Housing Archives - Page 7 of 8

Old Susannah’s Journal No.39 – Maths! (After A Fashion)

Articles, Community, Creative Writing, Information, Opinion, Satire and Humour No Responses »

Jun 102011

Voice’s Old Susannah casts her eye over recent events, stories, and terms and phrases familiar as well as freshly ‘spun’, which will be forever etched in the consciousness of the people of Aberdeen and the Northeast.

Summer in Aberdeen. Lighting the barbeque (rain permitting) then standing around it (to warm your hands up) while someone inevitably insists on taking over the cooking, ensuring you get a burger burnt on the outside yet still frozen inside.

Old Susannah is off for a spray-tan tomorrow so she’ll be bright orange (or maybe not) for the season’s most important event – the Friends of Union Terrace Gardens picnic. My picnic basket has been dusted off, a few brewdogs put in the deep freeze, and raingear laid out (just in case) for the big day Saturday.

If you think the City’s economic future doesn’t depend on putting a carpark where the verdant remnant of the Denburn Valley is, then I will see you there Saturday.

Old Susannah was at the RGU students’ fashion show last Thursday as a guest of one of the lecturers; the designs on show were impressively creative and individualistic. It was a professional, enjoyable show, but I hope they do better on the drink front next time. I guess it is possible to have clothing that’s not been sewn in the third world by children in sweatshops after all.

The mini bottle of unchilled white wine however was not to my group’s taste, and we made a break for it to Cafe 52 for some cold beer and wine. Since then, I’ve had a wee bit of my time taken up looking into the deer cull. It’s not too late (I hope) to stop this madness.

But now it’s time for a definition or two.

Mathematics: (noun) classical discipline encompassing algebra, geometry, trigonometry; numeracy.

Maths was never my strongpoint. I still haven’t figured out how we can guarantee our economic future by getting a TIF loan for £100 million or more while being £50 million in debt to get rid of Union Terrace Gardens.

Thankfully, that’s what ACSEF and the Council tell me will happen, and I’m quite prepared to take their word for it. I’m not even smart enough to figure out how a Stadium at Loirston Loch for 21,000 people can work on 1400 parking places (or how the stadium’s plan to have 80 buses reach Loirston from College Street in 15 minutes flat is feasible. I personally can’t get a bus from Torry to Nigg when it’s busy that takes less than half an hour. Obviously I’m doing something wrong.).

I’m working on my math skills in the hopes I too can see how black and white our city’s thinking must be.

I guess I also have to work on the mathematics behind the Haudagain Roundabout situation and the proposed Paper mill housing development. It is good to know that Aberdeen is the best in the UK at something – and it’s official: we are the best at roundabout traffic jams. I’d always thought traffic moved just a wee bit slowly in the part of town as people stopped to admire the lovely roundabout itself. However, as ever: the City has a plan.

And here is the mathematical sense behind it:

Take: 1 x congested roundabout

Subtract: 100 nearby Middlefield houses to be bulldozed

Add: 900 private dwellings (builder: one Mr S Milne) near congested roundabout

Add: shops, offices, a medical centre, business units and riverside bistro (builder: Mr Milne)

Equals = minimal impact on roundabout traffic.

That’s right. There will be minimal impact on the roundabout per our Council.

Personally I would have thought that the massive number of people trying to get a table at the riverside bistro alone would have led to traffic standstill; I hope to have an invitation to the opening night. The medical centre makes a nice addition to any housing scheme of this size; it is the Vaseline that lets these great housing plans slide through planning departments. It will be an extremely useful medical centre, as all of the people stuck on the roundabout will need treatment for C02 inhalation and dehydration.

My other mathematical ignorance concerns the Tullos Hill deer:

Take: 30 deer (Council’s estimate) which normally live 5-7 years

Subtract: (I mean ‘kill’ – sorry, I mean ‘cull’) 9 male deer this year

Balance: 21 deer

Plant: 40,000 trees

Number of trees left for each deer to eat = 1,904

Old Susannah can eat and drink with the best of them, but had no idea how hungry these tiny little deer must be: 1,904 trees is a fair amount per deer. If each deer ate only 5% of this figure, that’s still 95.2 saplings for each deer (of the remaining herd after we’ve ‘managed’ 9 males as the City wishes). It is a complete mystery to me how these hungry critters manage to survive on Tullos at all given the lack of trees. Alas, I have no degree in forestry, so it looks like I must take the experts’ advice: deer are dangerous vermin which if left unchecked will eat.

Not in Crisis: (mod English phrase) – phrase used to reassure others that a given situation is under control or no cause for concern.

If you follow football (a game somewhat similar to what they do at Pittodrie), then you will know that FIFA is ‘not in crisis’. For you or me allegations of corruption, vote-rigging, bribery and dishonesty might spell a bit of trouble. For the Federation Internationale de Football Associations, such issues can be shrugged off. It is because of FIFA’s high moral stance that footballers the world ‘round behave with such dignity, ethics and honesty.

Behind every great organisation there is a great man.

Milne Homes has Stewart; the Wood Group PSN has Sir Ian, and FIFA has President Blatter. Mr Blatter is so very popular that no one ran against him in the latest FIFA presidential election. Or something like that. I guess the question is does a mere £100 million ‘inducement’ really amount to a bribe? I think not. FIFA does have a ‘Standards Statute’, which is a modern fiction classic. It reads in part:

“The Standard Statues contain all the provisions that are intrinsic to any constitutive texts worthy of such description. We are therefore calling upon the Associations to examine these statutes meticulously and incorporate all of the articles and principles covered into their own statutes – for their own benefit and for the Good of the Game” – Joseph S Blatter

I love a good read, and gave the Statues a once-over. However, I did not find the proper etiquette for accepting brown envelopes filled with money. Perhaps someone here in Aberdeen can help with that. In any event, it is hoped that all the world’s football associations will soon behave as Mr Blatter wishes. Heaven forbid anything happens to put the beautiful game into disrepute.

