EVIDENCE GIVEN TO THE SCOUT MOOR INQUIRY, OCTOBER 2O16 .

l am Dr. [name redacted],

I have spent many years in research into peat formation, vegetational history, and climate change, using pollen analysis, radiocarbon dating, dendrochronology, etc. I have been involved with various research projects on Scout Moor.

My family owned a commercial peat field, and I am very familiar with the problems of the exploitation and restoration of such sites. I have been concerned by wind turbines for over 25 years, since a friend suffered a serious breakdown (possibly the first) caused by the erection of turbines very near to her home at Llangwyryfon nr Aberystwyth.

Scout Moor/ Rooley Moor

My interest:

Diary entry aged 10, living on the edge of the moor: “. . .we set out over the moor, across fields of cotton grass that made it look as though it had snowed” – then past old farmhouses, finding a grouse’s nest, and on to Waugh’s Well.

Since then, I have always thought of this moor as a very special place, and it never occurred to me that we would have to put up with the utter vandalism and’ greed we now see.
At that time , the moor was in much better condition than now. Most of the quarrying had ended, several quarries having closed at the start of the war, and never reopened.

It was before the big problems with acid rain.

The moors were where people went on Sundays and holidays, and we children played there whenever we got the chance.

People went for the fresh air, the breeze, and the spectacular views, and to get away from the smoke and the cramped houses and streets in the shadow of the mills in the valleys below.
They had done this since early Victorian times, and everyone knew the poems, songs and stories of the local writers praising the moor. All talked of the openness; the sense of remoteness and the views. These moors are almost unique in that once the steep sides have been climbed, the walker emerges on to a plateau from which the valley cannot be seen (and from many places not a sign of habitation).

One of, if not the most famous of these authors was Edwin Waugh, and the Well was built by his admirers 50 years ago. People still read and are moved by his poems such as especially in this context,

“The Moorland Breeze”

Verse 4
ln yonder valley, richly green,
I see bright rivers run;
They wind in beauty through the scene
And shimmer in the sun;
And they may sing and they may shine
Down to the heaving sea;
The bonny moorland hills are mine,
Where the wild breeze whistles free!

I used to sit by Waugh’s Well, and imagine Waugh himself sitting there writing these lines. Not now.

Other writers, such as J. Marshall Mather (Rambles Round Rossendale: 1888) expressed similar admiration for the situation of the Well “Wherever the eye falls there is meadow and moorland, mountain solitude and lonesome gorge”.

It is a great pity that the Brontës did not write a few lines about this moor. It is much more interesting than the moors around Haworth.

More recently, Ian Goldthorpe has written two-guides to rambles round Rossendale, and it is interesting to recall that when he was chief planning officer for the Borough, skyline development of any kind was not permitted – not even, a small shed. Great effort was put into ensuring that the National Grid pylons kept, as far as possible to the valleys.
How did we get form the situation where the landscape and heritage were sacrosanct to the present mass-crucifixion skyline?

Condition of the peat

In the 1950s, there were large grass fires on the moor which, because of the very dry weather, spread into the underlying peat. Subsequent heavy rain caused considerable erosion, and this damage is still visible.

Acid rain increased in the 1960s and 70s, and caused further damage.

In the 1980s and later, acid rain decreased, and the vegetation started to recover, and this would probably have continued had the moor had been left to itself
Restoration

I have been involved in several research projects on the origin and history of the peat on the local moors.

Radiocarbon dates which I have obtained show that the peat started to form about 6000 years ago. At the base of the peat are the remains of a birch forest, which was killed, apparently by increased wetness, and was succeeded by sedge grass and moss, which built up the peat until it is up to 6ft. thick. Pollen analysis shows a complete record in the peat of the changes in vegetation and climate over the 6000 years.

In many places on the moor, erosion has left vertical faces in the exposed peat, and it is clearly not possible to recreate al the layers of peat which have been washed away.
Probably the best solution is to leave the whole area untouched, in the hope that the bare areas will be re-vegetated and stabilised. This would be a long process.

