed which let the original contractor off the hook, but meant they couldn't carry on digging there.

Not a particularly brilliant contract in my view, as this forced the mineral company to go further afield once it lapsed and find new land to target / quarry / desecrate (delete as appropriate) AND apparently let them off the hook in cleaning up the mess they had left behind at Bawsey.

Of course, that was around 30 years ago, and legislation is much tighter now, so that couldn't ever possibly happen again could it? Or could it?

And given that we already have Bawsey and Leziate so close, why does Middleton need a lake or two as well?

People on WBB's payroll need not apply - You have a vested interest after all, right?

After all, if WBB are paying your mortage this month I wouldn't be surprised if you thought a lake there was a fantastic idea.

However, in the interests of impartiality and fairness, tell me what will be so fantastic about it.

Fishing? Will it support life within 20 years of being left to fill with water?

Swimming? Will you be prepared to risk it?

Will it look like a concentration camp with signs like the ones at Bawsey?

Will it be somewhere to take the kids on a picnic? - Just watch out for the steep sides, the sheer banks and the barbed wire.

Let me guess, all of those in favour...

1) Don't stand to have their houses flooded if the lakes get overly full

2) Don't care about any risks of ingesting silica dust particles - after all, it's safe whilst the sand's still underground, right?

3) Don't stand to have 10 - 20% or more knocked off the value of their property

4) Don't live close enough to be affected by many years of noise dust and light pollution

5) Haven't seen the huge pile of Sand at Leziate, which is lit up by huge floodlights at night - you can forget looking at the stars through your telescope over there due to the overwhelming light pollution...

6) Haven't lost any relatives to illness who have worked in or lived near the sandpits

7) Have never read a single thing on the Health and Safety Executive's website and may in fact have not done any "proper research" on the subject

8) Don't live close enough to be detrimentally affected in any obvious way whatsoever, in fact, if Middleton, East Winch and West Bilney are being dug up, then someone else is being left alone...

9) Stand to make a packet out of the whole thing whilst the rest of us suffer!

10) Just believe what WBB tell us, after all it must be true...

Incidentally, if you meet all 10 of the above criteria you are probably on the Parish Council!

Anyway, if you do have any good reasons why this part of Norfolk should be completely dug out and left submerged, then let me know in the comments section - Thanks!

Reminds me of the old Beatle's song "I'd like to be, under the sea, in an Octopus's garden in a cave"

Perhaps we can all club together and buy a submarine.

Air Quality Update

2008-06-04T21:44:00.002+01:00

Gosh, has it been over two weeks since my last post?

I have heard back from Dave Robson, the Environmental Health Officer, who will be meeting with WBB later in the month to discuss air quality.

Here's and extract of my latest email to him:

Fundamentally, what we want to know if quarrying and treatment of silica sand is safe, and if so, how do we define safe?

Is there a certain amount of sand and dust being released by existing quarrying operations, (how much?) and to what extent can RCS PM10’s be measured and tracked both around the quarry sites, transport routes and processing centres.

From there I would hope we can assess what risk there is of Respirable Crystalline Silica (RCS) PM10 ingestion specifically relating to silica sand, relative to accepted Maximum exposure limits (noting the statistical relationship onset of respiratory diseases at that dosage level for quarry workers)

and over what radius from each site a risk is posed to residents who live near by or indeed further afield, given factors of wind direction, particle concentration etc.

Additionally, with additional proposed sites potentially becoming live over the next ten years or so (e.g. MIN39, MIN 40) in a relatively small catchment area, (Grimston, East Winch, etc) we would like to be in an informed position to assess what additional cumulative risks these new proposed sites would pose to local resident’s health, in terms of increasing concentrations of particulate emissions locally.

This is a major concern of residents, given the current lack of testing since year 2000 and lack of any apparent concern by WBB about the dangers that have been well documented on HSE’s website (to name but one) with the extraction of this material.

Illegal tree felling behind Town Close

2008-05-17T15:16:00.006+01:00

We have discovered that one of the owners of the farmland near "MIN40" has destroyed two clumps of trees, which were still standing when we walked around the site on 26th April. The first picture shows Town Close, looking south, with the pile of felled trees on the immediate left.

As you can see from the photos I have taken today, the trees have been uprooted.

There was a pile of burnt sticks further away from this site where the second clump of trees has been felled and incinerated.

A couple of the local children were playing near the felled trees.

They told me that there had been birds nesting in the trees at the time they were cut down. Tree felling whilst birds are nesting is illegal.

Furthermore, the children told me that they were worried about the farmer cutting down the trees, and had been making protest signs out of cardboard to stop them being felled.

As it turns out, the farmer, I am told, threw the sign of the pile of deadwood and burned it.

So now the kids have one less place to play (unless a grubby old patch of deadwood counts).

They also told me that they wanted everybody in the village to come out and join hands, to stop lorries coming in and digging the quarry.

So what is the farmer's explanation?

Was he just being on old sourpuss because the kids didn't want him to cut down the trees?

And why did this have to be done whilst birds were nesting?

Why flagrantly break the law?

When we visited the site on 26th April, these trees were still standing and pheasants were using them as cover.

As I stood next to the broken pile of deadwood earlier today, Saturday, 17th May, a pheasant scrambled out and took off a few feet from me.

So what I want to know is, who owns this piece of land?

Who ordered the trees to be felled?

What is their explanation?

The leaflet "Protecting hedgerows, trees and woodlands" from the RSPB says:

"The WCA [Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981] does not legally protect a tree.
The Act protects active nests of all wild birds, and should delay tree work, if this were to result in the damage or destruction of an active nest."

The children at the site today told me that there was a baby bird in one nest and eggs in a separate nest. They believe all the eggs & baby birds were destroyed.
I think those count as active nests, don't you?

"As always an excellent, well written piece webmaster"

2008-05-16T20:26:00.007+01:00

"Well done to EWAG and webmaster for all the hard work and standing up for our village and encouraging us to unite and keep fighting, we are with you all the way.

THIS IS OUR VILLAGE! and we DO NOT want a quarry, our health put at risk and our wonderful village life we chose so cruelly taken away."

I get feedback. Quite a lot of it. Good feedback, and not so good feedback. Feedback that I like, and feedback that I think stinks.

This is feedback I like.

Thank you so much for your comment and for your support. It means a great deal to me, and it's very timely too.

In the same way that this village means a lot to me.

A little encouragement goes a long way.

Some news just out...

2008-05-15T23:31:00.005+01:00

"Silica sand isn't dangerous.

The parish council are on our side.

And I'm a little teapot called Dave."

I'm so glad we cleared that up!

Excuse me whilst I disassociate myself from the above comments.

Parish Council Meeting

2008-05-13T00:46:00.011+01:00

I had the pleasure of attending the East Winch Parish Council Meeting this evening.

I think it raises far more questions than were actually answered to any satisfactory degree.

Here are a few highlights.

For Example:

1) Question: Why was half of Min40 offered up by the Parish Council in their response to Norfolk County Council?

"As Silica Sand is a strategic mineral and local policy will undoubtedly be overruled by national policy any reduction that can be gained on the proposed area of the site needs to be negotiated now and definitely at the next stage of consultation when it will be know which sites will be included in the final proposal and ultimately at the Planning Application stage which may not be for many years if the site is included."

Answer: Have you read the Orange Book?

I tell you what, If you have read it, and you understand it, explain to me and the rest of East Winch what it says, instead of guarding it's secrets and implying the knowledge of those secrets make it all so obvious to those "in the know".

I have been too busy doing "a little proper research" on Health and Safety which I believe to be more important, rather than memorising reams of council policy which encourages many acres of Norfolk to be dug up and destroyed with little justification.

I believe in prevention, not mindless compliance.

I was led to believe by the parish clerk this evening and comments by Mr Underwood that half of Min40 is already a done deal, as she drew her finger down the middle of the site plan.

That simply doesn't stack up with the site being a mere proposal, or as Henry Bellingham referred to being on the "wishlist".

Better explanation required please. It simply doesn't make sense.

2) Two Houses for development on A47.
This decision was put on hold as there was some debate as to whether or not the proposed dwellings would be within the "village envelope".

The upshot of this is that as there is only 21 days given to object against the proposals, and the notice was issued on 24th April, the chairman's decision to delay making any decision this evening pending more information(given that the parish council meet only every 2 months) will result in their approval (subject to any other objections of course) by default.

This will clearly help anybody with a commercial interest in the properties being built get what they want.

Was there anybody present this evening, I wonder, who had an interest in those properties being built. I wonder!

There is a further ethical point to consider.

Is it ethical to continue to build houses in an area which could be overrun with quarries within a few years? To do so would mean that any incoming property owner, who is probably coming out to Norfolk to escape to the country and/or retire, will put a substantial part of their life savings into their new property.

Once they have moved into the area, and the news about the quarries gets out, how much of a financial hit will these people have to take if they decide to move out
again?

And if they decide to stay, what about the risks to their health and wellbeing?

Can they expect the full all night floodlighting treatment that people at Leziate get?

Is it right to pull new people into the area, when the quarries don't show up on searches? I don't think so. More victims that someone somewhere is making money out of. It's exploitation. It's shameful.

3) Defraying of expenses. Nell asked the Parish Council if EWAG could get expenses reimbursed for costs incurred in the runup to the objections being delivered to Norfolk County Council.

The Parish Clerk replied that there were rules and regulations that prevent them from doing so, and from being linked with Action Groups.

She did not tell us what these rules were specifically.

I asked why it was the case that the Parish Council could associate with WBB Minerals and not the East Winch Action Group.

I was told that WBB had no such representation on the council.

Although Mr Dennis Underwood (Now Vice Chairman EWPC) did remind us he had declared an interest.

At this point I mentioned about chocolate fireguards and left the room.

I had in fact neglected to mention the not so publicised "Local Liason meetings" with WBB held every 6 months or so, as reported to me by Keith Harrod (WBB) and Rob Cranthorne (NCC).

Does that or does that not count as an association?

Please explain. I'm curious.

4) Mr Keith Harrod from WBB talked about sand blowing around, and dust being generated at some point further down the line, dust and PM10 and so on.

So when could it be dangerous...
When you come and dig it up?

I asked him what he meant in his letter of 24th September 2004 to Leziate Parish Council, when he wrote:

"The wind blown sand was causing concerns within the quarry area and the efforts were made to increase levels of dampening down the quarry with a water bowser, but the force of the wind countered this action and made it useless."