Quasi-serious note

Last Christmas I put in a serious note about the holidays not having to be the beautiful family and friend-filled affairs that the TV commercials present.

Not everyone had 20 friends round their tree drinking eggnog before a horse-drawn sleigh ride. Summer is rather the same. The media tells you that you must look fantastic in your bathing suit (if it ever gets warm enough to put it on). You must play volleyball on a sandy sunny beach and drink orange soda the same colour as your skin.

Don’t for a moment assume that everyone will be having tropical holidays and drinking cocktails from coconut shells under palm trees. The economy is not great (despite the best efforts of ACSEF and ACC). You might have your worries. Take a ‘staycation’. Visit Scotland. Visit Tullos Hill for that matter.

But don’t let some false media advertising imagery fool you. And if you are like many people struggling with one thing and another, remember: at least you’re not Ryan Giggs.

“You’re Shooting Yourself In The Foot” – Cults CC Tells Malone

Aberdeen City, Articles, Breaking, Featured, Opinion No Responses »

May 272011

Voice’s Suzanne Kelly reports from a dramatic meeting ( 26.05.11 ) of Cults, Bieldside & Milltimber Community Council she was kindly invited to attend as a guest, and took the opportunity to discuss the roe deer cull in person with Cllr. Aileen Malone, Convener of the Housing and Environment Committee responsible for the decision.

Protestors Deliver A Petition Of Nearly 2,500 Signatures To Cllr Aileen Malone

Lib Dem Councillor Aileen Malone avoided debating with me the Tullos Hill Roe Deer cull she supports on Northsound 2 a fortnight ago.

She ‘had a prior engagement’ and could not spare 20 minutes over the phone on a Sunday morning to give Aberdeen her reasons for wanting the deer shot.

Cllr. Malone successfully silenced me and the Nigg Community Council representative when we wanted to debate the cull issue at the 10 May Housing & Environment Committee meeting. We weren’t allowed to speak to the Committee because there was no written report on the cull – just a verbal report. It didn’t matter to the Committee (except for four members) that new information had come to light, and the Community Councils wanted to be heard.

After the Housing Committee voted to get on with killing the deer to plant ‘a tree for every citizen,’ Malone told the media she hoped that would be an end to the controversy. With thousands of petitioners, four protesting community councils, and various animal charities against the cull, this was wishful thinking taken to a new level.
See: Tullos Hill Picnic

I was not alone in making complaints about the handling of the deer cull and tree planting issues to Aberdeen City Council. It is hoped that any cull will be halted until a proper investigation and a democratic, fully informed debate can be held. The 10 point report I prepared as a basis for my complaint is attached at the end of this article. ( click here )

It had been circulated to the members of the Housing Committee and to Cults, Bieldside & Milltimber Community Council, where Ms Malone is an elected City Councillor. I told them I would like to attend their next meeting as a guest on this issue, and they kindly invited me along.

Having served as a Community Council member myself, I was not surprised to hear they have some of the same issues I remembered from my days on Torry’s Council – litter, tree pruning, and so on.

I was surprised to find Mike Shepherd, Chair of the Friends of Union Terrace Gardens at this meeting. He gave a presentation on the state of play of the design competition, and what funding might be used for any scheme. To his surprise and mine, Councillor Aileen Malone made a promise that was both dramatic and new to Mike and me.

Cllr. Malone categorically stated and repeated this promise: after a final design for the gardens is chosen, the people will have a vote on whether to go with the design – or to leave Union Terrace Gardens undeveloped (which could include some improvements and amenities)

She was not sure whether or not this would be only for the people of Aberdeen – perhaps the Shire would be voting as well: but she was adamant this was the case. So Friends of Union Terrace Gardens – do not despair just yet. She also confirmed twice that “not a penny” of City Council money would be used to develop the gardens. No doubt Mike Shepherd will have more to say on these matters.

Back to the deer...

The Cults, Bieldside & Milltimber Community Council Chairman, Peter Reiss opened the deer debate by saying he attended a recent Civic Forum meeting – and was struck that on the subject of the deer cull, there was virtual agreement across the ages and across the boards against the cull. “For outsiders looking in, this looks like a no-brainer: let’s put the trees elsewhere” he said.

Ms Malone tried to use arguments which had already been dismissed in the press – not least in the Aberdeen Voice. She said that expert advice had been given. I countered, and explained to the Councillors that someone had briefed the SNH against the non-lethal measures (as shown in a letter of 25 November from SNH to the council), and offers from experts – who had knowledge and experience of ways to plant trees without killing deer – was refused.

I told the Council that the SNH letter proves someone had said tree guards were out because ‘they had visual impact.’ This did not sit well with the Cults Council at all. I explained that the phase 2 consultation documents made no mention of any deer cull – again, the councillors sided with me.

By now an increasingly desperate Ms Malone explained that the tree planting was ‘A Liberal Democrat manifesto promise’ – as if that were justification of some sort.

Other council attendees had comments for her position such as:

“Aren’t you shooting yourself in the foot,”

“other forms of deer control should be paramount”,

“think about the reaction you have had here tonight – it looks like a stupid thing to do: you have not won the argument.”

Amazingly Ms Malone tried two further tactics. One was to make general sweeping comments that deer culls are necessary, and her earlier, discredited ploy that only a handful of people initially objected to her in writing, and most were animal activists.

I reminded her that the full story had not come out immediately – the phase 2 consultation made no mention of the cull for Tullos Hill, and it had been subsequently proved that I was one of those who had written to her with my address opposing the cull. She had gone to the Press and Journal at first, saying ‘only about one’ person from Aberdeen had objected to the cull. She later made private apologies – but none through the Press & Journal, leaving readers of it with the wrong impression.

