Letter to Local Planning Authorities from an Entrepreneurial Farmer

1.1 Introduction to myself and reason for proposal.

My name is MR Michael Christou and I live and work at Moatlow Farm (GR 156 538). Farming in my area is becoming increasingly difficult. This is due to poor soil and the harsh climate. Also I am receiving much less income because of increase in cost of keeping my live stock and the decrease in their value at market.

1.2 Please consider the above details when reviewing my proposals. (The following)

2.0 General explanation of my proposals (Of which there are three)

2.1 Development of out buildings into holiday accommodation.

Firstly I propose to make the appropriate alterations to some of my unused outbuildings. If I do so I will be able to accommodate tourists consequently earning a little extra income to pay for the keeping of my animals and giving tourists a quality experience of the peak district area, which will bring more money into the area and community.

2.2 Restriction of certain foot paths during lambing season.

My second proposal is that the public footpaths which cut through my land are closed for the period of time when the lambs are at a stage where if they are disturbed they are easily scared because this leads to them growing to be unhealthy. Although I agree that the general public has the right to be able to experience this scenic and peaceful environment, but if they carry on passing through my fields as regularly and in the great numbers that they do then, especially during lambing season, my income and the role I play within the community will be impaired.

2.3 The replacement of dry stone walls with easier maintainable fencing.

Being a hard working farmer I strive at putting 100% into my work knowing the more time I put in the more I get out, but an everlasting problem of tourists damaging and myself having to repair or pay for damaged dry stone walls is becoming somewhat of a hindrance. Also the more time I put into repairing the dry stone walls the less time I have for real work this is why I suggest that the majority of the walls are replaced by cheaper, easier to maintain fencing.

3.0 Evidence and ideas to support my plan.

3.1 Evidence and ideas concerning out building development.

There are an extremely large number of visitors every year to Dovedale and the peak district area; this is where the local community gains its income to be able to support itself. It is inevitable that if an extra place for a family to stay is provided people will take that opportunity. If accommodation is provided for 2 or 3 families then it would be an extra 2 or 3 families in the local area which means not only I receive much needed extra income but the whole community will benefit. The simple reason being that those two or three families will be spending their in the shops, paying to use the facilities and paying to visit the attractions in the area.

3.2 Evidence and ideas concerning the closure of certain foot paths at certain times.

Changing the routes during busy season is in favor of what the P.R officer is proposing and also it would be a great benefit to my self.

3.3 Evidence and ideas concerning the replacement of dry stone walls with easy maintenance fencing.

People in opposition to this proposal would argue that the removal of the dry stone walls would be the removal of a natural beauty; but the walls are not natural, man put them there. But that is not my point/argument just fact. I agree that the removal of all of the dry stone walling would be the removal of something which I believe symbolizes English countryside, culture and heritage. But I am not asking that all the walls are removed/destroyed just the ones that surround my land and nearby farms.

This would be barely noticeable to the general public but would make a significant difference to myself and my work. If the walls are left there I will have to continue repairing them after visitors have damaged them which is either time consuming, expensive or both. If it is not possible at any point for me to make a repair to the wall then holes form meaning my animals can escape easily consequently getting lost or injuring themselves costing me even more money.

Also the lime stone can be used again for things such as repairing other walls, strengthening/repairing foot paths instead of scaring the scenery by digging for it. In short it is been re-cycled, beneficial to the local community.

4.0 Justification of my proposals in comparison to those of the parish council and the public relations officer.

4.1 Why the parish councils proposal will not benefit the community.

(1) The car parks are to be made by the laying of tarmac. If this is to be done then extreme disturbance of the local area will occur, e.g. the heavy plant machinery will make such noise and will take up space there fore the area will have to be closed to visitors during construction other wise extreme disorder would occur. This closure to tourists, even for a short time would kill most of the communities’ peoples income.

(11) The cost of visiting the area for most people is far from cheep then on top of that when visitors arrive the parish council wants to charge them for parking their car. The tourists already provide a large percentage of our income to charge them for things such as parking would almost be exploiting them! After all they do have as much right to experience this environment as we do.

4.2 Justification of my proposals cont…

Why the public relations officers proposals will not benefit the community

(1) The proposal of putting information boards around the area to help give visitors awareness of what they are doing to our area will benefit the area in no way what so ever. My reason for believing this is that I believe that the people who take out the time and show interest in these information boards saying ‘Don’t drop litter’ and ‘the country code’ etc are the people who would have thought to respect our environment in the 1st place. Consequently the boards are a waste of money. (Money which is donated by the local community)

(11) Making alternative footpaths out of hard wearing footpaths i.e. tarmac would have the same negative effect on the community as explained in section 4.1 (1).

Whereas if you (the committee) were to accept my proposals the lime stone from the walls would be crushed and used to make hard wearing, natural looking footpaths.

4.3 The afore mentioned proposals of the P.R officer and the parish council would both have a negative effect on the community and would just cause a great hassle.

My proposals have been carefully planned to have a positive effect on the community, whilst making the role I play within the community more focused.

5.0 In conclusion:

Please consider all of the facts and think about how our community is going to benefit the most. I am confident that once you have done this you will decide that my proposals are going to have the most positive effect on the future development and future in general of our community, and there fore should be put into place.