Not a great confidence builder in my book that one.
No nice feeling of being warm and safe after reading that.

Conclusion
Let's examine what a fireguard does for a moment. It is a form of protection that stops you getting burned.

Based on my observations, the parish council is not carrying out it's work in a way that supports the best interests of the village as a whole. This has been demonstrated in the quotation above by offering up half the quarry with adequate vegetation screening which may be acceptable before the proposal stage has even completed.

Even if I was to commend them for the more mundane aspects of their work, ensuring street lights are maintained and dog loos are emptied and deciding how much to spend on bouquets of flowers and so on...

I cannot see how [agreeing to / not objecting to] the land to the West of Grandcourt Farm being approved for planning permission in September 2007 is not a serious and unforgiveable lapse in the protection of villager's interests.

It was one of the points that wasn't covered at the meeting this evening. The bouquets and the dog loos took precedence after our allotted time was at an end.

DOMINOES
The domino effect is now in full swing, you can see East Winch disappearing under a mountain of grey shading from the encroaching quarrying.

As Mr Underwood mentioned this evening, it is likely to affect property values.

How many of the Parish Council's property values, I wonder will be directly affected?

Surely I don't need to revisit the health and safety issues associated with silica dust again, labelled by Mr Underwood as my "scaremongering".

(I think I now have a pretty good idea who Mr Anonymous is!)

Why do we have to wait until we've got the disease to prove it's real?

MESSAGE TO WBB MINERALS
WBB, Give us proof it's safe. No more wooly talk about the sand grains being too big to breathe in when it's still underground. Don't insult our intelligence.

Why should the onus fall on the villagers to prove we are ill when it's too late and WBB are all in the Bahamas sipping cocktails?

Prove to us what you are doing now is safe. Or stop doing it until you can. Be responsible.

Let's have public access to your safety records.

Tell us about your air quality monitoring.

Tell us about the dust generated on haul routes.

Clean up Bawsey.

Go On, Put your money where your mouth is.

Walk the talk from your article in Voice of the Villages.

Be responsible.

I don't buy the denials from the EDP. They stink.

Tell the truth.

Then we can talk.

Nobody has to be a chocolate fireguard here.

We can all be grown up, and choose to do the right thing.

You know it makes sense.

And I'm confident that if you all carry on with your heads in the sand, in 30 or 40 years time, the crisis you have all created with your complacency and ignorance (and vitiating inaction) will be utterly tragic and utterly self evident for all to see.

So stop it now.

So no more bullshit. OK?

The people of Norfolk deserve your respect and the truth.

AND TO THE PARISH COUNCIL...
Stop playing favourites and hiding behind your aura of self importance and ever so general "rules and regulations" which suit some and not others, your fancy jargon, the "orange book" and the "village envelope" amongst others, and support the health, wellbeing and the views and the interests of your villagers.

Or we will have to find somebody else who will.

And don't forget, any quarry is a secret one if nobody tells you it is there. Especially when it's obscured by banks of earth, screens of trees, restricted notices put in not so obvious places and guarded talk from those "in the know".

Thanks to the chairman Mr Veltzeboer, for admitting that he didn't know about the health risks associated with silica sand.

And thanks to Mr Underwood for bringing along a picture of my Dad -
It's a reminder that some things are definately worth fighting for.
And here's another one.

Keep Smiling.
Anyone fancy a choccie?

Spot the difference...

2008-05-10T09:22:00.004+01:00

Here's a little test for you...

One is an artist's impression of something very nice that hasn't happened yet at Grandcourt Farm (now endearingly called Grandcourt Quarry by WBB)

The other is the reality of previous handiwork at Bawsey, which lives on as evidence of unmet expectations and broken promises...

So, which do you choose to believe?

The reality, or the fantasy?

Still want another Lake?

So Just How Many Is Too Many? Toxic Lakes That Is........

2008-05-09T22:34:00.005+01:00

I don’t know why, but WBB appear to have absolutely nobody on board with any imagination whatsoever. The company is in dire need of a designer bod to generate ideas when it comes to clearing up their dirty mess each time they leave an empty quarry behind them.

They truly seem to only work along the lines of..............

"...........derrr we dig it all out and then derrr, we fill it all in again with tons of water...... summat like that anyway.......”

Another toxic lake is hardly high on our list of tourism ‘must haves’, not mine anyway, and I doubt not most of the people about to lose the sight of green pastures at Grandcourt Farm.

Maybe it’s time we started demanding what will be acceptable to this village, to replace these utterly barren, poisonous and potentially lethal water holes they seem to be so fond of? After all we will still be living here long after this company has packed up its silicosis activation diggers and moved out. Living here almost certainly harbouring some nasty illnesses – true – but living here we shall be - after all as I mentioned in my first piece, home buyers aren’t exactly going to be knocking at our newly painted ‘silica sandy’ covered front doors, asking us to sell up are they?

So surely we should be the ones to dictate, yes I did say dictate, what should stand in the place of the ruined Grandcourt Farm, after its desolate and craggy demise? Something other than a very large, scabby, boils and blisters water attraction?

We need ideas, ideas that unfortunately may well cost WBB considerable sums of money to do, (nothing worthwhile ever came cheap), and maybe, it will be even necessary for them to be responsible in setting it up and initially running it as well?

So this is my idea, it’s just to get your old brain cells working so that you can all come up with your own - after all it’s YOUR village, not theirs, it should be what YOU want not them. Personally I think my idea is a winner though! 

How's about an indoor permanent ice skating rink with ringside seating, a cafe/restaurant and plenty of car parking? There are none anywhere for locals or even for those living in Kings Lynn. This is why nobody uses the Christmas holiday ice rink that’s set up in the Tuesday Market Place in Kings Lynn every year, because nobody in the area has the opportunity to learn to skate! Only Norwich and Peterborough have ice skating rinks.

It would give us jobs, a great facility for family fun and is in demand. Ice skating has been growing since TV’s Dancing on Ice started a few years ago, I should know, I travelled to Peterborough every Saturday for a year then gave up because of the distance and constant road works! (Passed my first 3 N.I.C.E. grades though! LOL!) Suffolk is looking forward to an indoor winter sports development including an ice rink, why shouldn't Norfolk get something? Particularly as it is suffering so badly with the negative aspects of these quarries.

We can't allow WBB to assume that they can continue lazily refilling toxic silica holes with water that in turn becomes toxic, and think it is an acceptable replacement for destroying the landscape whilst making us ill and seriously depleting our standard of living! They do this because it is the cheapest option, they then wrap it and present the package as ‘beautiful reconstruction scenery’. Yeah right! It’s like the Marie Celeste out there! They haven’t even given any thought to the possibility of flooding down the years, that’s just another little problem we could be envisaging.

WBB are going to have to, must, give BACK to the villagers - give back something of USE. I think the best way they can do that at the Grandcourt site is to provide something that generates employment, and encourages tourism, family leisure time and children’s interests - not by providing a collection of oversized contaminated duck-less flood ponds.

The birds know it – the bees know it, the rest of the wildlife and trees know it,

WBB know it –

‘Love just don’t breed near toxic weed……’

"A Little Proper Research" Leziate 28th April

2008-05-09T21:14:00.023+01:00

Thanks to a certain Mr Anonymous, I was able to gather the following material for the Leziate meeting last month:

The following is a statement produced in response to a comment left on the Save East Winch Website, www.saveeastwinch.blogspot.com

“Maybe once youve finished polishing your pitchfork in preparation for your witch hunt you could open your eyes to the real culprit's - every one of us.”

Mr Anonymous,

Thank you for expressing your views on this blog.
Some further "proper research" from yourself would not go amiss either.

Frankly, your ignorance astounds me.

Just to reassure you, I don't have a pitchfork. Although if I did, a quick prod in your gluteus maximus might wake you up to what's really going on here. Wakey Wakey!

Why was there a conference in Stirling on Friday about Occupational Cancers?

http://www.hazards.org/cancer/conference/index.htm

“Despite occupational cancer being the single largest cause of work-related deaths, the risks have been downplayed by governments, health and safety enforcement agencies and employers. The end result has been a wholly preventable epidemic of cancers,” says International Metalworker’s Federation (IMF) general secretary Marcello Malentacchi.

“the red line does NOT mean they will mine up to peoples back fences. Im certain the councils would ensure the correct mitigation measures - it is nieve to think that the council would allow extraction very close to properties without mitigation measures to protect our residents”

That is a dangerous assumption to make, though you have raised a valid point about mitigation measures. Let’s be factual and objective. Let’s find out what mitigation measures are currently in force at existing sites, assess if they are adequate, and establish what additional measures, if any, are needed in future to further reduce risks.

“You quoted the mining companies Safety man as stating that it is perfectly safe when unprocesse- every thing points to this being very true.”

Re WBB’s Andy Price – Comments in EDP 21/04/08
"Silica sand as it exists in the ground is completely harmless because the sand grains are obviously too course to be breathed in."

No problem with that. Pretty obvious really, and a great argument for not digging it up in the first place. According to the man at WBB on the video from the Lynn News dated 150507, the sand lies beneath the topsoil and the overburden. When it’s left undisturbed under the ground it obviously does not form “particulates” (tiny airborne particles) of less than 10 micrometers in diameter (PM10’s) which are small enough to be ingested into the lungs. Next?

“also it would take many years of 'proper' exposure to result in any damage.”

Is that supposed to make us feel better?
How many years would the quarry be open for? 8 years? 10 years?
Is that long enough do you think to get ‘proper’ exposure?

HSE Construction Information Sheet No 36 Revision 1 states:

“Exposure to silica
The health hazards of silica come from breathing in the
dust. Activities which can expose workers or members
of the public to the dust include:
● stone masonry;
● facade renovation;
● blast cleaning of buildings, especially using sand;
● many demolition processes;
● concrete scabbling, cutting or drilling;
● tunnelling.”

And also

“Breathing 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.”

http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/cis36.pdf

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Public Health Service
National Toxicology Program
The Report on Carcinogens 11th Edition states:

Silica, Crystalline (Respirable size) "is known to be a human carcinogen".

"The link between human lung cancer and exposure to Respirable crystalline silica (RCS) was strongest in studies of quarry and granite workers..."

"Residents near quarries and sand and gravel operations are potentially exposed to respirable crystalline silica."