Animal lovers and activists might be interested in two further statements Councillor Malone made at the meeting.

Firstly, there has been permission in place to kill the Tullos Hill Roe Deer since March. The Council still are not answering questions about when the shooters will be sent in – I have asked – and if anyone else cares to ask the Council, it may help.

Secondly, Malone alludes to plans to kill the deer at Bridge of Don.

Some Councillors were all in favour of culls of animals – where the animals are in danger of starvation or over population. They were reminded that 30 deer live on Tullos Hill. Malone seemed to say that 9 to 12 of these would be shot now, and the shooting would go on.

She had no real answer why the £225,000 for ten years of fencing / protection was demanded up front. One person present said:

“no one in their right mind would put their hands in their pockets” for protection in the circumstances – i.e. not knowing exactly what they were paying for or for how long.

I reminded those present that there were plenty of ways to have deer and trees together. One councillor suggested having less trees planted. I reminded everyone of the Scottish SPCA position on the matter – the Tullos Hill deer would be killed not because it was for their safety/health – but to plant trees . “Abhorrent and absurd” were how the Scottish SPCA put it.

At the end of the day the Council decided to draft a letter to the City. The debate was closed with Peter Reiss saying to Ms Malone “you have not taken the public with you, and people are saying “this is ridiculous”. It was suggested this might even damage Ms Malone’s political career.

And that is where we leave it for now.

But one thing is certain, the opposition to the cull has not gone away by a very long shot. If nothing else, the Cults, Bieldside & Milltimber Community Council gave me the democratic forum for debate that I could find nowhere else: I am extremely grateful to them.

Suzanne Kelly’s 10 point report – Click here. – Please consider writing to Aberdeen City Council’s Housing and Environment Committee in support of this formal complaint.

Fittie’s Future? – As Maybe Seen By ACSEF

Aberdeen City, Creative Writing, Opinion, Satire and Humour No Responses »

May 202011

By Bob Smith.

The MS Europa wis ower big
Ti berth in oor hairbour watters
We ACSEF chiels are already thinkin
The toon’s reputation’s in tatters

We canna lose future tourist fowk
So eence mair we’ll use a trick
We’ll get aa oor PR billies
Ti lay it on richt thick

Us ACSEF chiels are the lads
Ti organise things in the city
We’ll jist hae a bunch o CPOs
Gien ti the fowk faa bide in Fittie

We’ll knock doon aa their hoosies
Syne mak the hairbour fine an big
An great muckle cruise liners can sail
Past the golf course ower at Nigg

Ach we ken the fowk in Fittie
Wull be tearin oot their hair
It’s for the gweed o the toon
So we dinna bliddy care

Noo there’ll be a lot o protest
So we’ll hae ti be richt fly
An git oor freens in the cooncil
Ti agree plans on the sly

Michty me we’re richt clivver
Eence mair we’ve worked a con
Noo fit aboot some ither plans
Fer a marina on the Don?

The Poetry Mannie’s used poetic licence
Fin writin iss poem’s verses
Bit shud iss fiction come ti pass
We’ll kick ACSEF fowk up their erses

©Bob Smith “The Poetry Mannie” 2011

Deer Today, Gone Tomorrow? – The Battle of Tullos Hill Begins

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Environment, Featured, Information, Opinion No Responses »

May 112011

By Suzanne Kelly.

· Housing & Environment Committee refuse to hear Kelly and representative from Nigg Community Council

· Deer Cull to go ahead

Two Thousand And Four Hundred area residents signed a petition asking for the Tullos Hill Roe Deer cull to be scrapped. Two Thousand people from around the world likewise signed petitions.
Torry Community Council were kept in the dark about a cull; Nigg Community Council wished to speak on the subject today. The initial consultation for the public to comment on said nothing about a cull.

In the 21st century in an allegedly democratic society, the above facts should have ensured that the proposed deer cull – designed to allow 40,000 trees to be planted – would have been debated and properly examined. You might even think that local people would have had a say in the destruction of a generations-old population of perfectly harmless deer.

You might even have thought that those pushing for a cull would stop for a moment and wonder if they were possibly making a mistake. And if you were really really an optimist, you might think that these same people bent on the destruction of the deer would have allowed people to talk about it – maybe even let Councillors have a vote on the matter.

You would be wrong.

I first got involved after Jeanette Wiseman wrote an article for the Aberdeen Voice. In writing my follow-up, I was struck by how secretive the deer cull had been kept by those in power, seemingly favouring trees over deer (see ‘Shhh! – Don’t Mention the Pre-planned Deer Cull, Aberdeen Voice). I was happy to help the animal organisations such as Animal Concern and Aberdeen Animal Action with further publicity and research. I did my best as a spokesperson.

This Monday a small delegation presented Aileen Malone with a paper petition signed by 2,400 people – mostly people who live within Aberdeen. Lush – who have been outstanding in their support and energy towards stopping the cull – came along, as did Jeanette, and Fred Wilkinson of the Voice. We met the Press, presented the signatures, and hoped this would have some impact on Malone.

Yesterday, Tuesday 10th May I might have had a chance to address the Housing & Environment Committee. Not only had Malone sent me an email saying they would vote on the cull, but the extraordinary lack of consultation with Torry Community Council had – or rather should have – been grounds for speaking.

Anne Begg is on record as saying ‘I see this (demand for money) as an appalling attempt to fudge their responsibility.’

If as has been shown, the Community and the people had been kept in the dark about the cull – then how could the Committee continue as if nothing wrong had been done? Surely all of the elected members would want to know how extremely badly the pro-cull Councillors and City officials had acted.