The applicants do not seem to have any practical suggestion for restoring the peat, whether or not the damage was caused by them.

The plan now seems to have been reduced to the erection of some temporary fencing (years, decades?).

They did suggest that any peat removed during construction would be stockpiled, and replaced at the end of the project. The object of any restoration is unclear. Is it as a carbon sink, to improve the appearance to stop erosion, or what?

Local Plan – wind turbines

The various requirements and safeguards seem reasonable, but: there is a general presumption in favour of turbines, this Is Rossendale Council.

A few points

Larger turbines considered on “High Moorland Plateau’, but not elsewhere. That is, exactly where they will be most intrusive, and exactly the place which would be (and was) covered by ombrogenous blanket bog on peat, The characteristic terraced geology of Rossendale means that horizontal or gently sloping areas predominate.

In the last 280 year, quarrying, drainage, burning, overgrazing and pollution have caused much damage, and the peat is now patchy and dissected , making a nonsense of the condition that peat over 40cm thick should be avoided. This implies a jigsaw of “deep” and shallow peat with turbines squeezed in.

Is it acceptable to destroy 35cm-thick peat? A 2m-thick blanket-bog peat will have the same vegetation as a 10 cm-thick one.

All areas of peat-forming vegetation should be avoided. This is a recognized internationally-important category, and every effort should be made to repair damage and re-establish the blanket bog.

This is a far more difficult job than restoring pastureland, heath or woodland, and will not succeed if further damage is being perpetrated. Sensitive areas should be avoided not only by turbines, but by all other associated work (roads, ditches, spoil, etc.).

An important way in which peat-cover can be re-established is by spreading along the margins of existing peat. This cannot occur if the area is interrupted by roads, etc-Damage done in a day might never be healed. It would take something very important to justify this scale of destruction, Not turbines.

Restoration of peat cover is a slow process: it may take decades or even centuries, but slowness is what makes peat important.

If it is not strictly protected it could quickly be destroyed.

No work has been done to repair damage caused by the construction of the existing turbines. This requirement and the de-commissioning procedure must be very vigorously enforced.

How did we ever get into this position?

Not many years ago no skyline development was allowed.

The greatest damage done so far is the construction of the existing roads and the turbine bases.

Using the latest satellite and Lidar imaging. I have carefully measured the area the area affected by this. Including the roads, ditches and banks it totals more than 44.5 acres, much more than the area claimed. No peat will ever be able to grow on this area nor will any characteristic blanket bog vegetation.

Presumably this same discrepancy will occur in any new construction.

Junctus (Common Rush) is becoming dominant on churned-up areas in addition to the 44.5 acres.

The applicants claim that the wind farm occupies only 2% of the moor. Of course, it occupies all of it.

Numbers and Density of Turbine Locations

I walked to the top of Thieveley Pike, a place always known for its extensive views over most of Lancashire and much of Yorkshire. I was very concerned to find that the whole panorama was ruined and all sense of remoteness lost, by the fact that, from one spot, 91 turbines were visible. Not all the Scout Moor turbines can be seen from there, so the total within a radius of 3 miles is over 100. If this were replicated over the whole of Great Britain the total number of turbines would be 150,000. The actual number is 7000.

It seems clear that Rossendale is being targeted as an “easy touch”. Peel have previously said that, of course, they would not site turbines on Holcombe Hill, Musbury Tor, or other “beauty spots”. Bacup and its surroundings is presumably and ugly spot.

In their original application (not called Phase 1 as, of course, there was no suggestion of Phase 2) Peel said (under “Cumulative Visibility”) that from most viewpoints the Scout Moor turbines would be in a panorama which already included turbines, so they would not affect the landscape. So one turbine makes it easier to put up a second, which makes it easier to put up a third, and so on.

In the 1870s, when we imagine greedy mill-owners exploiting the people and resources of Rossendale, none of them would have dared to put forward such a scheme.