“In humans, respirable crystalline silica persists in the lungs, culminating in the development of chronic silicosis, emphysema, obstructive airway
disease, and lymph node fibrosis.”

http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/eleventh/profiles/s161sili.pdf

T P Brown & L Rushton, in their paper, Mortality in the UK silica sand industry: Assessment of exposure to RCS say:

“The health consequences of exposure to RCS are well documented in many industries; In addition to silicosis, RCS has been associated with lung cancer, non malignant respiratory disease, non malignant renal disease, and autoimmune disease

However, there have been no studies published of silica sand workers in the UK.

The silica sand industry is engaged in quarrying and refining a product of high silica content and at quarries where silica flour and cristobalite are produced.

Thus the possible respiratory risk may be higher than in other quarrying industries.

During 1986 The UK Health and Safety Executive (HSE) assembled a cohort of 4749 individuals who had ever been at seven quarries owned by a large UK industrial sand company, but did not collect any exposure data.

An analysis of mortality was undertaken in 1991 but never published.”

Why not?

We can argue this until we are blue in the face.

Is it possible that in the real world, in a number of situations throughout human history, that shareholder's interests, owners of companies, have been put ahead of the long term welfare of the general public, that profit has been put before public safety?

Think of Thalidomide. Think of asbestos, Think of coal-mining. Are we to conclude that there were no risks or consequences from these events either?

It took many, many shattered lives to get governments to take notice of asbestos, including incidentally, my own father who passed away on 13th Dec 2007 at the age of 77, in Southampton General Hospital. He died directly as a result of working with asbestos which we can trace to being well over 40 years ago.

When he left school in 1945, he said in his first job, he and his colleague used to sit on sacks of asbestos. By 1963, he was working in a factory at Neilson’s Yard in Bridge Road, East Molesey which had asbestos corrugated sheeting in its roof. We conclude therefore that he had at least 18 years of intermittent exposure to asbestos.

Would that qualify as being under your definition of “proper exposure”?

For him and many others, the reforms made to ban asbestos in the 1970’s were too little, too late. The seeds were already sown. The time bomb was already ticking.

Personally, I hate the thought of history repeating itself, don’t you?

So I have a question for you, would you like to see a friend or a member of your family in intensive care, sedated, on a ventilator with a huge tube inserted into their mouth and throat, unable to talk, ashen grey, and being told by the doctors that they will take them off the ventilator in the morning to see if they can breathe unaided? Which in most cases, they can't? Being told that they are riddled with cancer, that’s spread rapidly from their lungs to other parts of their body, a cancer which is extremely difficult to detect before it’s too late? A cancer which the doctor told me is only detected early enough if found by chance. My father was allowed a week on the ventilator before he was taken off it as there is a continuous queue of other people coming in to take their place on the machine. I wonder why?

Would you also deny the truth of the story of the man who was paid just £3,750 in compensation for contracting silicosis at work?
HSE inspector Andrea Robbins said: "Breathing in the very fine dust of crystalline silica can lead to the development of silicosis, which in its most acute form can result in premature death.
"It is vital employers monitor dust levels to assess the risk of exposure and that they put control measures in place to reduce the levels to which employees are exposed.
"What makes this particular situation worse is that the company had previously commissioned the services of an external company to carry out atmospheric monitoring of dust levels, but did nothing to act upon the findings."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/7099771.stm

Are all these quoted sources, in your opinion, including HSE’s own published documentation, "less than Half truths?"

What exactly do you define as “a little proper research”?

That still leaves many other risks in the workplace.

If you are so convinced there's no risk then go and stand in the quarry at Ashwicken without any protective clothing, masks etc. and then tell me there's no risk.

Preventing occupational cancer

A new cancer prevention guide, reveals that over 600,000 deaths a year – one death every 52 seconds – are caused by occupational cancer, making up almost one-third of all work-related deaths.
GLOBAL: A worldwide epidemic of occupational cancer is claiming at least one life every 52 seconds, but this tragedy is being ignored by both official regulators and employers.

http://www.imfmetal.org/main/index.cfm?n=47&l=2&c=15708

If all of us are in fact to blame, then we should be seeking a solution together to stop workers dying of preventable cancers every 52 seconds, and that means lobbying the government and becoming educated about the risks, not simply denying them.

Every denial now leads to another pointless death, and another. Every 52 seconds. Just consider for a moment how many more people will die due to asbestos, alone, over the next 20 years or so, let alone the other illnesses we have mentioned.

And that only applies to workers in the workplace. It doesn't cover
people who are trapped living next to a quarry with the dust blowing into their gardens where their children play.

Every denial might aspire to be a half truth, but it is not. It is a simply a lie. An untruth.

And you will have to take your head out of the (silica) sand long enough to recognise it.

Martin Luther King said words to the effect of "man's inhumanity to man is not only perpetrated by the actions of those who are bad, but also by the inaction of those who are good."

To say there is no risk is to protract this argument and in so doing to condemn many more people to a pointless, slow & painful death, and to deprive today’s children of their parents in later life many years earlier than necessary.

Since we started the “Save East Winch” website I have been accused of making "ignorant statements", though I recognise that I am not alone in my ignorance, and I am at least prepared to do something about it. A little proper research, for example.

Are you?

“Scare tactics based on not even half truths should not be published until the full story is known.”

How much of the full story do we need to know?

1) We know that MIN40 is a proposal, which could get the go ahead as a preferred site in a matter of weeks.

2) We know that Grandcourt Farm West has been granted planning permission as of 7/9/07, without the majority of the local resident’s knowledge. We do know that 3 parish councils, (Middleton Leziate and East Winch) the RSPB, NWT, HSE and our local councillors were there, amongst others, and raised no objections on Health grounds or any other grounds for that matter with the exception of a Middleton Parish Council’s comment about a haul route off the A47. Why not?

3) We know that the Quarry on the Ashwicken/East Winch Road is in full operation, and we have established from previous evidence that the risk comes from live quarries, not from the ones they haven’t dug yet.

To quote Andy Price from EDP 21/04/08 “Silica only becomes potentially harmful when fine dust is generated during industrial processes which cause grains of silica to be broken down into microscopic particles.”

That is, when they come and dig it up. Which they are already doing at Ashwicken and also, we believe at the land to the west of Grandcourt Farm. WBB can confirm.

Andy also states: “No cases of silicosis have ever been recorded among members of the public in great Britain.” Compare with Brown & Rushton’s comment “there have been no studies published of silica sand workers in the UK.”

So despite the talk in the papers and from officials of the so called “wish list”, the so called “consultation” and silicosis only being seen in industries, according to Andy Price “where there is a significant exposure to silica dust” (e.g. silica sand quarrying)

the risk is real.

It exists, here and now.

Not in the summer.

Now.

In the air that we breathe.

Here & Now.

The clock is set.

This time bomb is already ticking.

And as for scare tactics, if we waited to publish everything until the full story is known, it would be too late to save anybody. But by then of course, Norfolk County Council will have met the Government’s quota (a win for them), WBB will have got their sand (a win), The Landowner will have got his money (a win), and oh yes, the villagers will have been left with ALL THE RISK from the transaction, none of the benefits and more than likely, a whole host of unpleasant and incurable respiratory diseases.

Like laboratory rats in a trap.

With no countryside, no wildlife nearby, a reduced net worth and an impoverished way of life. Not such a great result for East Winch and its neighbours then. That’s known as a win win win win lose situation for the ordinary people of Norfolk!

I do however, have the full story on my father Eric. Eric is dead. If he was still alive today he was undoubtedly have his own story to tell, and his own unique way of expressing himself. And to those of you who still deny the dangers of ingestion of particles into the lungs he would probably simply say this.

His was a life wasted, cut short by a good 5 – 10 years. My question to you is how many others have to suffer before we collectively face up to our responsibilities to future generations, the evidence, and to the truth?

My Dad & I in happier times. A real person, killed by a real threat. Killed by "proper exposure" to asbestos which was well over 40 years ago. He was already unwittingly carrying the seeds of his destruction in his body, when this picture was taken, and possibly before I was even born.

It makes you think, doesn't it?

And by the time you have finished hearing/(reading) this, another 12 people will have died needlessly. How many more have to die? (The answer is blowing in the wind).

A couple of final points:
Asbestos & Respirable Crystalline Silica (RCS)

What’s the difference?

They both enter the lungs.

They both Debilitate.

They both KILL.

One is recognized as such by HSE, one has no UK published studies available.
Why not?

What’s the difference?

What is the truth?

“So in answer to whos the culprits??? - the fact is its all of us.”

So if that’s true - what are we going to do about it?

Thank you for your attention.

***
POSTSCRIPT - A FINAL POINT

“It will not settle your mind as you are far to enraged but a little proper research on the issue of sand causing cancer told me this is simply not the case.”

And as for being enraged, that’s not me you need to talk to. That will be Julia Green of Ditchingham Parish Council and her local group.
ENRAGED stands for (Norfolk residents against gravel extraction at Ditchingham)
See the article in EDP 23/04/08. We have a link on our blog.

http://new.edp24.co.uk/search/story.aspx?brand=EDPOnline&category=News&itemid=NOED23%20Apr%202008%2009:01:27:070&tBrand=EDPOnline&tCategory=search

After all, we pride ourselves on doing “a little proper research”!

Air Quality the Priority for the week ahead...

2008-05-05T21:52:00.006+01:00

I shall be discussing with the council what Air Quality Testing can be done both at the working quarry sites and on the haul routes.

A quote from "Mortality in the UK industrial silica sand industry:" assessment by T P Brown & L Rushton states in it's conclusions:

"The continual collection of dust measurements in the industry is essential to facilitate the exploration of exposure-response relations that may exist between silica and silicosis, lung cancer, and other diseases."

So you think minerals are more important than people?

2008-05-04T16:22:00.001+01:00

I can see from our poll that a number of you have voted to the effect that minerals are more important than people.

Could I ask what the reasons are behind this opinion? Thanks.

RSPB Action Pack Available for Download

2008-05-04T08:41:00.004+01:00

I have attached a link to a zipped copy of the RSPB action pack, which contains useful information about protecting wildlife from development

Contents includes:
Getting involved in planning applications
Getting your message across to local politicians
Getting your message across with local media
Helping you to assess the value of a wildlife site
How to get involved with local development plans
Planning for wildlife
Protecting birds from development
Protecting hedgerows, trees and woodlands
Protecting other wildlife from development proposals
The planning system
Useful Contacts England
You can make positive changes in your community

NB You will need a copy of Winzip to unzip these files

Response from Campaign for Protection of Rural England (CPRE)

2008-05-03T17:22:00.002+01:00

From: CPRE Norfolk
42-46 Bethel Street
Norwich
NR2 1NR

26 March 2008

Minerals Site Allocations, Issues and Options Consultations,

Feb-March 2008

Thank you for contacting CPRE about the Minerals Site Allocations, Issues and Options Consultations and asking us how we intend to respond to this important document.