If the Nigg Community Council (which probably should have been consulted, too) had seen fit to send a delegate to this Committee meeting, surely the Councillors would want to know what the people of Nigg wanted to say? Certainly not.

First, Malone addressed the Nigg Delegate as being from ‘Nigg Community Centre’. “Nigg Community Council” several people shouted. She corrected herself. Tut, tut: Nigg had MISSED THE DEADLINE TO ASK TO SPEAK. Malone made a move to have his deputation request rejected. Someone else suggested that my request and the Nigg request should be jointly put to a vote.

( See Suzanne Kelly’s intended Speech – https://aberdeenvoice.com/2011/05/a-plea-for-the-deer-a-speech-unspoken/ )

It was on an incredible technicality that Aileen Malone suggested we should not be allowed to speak. No physical, paper report had been attached to todays Housing & Environment Committee Meeting’s papers. The previous meeting’s minutes reported that ‘a report would be made’ concerning the deer cull.

Some of the Councillors – Neil Cooney and Yvonne Allan – said that a report should have been attached, and that the deputations should be allowed. Malone decreed that the report was always going to have been a verbal one, and our requests for deputations were not valid.

A vote was held which went against us speaking. I wrote down the names of those who were trying to save the deer by allowing the speeches, and can report that they included; Neil Cooney, Jim Hunter, Norman Collie, Yvonne Allan, Muriel Jaffrey, and Jackie Dunbar. The Convener Aileen Malone, Vice Convener, and Councillors Yuill, Noble, Cormie and Robertson were among those who voted to kill our deer.

They had seemingly deliberately made a mockery of the public’s not stumping up the ransom money – they had one Mr Reilly, ( derisively I thought) announce that a total of 2 donors pledged a total of £51.00 for fencing. As every Councillor knew – the animal groups were not going to submit to the demand for £225,000 for deer protection.

I hope every anti-cull person out there will contact all of their elected representatives and the Housing & Environment Committee

The word blackmail was used by many individuals and groups to sum up how they felt about the Council’s demand for the money. Anne Begg is on record as saying ‘I see this (demand for money) as an appalling attempt to fudge their responsibility.’

I waited a few minutes before I left.

Even though I was not surprised by the decision, the concept that the absence of a written report was sufficient to derail any debate was a bit of a shock.

When I did leave, I was quickly followed by virtually all of the Media present – BBC, STV, P&J, Northsound, Evening Express.

I gave a fairly lengthy, comprehensive account of past and present developments and issues. And then I raced home to brief the legal team ( yes, legal avenues to save our deer are being actively pursued ) – and to thrash out this swift article. I will also publish my rough draft speech notes. Who knows? Someone on the Committee might actually want to read these.

I have to say that some of the Councillors – Cooney and Allan in particular – did all they could today. The rest seem to have either been sleepwalking – or voting the LibDem line. I hope they realise this is a beginning and not an end to the story.

What now?

If the feelings of the thousands of people and dozens of animal organisations can be swept away, our willingness to take action cannot be so easily stopped. Many groups are planning to ‘take to the hills’ to stop the slaughter. I hope every anti-cull person out there will contact all of their elected representatives and the Housing & Environment Committee (feel free to copy to me) to demand a full enquiry into the tree initiative be held before the £2,500 (yes that’s a correct figure) is spent on the first round of deer slaughter.

You can certainly send in some Freedom of Information Requests to Aberdeen City Council; the email address is: foienquiries@aberdeencity.gov.uk

why not ask the Council:

– who wrote the phase 2 consultation?

– who decided to leave the deer cull out of the consultation?

– does the city already owe £44K or so for previous failed tree planting?

– who decided not to tell Torry Community Council about the cull?

– who decided to tell SNH that the non-lethal options would not work – and that ‘tree guards have visual impact?’

And tell them we demand warning in advance of any cull.

Aberdeen Voice will do its best to publish updates relevant to this story. Personally, nothing would make me happier than having the opportunity to write that this whole sorry cull has been stopped.

A Plea For The Deer – A Speech Unspoken

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Environment, Events, Featured, Information, Opinion No Responses »

May 112011

Suzanne Kelly presents her speech which she was prevented from delivering at the crucial Housing and Environment Committee meeting yesterday due to an ‘incredible technicality’.

The committee voted down the opportunity to consider input from Ms. Kelly and a representative of Nigg Community Council, thereby ruling out further debate ahead of pressing ahead with the cull, in spite of the receipt of a 2400 strong petition, and 82 letters in opposition to the cull on Monday.

Councillors, thank you for allowing me to address your Committee today.

I am here to echo the sentiments of thousands of Aberdonians as well as national and international people, and ask you to stop any plan for a cull of deer on Tullos Hill.

I would like to propose you adopt one of two positions:

Halt the cull, and then plant trees once non-lethal measures can be put in place or …

re-launch the extremely flawed phase 2 consultation to the public – this time telling them that the tree planting will involve a deer cull.

There are some of you who insist that:

‘deer must be culled’,
‘we have taken advice from Scottish Natural Heritage’,
‘animal lovers should pay £225,000 for deer protectors’.

Let us examine those positions in a moment.

Firstly, let us consider how extraordinarily un-democratically – how against established good governmental practice the entire issue has been handled.

Irrespective of a Councillor’s personal views on animal culling, I hope we are all in agreement that there are established procedures for consulting with the public and consulting with Community Councils which have been wholly ignored. If you are upholding the law and the rights of your electorate, you must now stop this cull – at least until a proper consultation is launched.

The phase 2 public consultation for ‘a tree for every citizen’ closed at the end of January.

I read this document on the Council’s website; so did countless other people. The document tells me that there are rabbits in the area, and have been considered.

