Hands Off Hartlebury Common

Anger at Chobham Common grazing proposal
By Louise Osborne
November 05, 2009

RESIDENTS have voiced their outrage at plans to introduce grazing cattle and permanent fencing on Chobham Common.

Around 130 people from the area attended a meeting to discuss Surrey Wildlife Trust (SWT) proposals on how to manage the land.

SWT, which looks after the common on behalf of Surrey County Council, put forward a five-year plan to improve the condition of the site after Natural England said it was in an “unfavourable conservation condition”.

Possible solutions proposed by the trust included allowing animals to graze on the land, as well as cutting and mowing, controlled winter burning and scrub clearance.

But some residents have said cattle would be dangerous and are not happy about the prospect of permanent fencing and grids that would be required to control their roaming.

James Osbourn, of the Chobham Society, which organised the meeting in conjunction with Chobham Common Preservation Committee and Chobham Riders, said out of all those gathered, only two voted in favour of the proposals put forward by the trust.

He said: “The meeting was reminded it was as recently as 1998 that the secretary of state had decided against the county’s application to fence the northern part of the common following a lengthy public inquiry.

“Many of those present asked why the matter had even been raised again.”

Debra Powell, who keeps her horse Merlin at the Langshot Equestrian Centre, in Gracious Pond Road, said she opposed the idea of having cattle on the site.

She said: “I am worried about the safety aspect and coming across lots of animals when I am out riding.

“Horses can be spooked and if they see something unusual, their automatic reaction is to run.

“I think there is a great risk to horse riders and I would be very worried about riding on the common.”

Natural England’s conservation officer Carole Mortimer said: “Grazing will control grasses that are invading the site and can be achieved, together with maintaining and enhancing public access. But no final decisions have yet been agreed.

“Grazing would probably only be for part of the year and we would take every measure possible to ensure its impact was minimal, including avoiding any potential impact on the visual appearance of the landscape.”

Why are they aquiring as much land as they can, with the very same blueprint, at the same time, wherever they possibly can??