CPRE has been involved for the last five years in the Examination in Public of the Regional Plan and we have to take account of this Plan and the levels of growth, although we have consistently contested these through the process, and will continue to make our case on this.

It is not possible for CPRE to object/support/comment on all 104 sites and deal with local issues for each, but we believe that the local community is much better placed to do so on specific sites and we would encourage individuals and groups to write to County in response to this consultation.

Below are the principles for site selection that we shall propose:

l. Allocation Sites vs Areas of Search

Do the sites have some firm evidence and estimate of the resource, that is, no Areas of Search, although some might be brought into play at a later stage as alternatives if they meet the criteria below? Within this, look for sites with reserves of a minimum of 0.5 million tonnes, unless an extension to an existing site, and/or a strong candidate for restoration as a habitat creation site.

2. Site Location and Proximity Principle

We would give a higher priority to sites within a reasonable distance to Growth Points (Norwich, Thetford) (regional/national), and Key Centres of Development (King’s Lynn, Yarmouth) (regional); and at a lower level to the larger market towns as identified in Local Development Frameworks as taking a considerable portion of development land.

3. Status of Land

We would avoid sites of national importance for wildlife and landscape, and local for wildlife.

4. Type of Land

As a general principle arable land will become a preferred candidate over other scarcer habitat and landscape types. This is because at the end of the working period it can be restored to arable use. Secondly, as an alternative option and condition on a planning permission, it can be used for habitat creation.

5. Habitat Creation

Indeed some sites could be selected with the driver of the intention to create a different habitat and landscape feature. For example, heathland, grassland, woodland, freshwater reed beds, etc. The type of creation would depend on the geology and hydrogeology of the site, and how best it would fit into the enhancement and development of ecological networks for the county and region.

6. Access and Highways Implications

An important consideration is the ease or lack of it in accessing the main distributor road network. The longer and more difficult it is to achieve this access without having a major impact on the countryside, the less reason for accepting a site.

7. Amenity

CPRE would not want to see sites selected which are close to a major settlement or on top of a village. Local residents are in the best position to comment on the potential impact in terms of noise and light pollution, HGV movements and the loss of valued countryside, walks, etc. We would encourage them to make a response to the consultation with a strong emphasis on how their community would be affected.

CPRE in making their response to the consultation will say again that the level of growth planned for Norfolk and the six county East of England region is simply not sustainable in any sense of the word. The long term housing provision planned, and the associated development, is predicated on large increases of population through net in-migration to the region. This will put a huge strain on our natural resources, and the physical and social infrastructure required to meet this.

The minerals plan is an example of the collateral damage that would result from unprecedented levels of growth. At an extraction rate of 3 million tonnes per year for minerals, how long will it be before we start digging into our most precious and irreplaceable countryside, and behind that, how long before all major mineral deposits are exhausted? Just a few generations it would seem.

We hope CPRE’s Principles for Site Selection, as set out above, will help in your response to the consultation, and we would welcome a copy of the responses from individuals and groups. For further information please contact Dr Ian Shepherd on 01263 713370, or email andianshep@aol.com.

Yours sincerely

James Frost

Branch Director

The children of East Winch say...

2008-05-03T17:19:00.002+01:00

"Please don’t build a quarry it's where we play..."

"I don’t want smelly diggers and lorries going past my bungalow all the time"

For those of you in a position to choose if Min40 becomes a preferred site, I would simply say, "LOOK TO YOUR CONSCIENCE!"

East Winch & West Bilney are under threat.

2008-05-03T11:19:00.007+01:00

After much pulling out of hair, the photographs taken on location at sites such as Min40, Min58 & Min18 have been put on Flickr are all available for viewing, as well as pictures taken at the live quarry in Ashwicken, and other sites such as Bawsey.

I hope this gives you a sense of what we stand to lose if these proposals are allowed to go ahead.

Also bear in mind that on my visits to Min40 for example, there is continous birdsong from skylarks, and more recently has been visited by migrants from Africa, sand martins, house martins and swallows. Min58 at West Bilney had its share of willow warblers and chiffchaff and whitethroat, as well as yellowhammer.

These are unique wildlife habitats, that deserve our protection, not to be allowed to be destroyed by greed for a few flatscreen TVs.

There is now a slideshow icon on the site and a link to photographs underneath it.

You can view the photos and leave comments. Locate the slideshow button on the Flickr site and sit back and enjoy the pictures of our beautiful countryside. You can contrast those with the scenes of devastation from our surrounding areas.

Thanks to our editorial team for the rich selection.

You may even want to visit the sites yourself.

I don't recommend visiting the live quarries without talking to WBB Minerals first. They have offered to show us round.

New Forum Launched!

2008-05-02T21:33:00.005+01:00

We have launched a new forum for the "Save East Winch" Campaign

http://saveeastwinch.freeforums.org/

This is the place to go to air your views

It is open to everyone!

Air Quality Update

2008-05-01T19:21:00.012+01:00

Following on from the Leziate meeting, I have been making enquiries as to what air quality testing has been done locally. I have not read the reports in detail yet, though I thought it would be a good idea to leave the correspondence within this article so that you can make your own judgements. Thanks to all those people who have responded in a timely fashion to my requests.

The bottom line is that there is no air quality testing currently being done at any of WBB's quarry sites to my knowledge, unless WBB can confirm otherwise.

Answers already received by Councillor Alistair Beales from questions put via Leziate residents:

Neil – regarding point 1) the Borough Council of Kings Lynn and West Norfolk is responsible for air quality – specifically Environmental Health. Points 2-5 are covered below. Most of the following is from answers I have already received from questions put via Leziate residents. As follows:

“The Leziate site was considered for emissions of fine particles called PM10 in 2000 which included an Air Quality Monitoring Station being located in the area to measure dust levels and air dispersion modeling was also carried out. The levels of PM10 were below the action limit. The site is also regulated as a Part P Permitted Installation and has conditions controlling emissions of dust.

The Reports are available on line: -

http://www.west-norfolk.gov.uk/pdf/Air%20Quality%20-%20Stage%201%20&%202%20-%20Section%2014.pdf

http://www.west-norfolk.gov.uk/Default.aspx?page=21848

The Environmental health officer concerned is not aware of any dust complaints from local residents.”

General comments were as follows:

“Dust can be controlled from the extraction site by planning conditions, statutory nuisance and if needed Air Quality Management Area.
Using DEFRA guidance we look more closely if residential dwellings are within 200m, if so then this may lead to exposure to PM10, but this does not mean that the level of dust that would cause harm. Also being rural there may be other sources of PM10 locally meaning that the background level of PM10 is naturally high.
We will make general comments on each site, but until a detailed planning application is submitted it is difficult to determine the exact impact to local residents. Certain issues can be mitigated by the use of conditions etc and until we know what they want to do and how they plan to do it then the impact cannot be fully anticipated.
Dust is controlled from the processing site by Part B permit and if needed Air Quality Management Area.
The main health issue is inhalation of PM10 (fine dust particles). This type of extraction will lead to some dust emissions but as the extraction is below ground level and the material is usually damp, emissions are minimized. However, I have found that the haul route and transportation links can also lead to dust emissions.”

1) Dave Robson - Environmental Health

In summary, yes we have monitored around the WBB Minerals site at Leziate and also carried out air dispersion modeling. This work indicated that there were not any likely breaches of the National Air Quality Standards levels for fine dust (PM10). There are two levels to be considered an annual mean of 40 ug/m3 and a 24 hour mean of 50 um/m3 which must not be exceeded more than 35 times in 12 months. We consider that the levels of dust at nearby residential dwellings, workers or occupational exposure of dust would fall to the Health & Safety Executive remit.

You can read the details in the Air Quality reports which are published on the Council’s website.

http://www.west-norfolk.gov.uk/pdf/Air%20Quality%20-%20Stage%201%20&%202%20-%20Section%2014.pdf

and

http://www.west-norfolk.gov.uk/Default.aspx?page=21848

Regards

Dave

Dave Robson MCIEH
Chartered Environmental Health Practitioner
Principal Officer -Environmental Quality & Licensing Section
Environmental Health & Housing Department
Tel. 01553 616302

Rob Cranthorne, NCC Planning Department

Dear Mr Paddock

Thank you for your email.

The Environmental Health Officer has a statutory duty under the Environment Act 1995 to monitor air quality. In this case the relevant contact is David Robson dave.robson@west-norfolk.gov.uk at King's Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council.

The County Council as Mineral Planning Authority, when granting planning permission for minerals developments, imposes planning conditions. These cover a range of matters including control of potential impacts on local amenity which may arise from, for example, noise, odour, and dust and sand blow. In the case of the permission for the WBB Minerals Grandcourt Farm quarry there is a condition, number 7, as follows: measures shall be taken to minimise dust nuisance and sand blow caused by the operations, including spraying of road surfaces, plant area and stockpiles.

The Environmental Health Officer was a consultee on the application, and his response was referred to in the report to the County Planning (Regulatory) Committee. He does not need to attend these committee meetings.

The County Council has a Monitoring and Controlteam which inspects minerals (and waste)sites regularly, and in addition to that, in the event of complaints being received. The WBB Minerals operations in Norfolk have generated very few complaints over many years. Mark Potter is one of the Monitoring officers, and he is familiar with the site and activities on it.

Regards

Rob Cranthorne

My Email to Rob:

Rob

Thanks for taking time out to meet with me last week

A couple of quick questions for you

Following on from our conversation about air quality, I feel that something needs to be put in place as a matter of urgency

Driving back from the sailing club there is a huge pile of sand at WBB’s King’s Lynn Quarry, which could be generating wind blown dust particles and blowing them across the whole village and beyond.

Would you please be able to make enquiries on our behalf and establish:

1) Who is responsible for air quality testing locally

2) What air quality testing (if any) has been done in or around the silica sand quarry sites, at Ashwicken and East Winch

3) How often it is done

4) What actual readings have been taken, and

5) Whether or not those readings confirm that the air quality locally is satisfactory

PS Heather Bolt suggested it was Mark Potter who I assume works for NCC, though I would be interested in establishing the identity of the local environmental health inspector, in particular, the one who was present at the planning application meeting for the land to the West of Grandcourt Farm, Middleton, when planning permission was granted on 7/9/07

Please advise if you can be of assistance

Erin Brockovich

2008-04-29T21:18:00.006+01:00

I had a look at Erin's Blog today - It's good - check it out by clicking on the link in the title above, or in the new inspiration section on the right hand side.