Who drafted this consultation and why did they omit the cull which was already being planned? We know the cull was being planned by the date of the letter from Scottish Natural Heritage, which I will come to presently. Who exactly decided to keep this cull from the public? Was it just an accidental oversight? Why were rabbits mentioned but not deer – the effect this had on me personally was to make me reach the conclusion that animals had been taken into consideration when the scheme was planned.

someone at the council or in the ranger service has decided to bypass normal democratic procedure

I can assure you that had a cull been mentioned, I would have most definitely objected to the plan while the consultation was open. And so would many other citizens of Aberdeen. I feel as if we have been robbed of our right to be properly consulted. In view of this point alone, the cull should not go ahead.

Another gross breach of protocol and established practice was the complete disregard shown to Torry Community Council. The City should by now have received a letter from Torry Community Council; as reported in the Evening Express, the Council voted unanimously at its April meeting to condemn this cull, and to complain that it was not consulted.

The Torry Community Council also confirmed that at no point was it alerted that a cull was part of the tree-planting scheme. Who, I would like to know, will take responsibility for this breach of established procedure? The City Council is already widely criticised for its failure to consult the Nigg Community Council concerning development plans for Loirston Loch. It is incumbent on this Housing Committee to stop any cull plans until it has addressed this procedural failure.

But now we come to the letter from Scottish Natural Heritage to ranger _________________. I contacted the ranger to whom the letter is addressed, and he referred me to Ian Tallboys, head ranger, for clarification.

Reading this letter – someone at the council or in the ranger service has decided to bypass normal democratic procedure.

Someone has told the SNH that fencing is a bad idea. Someone has even more incredibly told the SNH that tree protectors should not be used on Tullos Hill as they have ‘visual impact.’ ‘Visual Impact.’ On a coastal hill. Tree protectors are in use far and wide throughout this city in areas that have a great deal more traffic than Tullos Hill.

How can anyone for that matter decide for this Committee, for Torry Community Council, and for the citizens who should have properly been consulted that a subjective observation as to ‘visual impact’ condemn a small herd of deer to death?
Obviously this Committee will now realise that the SNH were led, by a person or persons yet to come forward, to decide that the lethal option was the only solution.
There are many, many non-lethal solutions to this issue of deer eating trees – this Committee acknowledges that the deer do not have to die.

Otherwise it would not have issued its highly controversial demand for money. The demand for money for fencing and tree protectors itself is a declaration that these are suitable options for deer control. It is of course a demand that is seen as nothing short of blackmail by myself, by animal charities, and the electorate.

This is one reason the avenue was not pursued: the City should be responsible for finding money, not citizens. The City has resources at its disposal – I note your new Robert the Bruce statue in front of the £60 million pound Marischal building, soon to be fitted with brand new furniture.

Are we really to understand that this city, with its vast real estate portfolio – which sells land at less than market value to property developers has no means of finding £225,000?

This city which hopes to borrow nearly £100 million pounds to fill in Union Terrace Gardens?

The suggestion the city has no money and cannot raise money is unacceptable. This Committee were offered the free services of a deer management expert: this was turned down. Some of the non-lethal methods which would work include: tree guards, fencing, using one of some 3 dozen types of trees which deer do not eat, planting crops nearby which deer will eat, planting the trees elsewhere, planting once the money can be found for these measures, using chemical deterrents on the young trees.

The Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals calls your proposed cull ‘abhorrent and absurd’ – a sentiment echoed by thousands of people. The cull is not a suitable response: other deer will move into the area, as per the various animal charities I have consulted – many of which have made this plain to the Committee already.

We seem to be talking about a herd size of 30 animals. This is not over population.

As an aside, it would be nice to see the Council put up roadside ‘deer crossing’ signs in the area to warn motorists deer do live in Aberdeen.

I just mentioned the herd size. This was one of a half dozen relevant questions I asked as long ago as 28 February, Most of my questions were not answered at all. Some were answered only recently, and some were answered with the phrase that has become a mantra for pro cull councillors: we have taken advice – a cull is the only answer.

Well, you have not taken advice. You briefed SNH as to why you did not want the non-lethal options, and then presented their response to this briefing as being their unbiased professional opinion. The animal charities all give you non-lethal options, and some of you inexplicably reject them.

Back to these questions of mine.

some person or persons initially said that the tree planting scheme would be completely cost neutral

I asked a number of questions which would have provided material for me to start hunting for an appropriate grant for saving the Tullos Hill Roe Deer. The timescale was very tight indeed – but the lack of forthcoming answers made it completely impossible for me to try and find any kind of grant or fund.

Again, everything is being slanted towards a wholly unnecessary cull. The silence of the persons responsible for the ‘tree for every citizen’ scheme has blocked this avenue.

As an aside, in some of the documentation I read phrases such as ‘in a few years the trees will begin to pay for themselves.’ Is this tree scheme meant to be a source of income for the City? Am I wrong and no such plan to make money from the Tullos Hill plan exists? Where is there any consultation on this matter?

I will be pleased to hear that no plans for commercial wood exploitation exist, and will report back to the media and Torry Community Council. It is serious enough that the consultation was slanted, that the SNH were briefed to favour a cull, and that Torry Community was excluded from what should have been a simple scheme. But to have some form of commercial enterprise in mind that would forever change Torry certainly cannot be going on behind the scenes, and thank you for confirming this is not the case in advance.

To sum up the history of this whole irregular affair, some person or persons initially said that the tree planting scheme would be completely cost neutral. Anyone with a rudimentary grasp of finance would have realised that planting over 200 thousand trees would indeed be expensive.

It would also seem that the responsible person or persons will not be putting up their hand and admitting their mistake – and instead are pulling out all the stops so that £2,500 is spent on the cull rather than the more expensive, humane, ethical non-lethal options which most definitely exist.

Someone or other briefed SNH that the non-lethal options would mysteriously not work on Tullos Hill.

