The Sanctuary LNR in pictures

Mark 2 Comments
The Sanctuary LNR Before and After 2003 - 2014(1)
The area outlined in red is the Local Wildlife Site. Two thirds was destroyed in 2003 but 4ha was saved by the creation oft the Sanctuary Bird Reserve.

 

 

 

Skylark Grassland October 2013
The new Velodrome and Derby County Football Ground
4.5ha of wildlife-rich grassland mayb e destroyed..
Mayor and Margaret Beckett telelscope 23 Jul 2004 cropped
Opened by the then Secretary of State for Defra and Derby’s Mayor in 2004, the Sanctuary Bird Reserve and LNR is threatened with destruction in 2014. Habitat for Skylarks, Snipe, and Wheatears could be replaced by time trials and mountain bikes.
Skylark grassland
Skylark Grassland

See yesterday’s Guest Blog for information on how to make your views known.

 

 

 

[registration_form]

2 Replies to “The Sanctuary LNR in pictures”

  1. I understand the concerns for the future of all LNR’s with this example, but it does highlights a few issues concerning birders etc. Firstly where was all the opposition to all the other building works around the area, the footie ground, the car showrooms (of which there are many) the newish looking train station, the hotel nearby, was this habitat equally not as good as the current LNR before? Or was it the case when people did object they were labelled “nimby’s” the developers favourite “get of jail free” card? But as soon as a nature reserve is under threat…different story. I do seem to remember one person on here pleading that the RSPB got more involved at local level with planning applications and this seems to me an exact reason why they should.
    But also look at the map on the right “toxic waste depository”, is it alreay there or planned? If it’s already there two things 1) A LNR situated next to a toxic waste dump…lovely 2) This could be the thing that stops the velodrome being built couldn’t it? How many cyclist wish to race next to a toxic waste dump…i wouldn’t, take the petition and get some well known cyclist involved if they will.

  2. James: the area which is now the LNR had been a landfill site for many years before the development of Pride Park – it had grassed over and skylarks etc were nesting. So this area was the obvious one to try to save from development and ‘turn’ into a reserve. The deal was that if the toxic wastes from the rest of the development area could be collected together and housed safely under a new mound (albeit destroying some grassland), the surrounding site would be ‘saved’ and turned into a reserve. (The wastes are carefully sealed in and there’s no leakage – as yet). Despite careful seeding ten years ago, a rather uninteresting vegetation has now developed on the mound and it is not of much use for wildlife. The quality grassland is situated mainly to the north of the mound – and it is this part that the track will cover.
    The velodrome itself is now almost completed and stands close to the LNR but not on it. It has been built on an adjacent park and ride car park. From the council’s point of view, the LNR is the only bit of (sic) ‘undeveloped’ land close to the velodrome that could be used for the track. And British Cycling say they will ONLY fund the track if it is adjacent to the velodrome – nowhere else!
    The council clearly didn’t realise what a stink it would cause when they published their plans though I’m sure they think they can still ride roughshod over our wildlife concerns and get the planning application through.
    Nick
    ps It is great that the regional rspb office have got involved with this matter even though it would appear at first sight to be a ‘local’ one. They have been excellent in giving the coalition of groups the benefit of their planning knowledge and in the lengthy, well argued objection which they have just submitted.

Comments are closed.