Some choice quotes:

1) "When it comes to human lives, compromise means failure."

2) "Half a victory is no victory."

3) "The only true victory is prevention."

Have you seen the movie with Julia Roberts in it?

Leziate Joint Assembly Meeting

2008-04-29T20:04:00.005+01:00

THINK GLOBAL, ACT LOCAL!

Thanks to everyone who attended last night's meeting at Leziate Sailing Club.

Having had chance to digest what happened at the event, I would have preferred us to have come out of it with an immediate action plan with a few key steps showing the way forward.

As it is, each of the local action groups who attended will be asked to provide two people to be put forward to a form a larger regional body, with an overall group/committee being chosen within the next 3 weeks. If anybody from East Winch or West Bilney would like to be put forward for this group, then please contact us in the usual way.

Sam Knox has written his review of the evening and I would encourage you to go over to www.savepentney.co.uk and read his comments.

One notable question which did not end up with a satisfactory answer related to the badly finished lake at Bawsey.

Why should the mineral companies be allowed to continue to put lakes in each quarry if they are devoid of life for many years?

Still, we were able to put names to faces and have some idea of who to talk to and follow up with within the local councils.

Thanks to Karan & the people at Leziate Sailing Club for organising the event.

Thanks also to the People of East Winch and West Bilney who tolerated my words of Gloom and Doom for the second time. I expect we will have to bang to same drum for some time to come, until people start to sit up and take notice.

I do have two words of positive encouragement, though.

ERIN BROCKOVICH!

Feel free to leave your comments in the usual way.

Response from RSPB

2008-04-29T07:22:00.001+01:00

Dear Mr Paddock,

Sorry for the delayed response, I was on leave all of last week. I have put a Wildlife Pack in the post for you today. I have been able to provide you with the following statistics from 2007 in regards to the types of wildlife queries we receive. The total number of queries we received last year was 80,247.

Here's the percentage breakdown:

Contentious: 4%
Welfare: 23%
Species: 8%
Law information: 4%
Information request: 6%
Identification/sightings: 8%
Feeding: 4%
Nestboxes: 3%
Birds in gardens: 8%
Conservation related: 11%
Other: 21%

Example of some of the conservation related queries we get
Agriculture: 140 queries
Habitat destruction: 1005 queries
Habitat creation/management: 314 queries
Planning issues: 441queries
Windfarms and other energy: 256 queries

Hope this is of help to you, and thanks again for getting in touch.

Kind regards,

Briony Coulson
Assistant Conservation Officer
RSPB
Stalham House, 65 Thorpe Road
Norwich
Norfolk
NR1 1UD
Tel: 01603 697588
Fax: 01603 660088

Reply To 1st Comment on 'Okay - So Who Is To Blame?

2008-04-27T11:33:00.003+01:00

In reply to this anonymous comment, quite possibly from a beneficiary of quarrying……………..definitely from a man;-

Like most blokes, you have completely missed the point. I acknowledged the necessity of SOME quarrying, (read it again!), just because there is a silica vein under the ground at MIN 40 doesn’t necessitate using it.

I USED TO OWN LAND – if it had been harbouring any silica sand beneath its grassy pastures I wouldn’t have sold out to a mining company.

Just got a conscience I guess.

Okay – So Who Is To Blame?

2008-04-26T20:48:00.003+01:00

The sinking prospect of my recent house purchase, (not a million miles from this proposed cancer carbuncle – yards actually), dropping like the proverbial stone in value, got me to wondering just who is responsible for this outrageous financial theft? Even if silica sand was the healthiest thing for us since Goji berries and mango smoothies, home buyers do not actively seek out houses that are rammed right up next to a quarry.

With this thought in mind I realised there were some pretty obvious front running contenders:-

WBB
Norfolk County Council
Parish Council
Gordon Brown

(not necessarily in that order…)

So let’s take WBB for a minute. This is a lawful mining company whose purpose is to carry out work all over the country to the best of its ability for apparently necessary reasons. So are they actually to blame for trying to earn a crust with skills they have trained for, and employing people to do a recognised, legitimate job? Schools and hospitals do need to be built occasionally after all.

Actually, when you look at it like that maybe they aren’t?

However……..

we can all make choices in this world, and for WBB to choose to purchase and excavate a site that is so close to a village it practically sits in people’s back gardens, is not only an immoral and thoughtless choice, it is sickeningly callous in the extreme.

So WBB – no thought, no morals, no ethics……………no thanks!

Next up in the dock, Norfolk County Council. As I understand it, every council in the country has an obligation to the government to meet a required amount of localised quarry sites for the purpose of excavating silica sand. So then, NCC has a problem on its hands has it not? Where to allow these hideous eyesores to be dug in our county? At the moment MIN40 is a request, a proposal that they have to consider, along with a hundred or so others. Just like all our requests for alterations of the landscape, including extending our kitchens, building our conservatories and sticking bedrooms over our garages.

So what can they do?

Well from the information to hand, Norfolk is well over subscribed in the ‘Silica Quarry Club’. Maybe this council should be requesting, or insisting that our county has been plundered enough thank you very much! Councils are there to serve and act for its residents, for which we pay heavily, not sit up there at County Hall playing pass the parcel! The time has come NCC, to stand up with us, and for us, not against us.

And so to the Parish Council……. my pen just took a suicide dive off the desk! I am aghast! I thought Parish Councils were supposed to be even more thoughtful and supportive of local issues than anyone else?! My childhood experience in a little village in Surrey brings to mind of the Parish Council there. They were fighting tooth and nail against a large number of private houses being built on a green belt area close to my home, at the other end of my road in fact. I think this was going on even before I was born.

I am 50 next month - those houses have still not materialised . . .

Whilst I would always prefer to see rolling green countryside as I’m sure we all would, right now I would welcome some nice bright new houses at the proposed site for MIN 40 if it was a choice between that and a Grand Canyon style cancer pit. At least it would mean homes for people.

So yes, East Winch Parish Council, I think you should take a much closer look at your responsibility to our village and its residents rather than satisfy any conflicting interests.

Gordon Brown – our Prime Minister – not that any of us actually voted for him! Poor man, he’s had a tough time of it lately hasn’t he? The buck stops with him for everything, but then he wanted the job – quite badly. There are issues clamouring for his attention in all directions, but above all this he always states he has ‘the interests of the nation’s families at heart’. If that is the case why is the government so badly underestimating the seriousness of the insidious health repercussions of mining silica sand? Why force councils all over the country to have such high quarry quotas? Why LEGALLY ALLOW mining company’s to quarry so close to any village, to even back up right onto the borders of people’s homes where children play in the gardens?

Shame on you Prime Minister.

So there we have it, the not so ‘Fab Four’ - or do we? There is someone missing off this list.

How do companies like WBB get hold of the ground in the first place to mine this sickening stuff? Who is selling them the land or leasing it to them?

Friends, whilst all of the names on the list can be held accountable, the main culprit is the one missing off the end of it. The person or persons unknown who have sold or leased the ground at East Winch, now known as MIN40, to WBB Minerals.

Just exactly WHO DID THAT????

Maybe they haven’t only vanished off the end of the list . . . . . .

MIN 40 Walk, 260408

2008-04-26T20:23:00.003+01:00

I walked around "MIN40" this evening with the family, looking for the barn owls.

We got excellent views of several skylarks, singing way up in the sky, and then dropping down into the field like a stone. There were also swallows, house martins and sand martins newly arrived from Africa, skimming low over the fields, collecting insects. A couple of common partridges startled and flew across in front of us. At the sewage works, we heard a yellowhammer singing his characteristic "a little bit of bread and no cheese". There was also a chaffinch perched on the overhead cables.

There were also the usual wood pidgeons, rooks and pheasant.

Preventing occupational cancer

2008-04-26T11:06:00.002+01:00

GLOBAL: A worldwide epidemic of occupational cancer is claiming at least one life every 52 seconds, but this tragedy is being ignored by both official regulators and employers. This stark warning comes from a global union coalition, which this week launched stage one of a “zero cancer” campaign to tackle what it says is the No.1 workplace killer worldwide.

Marcello Malentacchi, General Secretary of the International Metalworkers’ Federation, says: “Occupational cancer is the most common work-related cause of death, ahead of other work-related diseases and accidents, but it is not taken seriously by regulators or employers.”

“Despite occupational cancer being the single largest cause of work-related deaths, the risks have been downplayed by governments, health and safety enforcement agencies and employers. The end result has been a wholly preventable epidemic of cancers,” says IMF general secretary Marcello Malentacchi.

“This epidemic has to stop. Trade unions in hundreds of countries will be joining the campaign. We’ll be calling for widespread workplace mapping, inquiries and surveys, and a big drive to get rid of the top killers, such as achieving a global ban on asbestos,” adds Malentacchi.

A link to this article is in the title and we have set up a new section called Industrial Disease in the column on the right.

Let us know about other links of a similar nature by emailing us at the address below or leaving comments. Thank you.

The truth...

2008-04-26T09:25:00.006+01:00

"All truth goes through three stages. First it is ridiculed.
Then it is violently opposed.
Finally, it is accepted as self-evident." -Schoepenhouer

http://www.compleatmother.com/quotes.htm

"Truth is incontrovertible, ignorance can deride it, panic may resent it, malice may destroy it, but there it is." -Winston Churchill

http://www.quotedb.com/quotes/3464

"If you tell a lie big enough, and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it." -- Joseph Goebbels

http://curezone.com/blogs/fm.asp?i=968111

Mark Knopfler (Dire Straits) said it best...

2008-04-26T08:31:00.007+01:00

INDUSTRIAL DISEASE

Warning lights are flashing down at quality control
Somebody threw a spanner and they threw him in the hole
There's rumors in the loading bay and anger in the town
Somebody blew the whistle and the walls came down
There's a meeting in the boardroom theyre trying to trace the smell
There's leaking in the washroom there's a sneak in personnel
Somewhere in the corridors someone was heard to sneeze
goodness me could this be industrial disease?