Someone or other created a public consultation that was by omission of the cull misleading.

Someone or other decided to ignore protocol and kept Torry Community Council’s elected members in the dark.

This same person or persons came up with a scheme to ask the public to come up with a quarter of a million pounds before today.

Someone or other sadly forgot to tell the corporate sponsors that a cull was involved.

Someone or other has a good deal to answer for.

What a pity that person or persons did not think to seek funding for fencing themselves as soon as it became apparent there were cost implications they had not previously recognised.

Ladies and gentlemen, whatever your personal feelings are on deer – although Mr Fletcher has made it plain that they are no different to rats or pigeons – you must acknowledge that in these circumstances you must vote against any cull.

If a vote goes ahead in favour of a cull, please rest assured that every aspect of the tree scheme and any cull will be put under a microscope not just by me, but by established animal welfare organisations and legal minds.

The mechanisms for such actions are, I can promise this Committee, most definitely being readied. The deer are not overpopulated; other deer will move in, and you will have someone killing these animals for some 5 years.

Perhaps you think the animal instantly drops down dead when shot? This is hardly the usual case. In many instances, the terrified, shocked animal will try to wander around in agony as it begins to internally drown in its own blood.

Trackers will be needed to follow the blood stains from the wound or from its breathing out of blood droplets (sometimes very hard to find) and finish the creature off. There are various types of hits an animal will sustain, this is not by any means the worst case scenario – some animals if not quickly found die an agonising, slow death that takes days.

On behalf of myself, the thousands of Aberdonians who signed the petitions, do not plant a tree for us if you are having a cull to do so.

Thousands Sign To Save Tullos Deer – Decision Looms

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Environment, Events, Featured, Information, News No Responses »

May 062011

With Thanks To Alan Robertson.

Aberdeen City Council are going to receive a petition signed by over 2,200 Aberdonians calling for the Council to abandon plans to kill 30 deer on Tullos Hill on the outskirts of the city. The wild roe deer are to be killed as part of a council project to create a new woodland and wildlife habitat. Local and national campaigners have condemned the planned cull as cruel, wasteful and unnecessary.

A small delegation of campaigners will deliver the petition to the council at The Town House, Broad Street at 3.30pm on Monday.

Aberdeen City Council Housing and Environment Committee gave pro deer campaigners until May 10th to come up with £225,000 to pay for tree protectors and deer fencing. As campaigners have not attempted to raise this “blood money” it is expected that the Council Housing and Environment Committee will, at their meeting on May 10th, confirm that the deer cull will go ahead.

Campaigner Jeanette Wiseman states:

“We hope that the Housing and Environment Committee will listen to the thousands of Aberdeen voters who have asked them to stop this needless slaughter. There is still time for an eleventh hour reprieve for the deer on Tullos Hill. Aberdeen City Council can stop this shameful act.”

The public consultation that was launched by Aberdeen City Council on 29th October 2010 ( closed on 28th January 2011) made no mention of the proposed deer cull at Tullos Hill, despite the fact that a delegation from Scottish National Heritage had visited Tullos Hill on 15th November to assess the option of a deer cull at the request of the Council, and wrote to the Council on 25th November.

The letter from SNH makes it clear that, while the public consultation was still active, someone at the City had briefed SNH to steer the decision making towards a deer cull, despite the fact that there are other options. The briefing by the Council to SNH was therefore biased, the consultation was flawed and the handling of both these matters by the Council requires investigation.

See: http://www.aberdeencity.gov.uk/Consultations/ArchiveConsultations/cst_tree_every_citizen.asp

The Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals is completely against the proposed cull, as are other animal welfare organisations, thousands of Aberdonians, and many concerned people living further away. Scottish SPCA Chief Superintendent Mike Flynn said:

“We firmly believe culls should only take place to protect the public or for animal welfare reasons”. He went on to say that: “It is absurd and abhorrent to undertake a cull because it would be too costly to protect trees which have not even been planted. We would suggest these trees should either be planted elsewhere or not at all. Trees should certainly not be planted at the expense of the lives of animals.”

Lush Aberdeen and Lush Edinburgh are actively involved in trying to save the roe deer ; the Edinburgh Lush team cycled to the Aberdeen store to raise awareness and funds. and Lush were actively involved in circulating petitions against the proposed cull.

A Facebook site to Save the Tullos Hill Roe Deer has been highlighting the main issues and over 2100 people have signed up to the site.

The fact is, that the Council are not using the normal city-wide procedure for tree planting at Tullos Hill and that is the reason the deer are to be culled. Elsewhere in the City, tree protectors are being used – even in areas where there are no roe deer, and will require maintenance that will cost money; these facts are being kept from the public to make it appear that Tullos Hill is too costly, when in fact it needs to be considered in the bigger context – as part of the Tree for Every Citizen initiative.

The precedent of how tree planting has been handled at Kincorth Hill and other areas of the City, where no deer were culled shows this to be be true.

Aberdeen City Council Housing and Environment Committee at their meeting on 1 March 2011 resolved:

”to extend an invitation to the individuals and organisations who have objected to these deer control measures to raise the sums necessary to provide and maintain alternative measures, including fencing and rehousing of deer, by no later than 10th May, 2011.”

With only days before the decision is taken, anyone who feels strongly about the proposed cull should contact members of the Housing and Environment Committee to forward their concerns.

Open Letter To Cllr. Aileen Malone

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Featured, Information, Opinion No Responses »

Apr 222011

Voice’s Suzanne Kelly has over the past 10 weeks campaigned tirelessly in her efforts to oppose Aberdeen City Council’s proposed cull of roe deer on Tullos Hill, writing letters and liasing with groups and individuals on both sides of the debate. Suzanne wishes to share with Aberdeen Voice readers her latest letter to Cllr. Aileen Malone and the Housing and Environment Committee in the hope that others might be encouraged to add their own voice to this controversial issue.