The caretaker was crucified for sleeping at his post
They're refusing to be pacified it's him they blame the most
The watchdog's got rabies the foreman's got fleas
And everyone's concerned about industrial disease
There's panic on the switchboard tongues are tied in knots
Some come out in sympathy some come out in spots
Some blame the management some the employees
And everybody knows its the industrial disease

The work force is disgusted downs tools and walks
Innocence is injured experience just talks
Everyone seeks damages and everyone agrees
That these are classic symptoms of a monetary squeeze
On ITV and BBC they talk about the curse
Philosophy is useless theology is worse
History boils over there's an economics freeze
Sociologists invent words that mean industrial disease

Doctor Parkinson declared "I'm not surprised to see you here
You've got smoker's cough from smoking, brewer's droop from drinking beer
I don't know how you came to get the Betty Davis knees
But worst of all young man you've got industrial disease!"
He wrote me a prescription he said "You are depressed...
But I'm glad you came to see me to get this off your chest
Come back and see me later - next patient please
Send in another victim of industrial disease."

I go down to speakers corner I'm thunderstruck
They got free speech, tourists, police in trucks
Two men say they're Jesus one of them must be wrong
There's a protest singer singing a protest song - he says
"They wanna have a war to keep us on our knees
They wanna have a war to keep their factories
They wanna have a war to stop us buying japanese
They wanna have a war to stop industrial disease
They're pointing out the enemy to keep you deaf and blind
They wanna sap your energy incarcerate your mind
They give you rule brittania, gassy beer, page three
Two weeks in espana and sunday striptease"
Meanwhile the first Jesus says "I'd cure it soon"
Abolish monday mornings and friday afternoons
The other one's on a hunger strike he's dying by degrees
How come Jesus gets industrial disease?

http://www.markknopfler.com/

How much are your lungs worth?

2008-04-26T07:59:00.004+01:00

This made me angry. A man contracts silicosis and his company are fined...

How much?

£100,000?

£50,000?

£10,000?

Guess again...

"Quarry failed to protect workers
A County Durham quarry firm has been fined after lapses in health and safety contributed to a worker contracting a potentially fatal lung disease. Dunhouse Quarry Ltd, of Staindrop, was fined £3,750, after admitting breaching hazardous substance controls."

The company was also ordered to pay costs of £8,177, which means the court made substantially more out of it than the unfortunate victim.

For the full article, click on the link in the title.

How much are your lungs worth?

Now the Fight Begins...

2008-04-26T07:46:00.007+01:00

Check out Daisy Wallage's article on our campaign in the Lynn News by clicking on the title above. Our thanks to Daisy for raising awareness of the cause and also of the meeting at Leziate Sailing Club on Monday!

Occupational and Environmental Cancer Prevention

2008-04-25T05:46:00.003+01:00

"A global epidemic of preventable industrial cancers is killing hundreds of thousands each year because governments and employers are failing to take simple and effective preventive action. Top cancer prevention experts from around the world, meeting in Scotland this month to prepare an occupational and environmental cancer prevention strategy, will reveal the full extent of the problem and will call for the use of safer substances and processes and a phase out of the worst cancer-causing culprits."

As a contribution to the global trade union zero occupational cancer campaign, an international conference will address a major threat to public health: the toll taken by occupational and environmental cancers. The 25 April 2008 event to be hosted by Stirling University, Scotland and supported by unions in the UK and across the world, will feature top union, campaign and academic experts from Australia, Belgium, Canada, France, Finland, the UK and USA.

Speakers from international health and safety agencies including the World Health Organisation, the European Agency (EU-OSHA) and the International Labour Organisation will also contribute. The conference will assess the best available policies and practices, including presentations from leading researchers and commercial organisations on toxics use reduction, from members of bodies such as the Canadian Cancer Prevention Coalition and from trade unions and non-governmental organisations.

Union safety specialists and safety representatives will have the opportunity to make contact with top international experts on occupational cancer causes and incidence and on prevention strategies.

Click the link in the title to find out more.

125 signatures on MIN40 e-petition!

2008-04-24T00:47:00.004+01:00

Thanks to everyone who has already signed the MIN40 e-petition to stop WBB minerals quarrying right next to our village and destroying our conservation walk.

Please talk to your friends and persuade them if you can to add their names to the list.

Breckland already have 1,000 signatures - so let's see if we can catch up!

Radio Norfolk Interview, Thursday am

2008-04-23T19:39:00.012+01:00

Sam Knox (Save Pentney Action Group) and Neil Paddock (East Winch Action Group) recorded an interview with Jill Bennett for BBC Radio Norfolk 95.1, 95.6 104.4 FM on Tuesday night in Pentney.

This was broadcast on Thursday, 24th April 2008 as part of the news and also featured on the morning programme.

You can now listen to the item in full by clicking the title of this article, thanks to Sam for providing the link.

www.savepentney.co.uk

For the previous news item, read by Steve Martin, pleae click here:

http://www.SavePentney.co.uk/audio/radionorfolkinterview.mp3

2008-04-23T19:25:00.004+01:00

COUNTY HALL, 23/4/08

“Our ambitions for Norfolk are:

• an inspirational place with a clear sense of identity
• a vibrant strong and sustainable economy
• aspirational people with high levels of achievement

We are protecting and sustaining the environment.”

The first official EWAG correspondence, your objections, and a petition with 195 signatures were safely delivered to County Hall in Norwich this morning - Thanks to everybody for doing your bit and making this possible!

Members of the planning department were offered the opportunity of a photograph, but declined.

"FIRM DISMISSES CANCER FEARS" EDP

2008-04-22T00:37:00.006+01:00

WBB's Integrated Systems Manager Andy Price is quoted in EDP news 21/4/08 as saying:

"Silica sand as it exists in the ground is completely harmless because the sand grains are obviously too course to be breathed in."

Ok Andy, Well that's all right them. So why not leave it where it is?

No, I'll tell you what, We'll all move out, and you come and live in the village next to the quarry and we'll see if you get cancer or silicosis within the next 30 years, ok?

And then we'll see who's right, the actual experts who wrote the Report on Carcinogens 11th edition, or you and your team of "experts".

The residents of East Winch and West Bilney do not want to be your Lab Rats...
As one local resident has remarked "HOW DARE YOU PLAY WITH OUR LIVES?"

Not Just Newts!

2008-04-19T16:47:00.003+01:00

I was surfing Google for references to Grandcourt Farm, and came across this little gem:

For the full report, click on the title of this article:

Heidi Thompson, Ecology Manger NCC stated:
􀂙 Biodiversity is still in decline in Norfolk, and this is an indication that current approaches are not working.
􀂙 Wildlife habitats have become increasingly isolated and fragmented, and surrounded by hostile land uses.

Grandcourt Farm West - Planning Decision

2008-04-19T16:33:00.002+01:00

My Blood Boils...

2008-04-19T13:20:00.008+01:00

I have attached the some extracts from the Council's correspondence above.

This relates to the land immediately to the west of MIN 40, and had planning permission granted only 7/09/07.

This begs the question...

How many East Winch residents knew?

There were only two objection letters "balanced" it would appear by 2 letters in favour. Conservation bodies and councillors alike let it go through without telling us and with out so much as a whimper.

Given that we now have over 100 signatures on our e-petition in just two weeks for MIN 40, I am sure we would have had at least that many had this been properly communicated at the time.

The tract of land threatens 500 year old oaks whose loss would be "regrettable".

Further more any lakes built are subject to a bird management plan which means it won't attract birds in case they collect in large numbers and collide with the jets from RAF Marham.

Have a look and write those letters!

This will also enable the company to link up to the north with their "secret" northern quarry / carbunkle / blot on the landscape which could be the death of us all.

And we are electing these people and paying them to represent us.

Our council tax is paying them to create a potential death camp in West Norfolk. A land, given time, devoid of both animal and human life.

Is your life worth a flat screen TV?
Are your children's lives worth a glass bottle?
Is the destruction of the beautiful countryside is anyway justified?

Can anyone think of a reason to carry on paying their council tax?

They need to see sense.

So much for the government's claim on their 2007 budget document
Building "Britain's future: Fairness and prosperity for families"

Why is Silica Sand so important?
Is it really more important than people?

The government and those assembled who approved this / did not object thought so.

And why no mention of Health Risks?

"Health & Safety Executive - No Objection."

Perhaps they don't read their own literature!

http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/cis36.pdf

Vote Now.

"Man's inhumanity to man is not only perpetrated by the vitriolic actions of those who are bad. It is also perpetrated by the vitiating inaction of those who are good."
Martin Luther King

VITRIOLIC
1 a: a sulfate of any of various metals (as copper, iron, or zinc); especially : a glassy hydrate of such a sulfate b: oil of vitriol
2: something felt to resemble vitriol especially in caustic quality; especially : virulence of feeling or of speech

VITIATING
1 : to make faulty or defective : impair
2 : to debase in moral or aesthetic status a mind vitiated by prejudice
3 : to make ineffective

Source: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary

Writing to NCC & Grandcourt Farm Planning Details

2008-04-19T10:54:00.007+01:00

A proactive and highly motivated neighbour of mine checked with the council to see if writing a letter carried equal weight to filling in the objection form.

The response follows below:

#1 - Re Writing into the Council:

Thank you for your email. It would be preferable for your comments to be made in a letter with headings instead of having your comments split between the form and a letter. I can confirm that a letter will be properly counted, registered and included with all other responses when reported to the relevant committee.

Norfolk County Council

#2 - Grandcourt Farm Details

Following our telephone conversation, I am writing to provide details as requested, about the site at Grandcourt Farm for the extraction of Silica sand, which already has planning permission.

The application went to Planning Committee on 05/05/2006 and the report to the Planning Committee is available on our website at the following address:

http://www.norfolk.gov.uk/consumption/groups/public/documents/committee_report/planreg050506item6apdf.pdf

A plan showing the boundary of the site is included in the report.

The minutes of the Planning Committee meeting at which the decision to approve the application was made is available at :

http://www.norfolk.gov.uk/consumption/groups/public/documents/minutes/planreg050506minspdf.pdf

The application was received in December 2004, planning permission was granted on 07/09/2007.

Thanks to ... for this useful information.

MIN40 Proposal - A Good Idea?

2008-04-17T13:27:00.009+01:00

The red boundary line shows how close the proposed MIN 40 quarry would be to the heart of East Winch Village (in Green).

Given the risks of silicosis and cancers from respirable crystalline silica to workers and local residents, would you dare sign this off?

The Report On Carcinogens, 11th Edition states:
"Respirable crystalline silica, primarily quartz dusts occurring in industrial and occupational settings, is known to be a human carcinogen."
"The link between human lung cancer and exposure to Respirable crystalline silica was strongest in studies of quarry and granite workers" and also "Residents near quarries and sand and gravel operations are potentially exposed to Respirable crystalline silica."

For the sake of the children living in Town Close (with their Garden Fence literally adjoining the proposed quarry site)
HELP US STOP THIS NOW!!!

The Secret "North Quarry" - Close Up

2008-04-17T12:17:00.003+01:00

Here's a close up view of the Secret North Quarry in Ashwicken

East Winch Church can be seen in the background

Did you know this was here? Should you have done? Is it safe?

Secret Silica Sand Quarry Exposed

2008-04-16T07:10:00.008+01:00

Here is a quarry being dug 400m to the north of East Winch, without the resident's prior knowledge. We believe silica sand is being extracted.

HOW DID THIS HAPPEN?!!!

Respirable crystalline silica is known to be a human carcinogen.

This confirms what we said to people at the meeting on sunday - you can see the sand exposed - we are at risk from the carginogenic dust already.

WBB Mineral's Business Cards read "Working together for mineral solutions."

For those residents living so close to a working silica sand quarry it could be the final solution.

Check out Multimap's feature by clicking the title of this article.

Sell Your House for £899

2008-04-15T19:50:00.003+01:00

I have just seen an ad on Google with the above title.
I didn't think the place would be worth that much!

(It's actually an ad for an estate agents and is describing what their fees are)

What is PM10?

2008-04-15T19:30:00.001+01:00

"The PM10 (particles measuring 10µm or less) standard was designed to identify those particles likely to be inhaled by humans, and PM10 has become the generally accepted measure of particulate material in the atmosphere in the UK and in Europe."

Find out more about airborne pollution by clicking the title of this article.

Letter from Henry Bellingham MP

2008-04-15T06:16:00.005+01:00

Terry has received this letter from Henry Bellingham, our Local MP, together with the response from the Norfolk County Council. As ever, we encourage you to comment on these by clicking on the word "Comments" at the bottom of this article. Thanks.
If you have not joined us before, Welcome!
To read the letter, just click on the attached picture. Thank you.

MIN 18 / 58 Visit

2008-04-14T20:50:00.009+01:00

Some additional pictures from today's visit

A bird strike - probably a Sparrowhawk kill

The Pond from the opposite MIN 18 side

Small mossy plants (unknown)

View across MIN 18 to East Winch Church

MIN 58 / WAS 39 - West Bilney Pit Visit 14/4/08

2008-04-14T19:57:00.006+01:00

Earlier today we visited West Bilney Pit. This is designated by the Council for both Mineral Extraction and Landfill.

There was an abundance of summer migrant warblers, including Willow Warbler, Chiffchaff, and Whitethroat. Skylarks were singing through most of the visit. A green woodpecker was observed flying backwards and forwards on several occasions.

A shooting club and an archery club use the site, as evidenced by the warning signs around the site.

The original Carstone pit has been allowed to revert back to nature over the last 20 years or so.

When it was first being dug, Sand Martins inhabited the sheer faces of the quarry.

Nightingales used to frequent the nearby woodland though they have not been seen for some time.

Now there are sycamores, small oaks, rows of birch, gorse and broom.

Small lichens could be seen on the former quarry's floor growing in the sandy soil.

Teazles grow in abundance and are used by flocks of goldfinchs during colder spells.

A pond in the corner often contains dabchicks, snipe and woodcock, though none were present on this occasion. Although warblers were seen in the trees next to the water.

Several common finches were seen, chaffinches, greenfinches and possibly some yellowhammers and linnets. There was so much birdsong at times that it was difficult to distinguish the different songs from one another!

When the soil warms at times slow worms, grass snakes and adders can be seen.

I photographed some tracks in the sandy soil.

MIN 18

We walked out of the pit and walked along the boundary of MIN 18

This is a substantial field bordered by mature trees, some of which have recently been felled by the Forestry Commission. Freshly felled areas create good habitat for Nightjars.

In the distance, the landfill site could be seen, as well as East Winch Church.

The pit is a hidden jewel of a place. I thoroughly enjoyed the visit and would enjoy visiting again.

One Voice That Shall Not Be Silenced...

2008-04-13T23:43:00.003+01:00

On our walk around Grandcourt Farm this morning, Paul said how he enjoyed listening to the sound of the Skylarks which are breeding on the site. We enjoyed great views of them.

When I saw one singing so close by, it was an intensely emotional moment. The skylark sings with an exultant voice, a song of joy, a cry of freedom.

I felt that it should symbolise the very cause which we have dedicated ourselves to.

One Voice That Shall Not Be Silenced.

Another One Bites the Dust

2008-04-13T23:21:00.003+01:00

Paul, Myself and the boys walked around part of the conservation walk at Min 40 (Grandcourt Farm) this morning.

There was bright sunshine and a fairly constant wind blowing to the east.

We got great views of 4 skylarks (Protected under the UK Biodiversity Action Plan), a beautiful peacock butterfly that posed for us. We could hear the yaffle of a Green Woodpecker, the trilling of a Wren, as well as the song of Chaffinches and Dunnocks from the little belts of trees on the site. A small brown bird that could have been a meadow pipit fluttered away from the tall grasses and flew to the north.

Paul showed us East Winch's only pond.

We palked past the rabbit warrens and the sewage works, coming to a drainage ditch where we found sticklebacks in the shade of a tractor tyre, where Paul says he has seen a Kingfisher on his daily walks.

It was a wonderful walk, I wish had had known about it earlier, as I would be out doing it regularly! Ben said he couldn't understand why people would want to destroy such a beautiful place.

As we approached the houses on the corner of the village, we noticed the children playing on their slide in the garden, and I dreaded the prospect of the sand from the new quarrying sites being blown right across their garden.

As we walked past, James spotted what appeared to be a dead shrew. Paul picked it up and noticed a bite wound on its back. It would appear that a cat had attacked it and killed it.

If any nature lovers can tell us what species this would be from the photos we would appreciate it. Please leave your comments.

EWAG Meeting well attended

2008-04-13T20:36:00.008+01:00

A quick outline of the meeting...Minutes to be issued in due course.
East Winch Action Group had a well attended meeting today at 2 p.m. in East Winch Village Hall when nearly 100 people turned out to get an update on progress made.

RE-ELECTION
The team re-elected the Action Group Committee (known as the CAG = Command Action Group) and Paul Edwards stepped down from the chairman's role and passed this onto Neil Paddock, with the approval of those present. Paul emphasised that he would still be playing an active part in future proceedings as part of the Command Action Group.

Further appointments to the Group that were reconfirmed included Nell Steele (Deputy Chairman), Paul Edwards, Terry Robertson, Wayne Footer and Mike Rawlings (Command Action Group).

FOCUS
We heard that the primary focus of the meeting was to get the objection forms back to the council in good time for the April 25th deadline, and a covering letter would be drafted which would extend to the other local sites proposed, to save us from having to complete objections for each site.

MINUTES
Neil Paddock introduced himself to those assembled and read out the previous meeting's minutes.

UPDATE
Paul Edwards provided an update on activities, including work on the website, local press interest and dialog with other local action groups, including ERASE and Save Pentney.

EMAILS TO BOOST E PETITION SIGANTURES
Paul requested everyone assembled to pass on emails to their friends and family to sign our e-petition for MIN 40 (The land to the east of Grandcourt Farm).

DELIVERY TO NORFOLK COUNTY COUNCIL (NCC)
Paul also mentioned our plan to drive the completed forms to NCC, obtain a receipt and had a photograph taken at the point of delivery.
Residents were encouraged to keep a copy of what they had sent.

OBJECTION FORMS
Terry Robertson was congratulated for his part in organising the delivery to local residents of the Objection Forms.
A show of hands demonstrated that the majority of the room had forms and had completed them, either online or as a hard copy.

CELEBRITY INVOLVEMENT
Terry also mentioned that he had written to Bill Bryson, Martin Brundle and Stephen Fry to support our campaign.

PARISH COUNCIL'S RESPONSE TO NCC PROPOSALS
Mike Rawlings read out the Parish Council's response to NCC's Proposal of MIN 40 together with his response to particular paragraphs from that letter.
Mike's response was extremely well received by those assembled.
Nell Steele proposed that a letter be drafted to the Parish Council to express our views.

Nell also expressed her concerns about the proposals and their affect on local wildlife.

FURTHER LOCAL COMMUNICATIONS
We discussed how we might best make contact with local landowners, councillors and other parties going forward.

WEST BILNEY RATIFIED
Those assembled voted unanimously to include West Bilney and MIN 58 within the scope of our objections to NCC and be part of the Action Group's remit.

FUTURE COMMUNICATIONS
We established that the majority of those present could be kept informed electronically, and we would also make use of local notice boards and the Post Office. It was proposed that those with internet access to share with their neighbours who aren't currently online.

CANCER TRAGEDY
One resident gave us a touching testimony that 13 of his family had worked in the pits, or lived by them, and had since tragically died of cancer. He added that 75% of the people he had worked with over the years had also died of cancer. A transcript and recording of that will be made available in due course.

ERASE MAP SHOCKER
Neil Paddock informed those assembled of the existing planning permission given in 2004 in the field to the west of MIN 40 and area about twice its size, and the existing silica sand quarry in the north, highlighted by the map provided by the Exploited Region Against Silica Extraction (ERASE) group.
Neil also mentioned the opinion of a local expert, who warned of an airborne particle called PM10 created by quarrying, which causes significant health effects to those who had inhaled them.
That report would be passed on in full to the Command Action Group (Committee).
Mike read out a response from WBB Minerals about the effects of sand and dust from their 2004 planning application for the west side of Grandcourt Farm.

ACTION GROUP FUND
It was agreed that a fund would be set up to reimburse Action Group Members for printing costs and similar expenses.

COLLECTION OF FORMS
It was also agreed that Objection Forms were to be dropped off by residents next Sunday 20th April at the Village Hall between 10am and 2pm, where assistance would be given with completion if required. It was proposed that donations could be made to the fund starting from that date.

Any Other Business
--------------------
A draft Mission Statement and Code of Conduct/Ethics for those elected to EWAG had been produced and would be passed onto the CAG for perusal and amendment.
Once approved it would be signed off by all members and made available.

One resident expressed his opinion about current world food shortages and questioned the rationale of the government to destroy arable land in order to mine silica sand. He also mentioned there was a Hobby present on MIN 40.