20 April 2011
Councillor Aileen Malone
Convener, Housing Committee
Aberdeen City Council

Dear Ms Malone

Re: Tullos Hill Roe Deer

I am writing this open letter to you in your role as Convener of the Housing & Environment Committee and leading proponent of the ‘A Tree for Every Citizen’ Scheme.

I am sending this letter to you in this format for two reasons. Firstly, you ‘accidentally’ deleted an email I sent you (with my street address) in which I protested against the Tullos Hill Roe Deer Cull, which is being planned as a result of the tree scheme, and I would hate for you to similarly lose this letter.

Secondly, I want to enlist the help of as many Aberdeen citizens and others opposed to this senseless cull as possible: if anyone reading this letter agrees with it, kindly add your name and address, and send it to Ms Malone.

Your committee came up with the ultimatum to citizens: give us £225,000 before 10 May – or we will kill the deer. ‘Blackmail’ is the word that springs to mind. I would never have believed a City would consider blackmailing its citizens. To do so after what seems like deliberately concealing the planned cull from the ‘Phase 2’ consultation which closed in January is inexcusable.

It has been demonstrated that before this consultation was launched, someone involved in the ‘Tree’ scheme had been briefing Scottish Natural Heritage and deliberately steering them away from the many humane alternatives to a cull that exist. I thought it was very clever to leave out the deer from the consultation but to mention rabbits – it certainly fooled me (and no doubt many others) into thinking that all animals had been duly considered, and that only rabbits were worth mentioning. Some might call that sneaky.

If the public consultation ending in January mentioned a deer cull or the need to raise money for tree protection, there are hundreds of people who would have objected. The opportunity was lost to them because the consultation was so very flawed.

The Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals is completely against the cull, as are many other animal welfare organisations, and thousands of Aberdonians as well as concerned people living further away.

I recall how you went to the Press & Journal and said something to the effect that ‘only about one’ local resident had contacted you protesting the cull.

You later made private apologies to me and others who indeed had contacted you – you ‘accidentally’ deleted my email. (I waited and must have missed it, but I never did see an apology in the Press & Journal for your error. It is almost as if you did not want to set the record straight).

There are dozens of ways in which the deer can be saved (tree guards – which someone told the SNH ‘had visual impact’ are being used elsewhere in the city such as Forrit Brae; dozens of types of trees are deer resistant, fencing could be used, trees could be planted elsewhere…). I can only hope that someone with sense within the C ouncil is striving to find a solution other than this cull.

But here, Ms Malone, is my counter-offer to your ‘blackmail’ demand for £225,000.

Call off the cull and plant the trees after suitable alternatives have been found to protect the deer, and make a public announcement to that effect by 3 May 2011, or:-

I will lodge a formal complaint against you with the Standards Commission for Scotland with a view to its censuring you (I do have rather an impressive list of complaints on your handling of this issue it must be said)
I will start a campaign calling for both internal and external auditing and inquiries into the entire ‘Tree for Every Citizen’ campaign focussing on who briefed SNH towards a cull and how the public was treated
I will start a campaign calling for your immediate resignation from the Council
I will call on your political party to censure you
I will call on as many people in and outside of Aberdeen to join me in these aims as possible

I expect your reply by 3 May, after which date if there is no halt to the cull, I will begin to take these actions against you and seek legal advice as well on preventing the cull.

Maybe my one letter won’t carry much weight with you; maybe no one will join me. But even if no one else signs this letter and sends it to you, I will continue to fight you on this very sad state of affairs until I have prevailed.

As a reminder, here are the questions I asked you and others by email on 8 March of this year (my comments in red)

When was the cull first planned? – NO ANSWER GIVEN
Can the proposed trees not go elsewhere? – NO ANSWER GIVEN
What will be the cost of the cull? – NO ANSWER GIVEN
What is the cost of the alternatives? – NO ANSWER GIVEN
Are we proposing to create a habitat for squirrels and deer as your email suggests – by first culling deer? – (APPARENTLY YES)
What is the cost of fire damage to the ‘Gramps’? – NO ANSWER GIVEN
When exactly were the voters of Aberdeen asked if they would prefer to have saplings than deer? – (NEVER HAPPENED)
Was a deer struck and killed by a vehicle during the recent ‘capping’ exercise? – NO ANSWER GIVEN
You refer to the area as ‘Urban’ – patently it is not an urban area at all – but is an area in danger of being destroyed by urban sprawl -comment please. – NO ANSWER GIVEN
How many deer precisely are on Tullos Hill? – NO ONE ANSWER GIVEN – RANGES FROM ‘A FEW’ TO ‘ABOUT 30’ HAVE BEEN SENT OR SEEN IN THE PRESS
Are all of the rangers and environmental experts convinced culling is the only way forward? – NO ANSWER GIVEN
Which department/arm of the council is charged with preventing further urban sprawl? – NO ANSWER GIVEN
What other deer populations are there in the coastal Aberdeenshire area? – NO ANSWER GIVEN
Have the local community councils been consulted, and if so, do they agree with the cull? – NO ANSWER GIVEN

Scottish Natural Heritage in its 26 November letter suggests that the public might not be in favour of a cull and need careful handling. They offer to help you with a robust communication plan. So, Ms Malone: how is that working out for you?

Yours,
Suzanne Kelly

Also signed by ________________________________________________________________________

Name and Address

(if anyone wishes to sign and send Ms Malone this letter as well, please keep me informed and send a copy if possible to sgvk27@aol.com. Thank you)

* Aberdeen voice is grateful to Ian Britton and Mark Aert for photographs.