Another resident requested a full list of future meeting dates for the Parish Council, and copies of the draft mission statement and code of conduct.

A question was asked about the timescale for the development to the west of MIN 40
The full duration of which would be about 12 years.

Meeting Closed Approx 4:30pm

[Note: any significant omissions are the responsibility of the Webmaster]

BBC Radio Norfolk Interview 13th Apr 11 am News

2008-04-13T11:27:00.003+01:00

BBC Radio Norfolk Transcript of News 13th April 2008 11.00 am read by Steve Martin

"People in a Norfolk village are meeting today over plans for a quarry near their homes. The site in East Winch is one of more than one hundred proposed for Norfolk.

Neil Paddock from the East Winch Action Group
Says there is a lot of Ill feeling even though the plans are only at a very early stage"

“There are these maps of very large areas of land which have been designated, or at least proposed at this stage, that go right up to people’s villages and in some cases houses will literally disappear. So clearly we’ve got a lot of strong feelings within the village at the moment and in neighbouring villages as well.”

Save Pentney Meeting. 1 p.m. Sat Apr 12th

2008-04-12T09:17:00.008+01:00

Neil Paddock attended the meeting on April 13th to offer our support to Sam Knox and our Pentney neighbours at Pentney village hall.

For additional Information, please click on the tile above to be taken to Sam's website. Thank you.

Parish Council's Response to MIN 40

2008-04-11T22:59:00.007+01:00

ADDENDUM - I understand that the actual document was not visible for those who weren't on Google Mail - the text of the original response is given below:

Please read the document,
Then vote and tell us if you think it goes far enough.
You can leave a direct response by clicking on the word
"Comments" below.
These can be left anonymously if you wish. Thank you.

***START OF DOCUMENT***

East Winch Parish Council

Responses to Norfolk County Council Re. Norfolk Mineral and Waste Development Framework.

Section: 6.4 Issue 2 “ Cumulative Impact of Development, How Option DC1
would be implemented

Whilst it is understood that there is a continuous requirement for minerals
With regard to Silica Sand, it is understood to be a strategic mineral
which occurs in certain areas. However sand and gravel must be considered
to be readily available in numerous sites in West Norfolk. It is felt by
parishioners that there are sufficient workings in this Parish and that
further developments of this nature are not desirable. Therefore the
feeling is that when a strategic mineral such as Silica sand is found in an
area with large sites to extract this there should not also be large sand
and gravel sites in the same area.

Option CS2 - Spatial Distribution of Development

This option as it stands will allow the same areas to be inundated with
Mineral and Waste sites and possibly become just one large hole in the
ground. It is understood that there is a continuous requirement for
minerals but it is felt by parishioners that there are sufficient workings
in this Parish and that further developments of this nature are not
desirable in the same area and sites should be well spread across the
county.

Section: 8.4 Issue 12 “ Waste going to Landfill, How Option DC5 would be
implemented.

It is recognised that there have to be Waste Disposal sites but West
Norfolk is adequately served by the landfill site at Blackborough End and
any extension of this facility would be unwelcome and be considered an
imposition by all residents therefore there should be no more landfill sites
permitted.

Section: 9.6 Issue 18.1 “ Lorry routes, How Option CS6 & DC6 would be
implemented.

It will be recognised that the parish of East Winch and many other small
parishes are served by a system of minor roads and lanes all of which are
neither suitable nor capable of additional traffic. Apart from the A47 trunk
road all other roads in the parish are already in a dilapidated condition
and any further traffic such as mineral and waste lorries would cause them
to become unsafe for normal traffic. The routing of lorries should not
only be secured through planning conditions but should also be strictly
enforced.

Preferred Option DC10. Development Control – Sustainable Construction and Operations. Section: 10.18 Issues 7, 31, 34, 36 and 37“ Recycled and Secondary
Aggregates, Water Resources, Flood Risk/Drainage, Greenhouse Gas Emissions,
How Option DC10 would be implemented.

The Parish of East Winch is known for its environmental diversity from the
SSSI area surrounding the old gravel workings situated within and adjacent
to the parish continuing on through woodland and open landscape of natural
beauty. There are recreational facilities in the immediate area for
boating, quiet fishing and bird watching. Any devaluation of these
facilities would be unacceptable to some 130,000 people within the Borough
of King's Lynn and West Norfolk. All developments whether large all small
should covered by enforceable conditions, not just guidance.

It may be seen from all of the above that major expansion of the already working mineral extraction facilities in the Parish would be both unwelcome and devaluing of amenities and lifestyle in this Parish.

Section: MIN 40 - East Winch.

Grandcourt Farm.

It is appreciated that silica sand is a strategic mineral and only occurs
in certain areas but the scale of the proposed site is felt to be excessive
as it encroaches too much on to the residential area of East Winch village.
There is a possibility that an area of half the size may be acceptable with
adequate vegetation screening.

Section: MIN 40 - East Winch, MIN 40 - highways

Although the site is located adjacent to the A47 trunk road access from the
site onto this would not be acceptable. The site should be accessed from an
internal access road.

Explanation for above statements re. Grancourt Farm.

As Silica Sand is a strategic mineral and local policy will undoubtedly be overruled by national policy any reduction that can be gained on the proposed area of the site needs to be negotiated now and definitely at the next stage of consultation when it will be know which sites will be included in the final proposal and ultimately at the Planning Application stage which may not be for many years if the site is included.

***END OF DOCUMENT***

Interview - Sunday Morning, 13th April

2008-04-11T22:34:00.006+01:00

There will be a short radio interview about the challenges we face in East Winch and our Action Group on BBC Radio Norfolk, hosted by Steve Martin on Sunday Morning, April 13th.

How to show your support...

2008-04-10T22:09:00.005+01:00

Many of you will receive a small postcard sized leaflet in the next few days, if you haven't done so already.

If you support the "Save East Winch" Campaign, please show your support by popping the leaflet in your front window or in your car window so it is visible to all. Thank you.

ERASE MAP SHOCKER!

2008-04-10T21:25:00.008+01:00

I want to extend my thanks to Jon from the ERASE group for producing this map.
ERASE stands for EXPLOITED REGION AGAINST SILICA (SAND) EXTRACTION.
You can view ERASE's NEW site at the link on the right, or click the title of this article.

This map shows not only East Winch and MIN 40, but all the other planned and existing local developments in the area. It's not a pretty picture!

As we prepare the Agenda for Sunday's meeting of the East Winch Action Group, here are some of the things we have been up to since last sunday:

Printing Save East Winch campaign literature and putting up posters locally
Distributing leaflets
Talking with the council about how to lodge objections
Developing this web site and adding extra links to external sources
Developing a list of objections to Min 40 for distribution
Talking to local contacts in the ERASE group and setting up their website (see link in title above)
Reading up on and discussing the Parish Council's response to the MIN 40 proposal
Preparing our own response
Talking to local conservation groups, such as RSPB.
Talking to local press, and the local school
Talking to local villagers in both East Winch and West Bilney
Discussing ideas to raise awareness of our campaign

We want to thank everybody for your support so far, and look forward to seeing you at Sunday's meeting. We want to represent your views as fully as possible, so please use the comments section under this message to let us know how you feel about what's going on.

We welcome your feedback.

If you know other people in the village who are not quite sure what to do, then please give them a friendly nudge and encourage them to come along to the village hall at 2pm on Sunday. We will be able to provide you with a report of where we are as a group and what still needs to happen to achieve our deadline for submitting the objections to MIN 40 by 5pm on April 25th.

Aerial Views of "MIN 40"

2008-04-06T22:03:00.000+01:00

The land designated as MIN 40, resembling a

giant slice of Battenberg cake is shown above.

Its proximity to the village is obvious.

Now imagine that being replaced by a gaping hole in the countryside.

What impact is that likely to have on our lives?

Can you see your house on here?
Click on the photo and have a closer look.

Our opponents may have thought this would be

a piece of cake - Let's show them they have bitten

off more than they can chew!

Thanks to Paul and John for providing the aerial photos.

Hockham Woods Saved!

2008-04-06T16:59:00.000+01:00

I have added a link to "Hockham And Wretham In Tandem Against Gravel Extraction Action Group" as they have been successful in opposing their local scheme.

Whilst our fight to save East Winch goes on, please take some encouragement from their achievement.

WE CAN DO THE SAME...BUT WE NEED TO ACT FAST!!!

An extract from their website (link shown below) says:

"Norfolk County Council contacted us Thursday April 3rd to advise us that the Forestry Commission have WITHDRAWN their proposals for Hockham Woods.
This is absolutely fantastic news. A big THANK YOU TO YOU ALL for your support
A massive thank you to everyone who...
A) Took the time and effort to complete the objections forms either on paper or on-line by our estimate over 80% of villagers have now registered their objections at County Hall which is a huge proportion and underlines the strength of feeling and commitment we all have against these proposals.
B) Added their name to the No 10 E-Petition, which reached a fantastic 1,072 number of signatories before it closed on Saturday. Out of the 8500 live on-line petitions on the government site ours climbed up to the 130 spot in only four weeks! A copy of this was handed in with the paper objections forms at County Hall on Friday March 28th and it will be presented in full to the Forestry Commission."

http://www.hawitage.co.uk/

Beginning with the end in mind...

2008-04-05T21:07:00.000+01:00

A friend of mine asked me what I hoped to achieve in raising the objections...
Here are my views...

Main Goal - To Save the Village!
-----------------------------
- To Protect our village, East Winch from encroaching mineral extraction & landfilling.
- To Protect our children from the choking and debilitating risks of silica dust ingestion.
- To Protect our way of life and livelihoods, our health, wealth and happiness.
- To Protect the countryside and its wildlife for future generations to enjoy.

Sub-Goals - What will happen as a result:
------------------------------------------
1) That the village will act in a united way with one voice and object to the plans by April 25th and that the objection will be successful.
2) The village will become united and strengthened as a result.
3) That the council & government will review and modify their plans to decimate Norfolk with quarries and rubbish dumps over the next 20 years as a result of our combined efforts (our village and those others that join up to fight the cause).

That's my opinion - I'd love to hear your views on the subject - please leave your comments. Thank you.

Save East Winch

2008-04-05T08:43:00.000+01:00

Save East Winch - Postcard sized

2008-04-05T08:12:00.000+01:00

Try clicking on it and pressing print - Alternatively email me for the .jpg or .pub file

Business Card Sized Poster Available Here!

2008-04-05T07:53:00.001+01:00

Just Click on the Image and Click on Print!