Shhh! – Don’t Mention The Pre-planned Deer Cull

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Featured, Information, Opinion No Responses »

Apr 052011

Planting trees, creating habitats, using trees to clean the air: no one could be against such a plan, particularly if it would be ‘cost neutral’ and the citizens of Aberdeen would wind up with forests to enjoy down the road. However, in light of new information, Voice’s Suzanne Kelly takes a different view.

What probably started out as a good idea is now a contentious web of extremely poor advance planning, politics, blackmail, vandalism and international outcry at a secret, but long-planned deer cull.

It is time to examine what should have happened, what went wrong, and what should and could be done.

The initial scheme

An Aberdeen City news release of 29 October 2010 explains that 210,000 trees will be planted in several stages, that this programme had funding for the first phase, and was winning awards. The news release goes on to explain how important trees are – they will such up pollutants and CO2; they will provide habitat for animals (presumably there should be a tree planting near Loirston Loch, but a stadium is to be planted there instead). This news release, stored on the Council’s website, also explains that funding is being sought for Phase 2.

It is a bit more difficult to find any record on the Council’s website of the deliberate vandalism which destroyed trees planned in Torry and elsewhere. There is no report on how vandals will be prevented from destroying further plantings. But within a month or so of this news release appearing, certain people in the Council involved with the tree scheme were already scheming some destruction of their own – and they certainly didn’t want either you or me to find out about it until it was too late for us to do anything about it. I refer to the plan to keep us in the dark about how Phase 2 of the scheme was being deliberately led: people behind the scheme were actively steering deliberately towards the cull of the Tullos Hill Roe Deer.

Scottish Natural Heritage: A view to a cull

On 25 November 2010 (while citizens were being ‘consulted’ on Phase 2’), Scottish Natural Heritage wrote a letter to a member of the arboreal staff at the Council. (See letter in full below this article). This letter raises a number of serious questions as to how the scheme was handled. The letter certainly seems to be replying to a briefing of some sort. The writer – James Scott of Scottish Natural Heritage’s Wildlife Operations Unit – is addressing issues which should have been made known in the consultation.

At the time of writing, Mr Scott has been informed that someone in Aberdeen Council has already taken several decisions.

an advantage of using contracted deer shooters is that it might distance the Council from the act

Fencing – It has somehow been decided by someone that fencing would be impossible, as there is a public footpath. The UK is covered with such paths and suitable gates are used. Fencing might not have been perfect – but oddly that is part of the blackmail offer the council now proposes.

Deer population – If the fencing controversy is not confusing enough, the letter admits that the number of deer is unknown. How many would be culled is apparently to be decided after SNH personnel visit the site under cover of darkness and make counts. It is not known if such a count has taken place yet, or what the results are. SNH say that tranquilising deer to move them doesn’t work (50% success) and then inexplicably says this would probably be illegal to do. If the law says that killing creatures is better than moving them, then it is time to change the law.

Humane options – the SNH suggest ‘frustrating’ deer – remove gorse, implement other measures, yet our officials rejected these proposals. Again, no recourse to the citizens here.

‘Visual Impact’ of tree protectors they are ruled out – The City told SNH that it would not be using tree protectors on the grounds that they might blow over, creating litter – and because they ‘have visual impact’. The visual impact of something is a personal, not a scientific, issue. It is not sufficient grounds to condemn a population of deer to death.

“there is the issue of reducing available habitat for deer and the fact that we would consequently expect a reduction cull. You have also decided not to use tree guards due to the visual impact and the likelyhood of these being blown away, possibly damaging trees they are meant to protect and creating a littering issue.” – James Scott , SNH

The word ‘deer’ does not get so much as a single use – yet it is now clear that a cull was in the cards

Without any regard to consultation, someone at the City has given this and other reasons leading SNH to conclude the deer should be culled. No one wanted to ask the citizens if we’d rather look at tree protectors (which cost money), or have the trees elsewhere in order to save deer. But the City and SNH were interested in keeping us in the dark….

Keep them in the dark – SNH actually says that an advantage of using contracted deer shooters is that it might distance the Council from the act:

“it may be preferrable to be seen to be doing it in house and have greater control rather than using contractors, or it may be preferable to utilise the distance between instruction and deed that comes from using contractors” – James Scott , SNH

The Aberdeen citizens should also be managed with care – with a ‘robust communication plan:-

“Having visited the site I am content that appropriate deer management can occur in a safe manner. Communicating this to access takers and the wider public may be more of a task which will require a robust communication plan. I would suggest that a suitable deer management plan will help in this regard and I am more than happy to offer assistance in this” – James Scott , SNH

It seems as if the ‘robust communication plan’ is an indication that some people might not like deer shot to save money. If a cull were needed for welfare reasons, a reasonable person might not like the idea, but they would understand. It seems that as no logical reason except cost savings exist for this cull – otherwise there would be no need to keep it out of the consultation or to have a ‘robust communication plan’.

Phase 2 Consultation: No options given

The Consultation which resides on the Aberdeen City Home page gives the reader no idea whatsoever that any of the above plans and processes were in place.
See: http://www.aberdeencity.gov.uk/Consultations/ArchiveConsultations/cst_tree_every_citizen.asp

There is no mention of the vandalism – only of the success of Phase 1. The word ‘deer’ does not get so much as a single use – yet it is now clear that a cull was in the cards. The trees are meant to start ‘making money’ in three years’ time – if there is a plan to turn Tullos into a timber yard, we haven’t been told.

A mix of private and public money is paying for this. Public money is your money and mine – this makes it doubly scandalous that the City chose to deliberately hide mention of the deer cull. We missed our chance to object to the consultation because of this omission – and as the petitions circulating attest – there are thousands of people who would have liked to have had the choice.

Questions for the Council

It is up to the Council – In particular, Aileen Malone, The Housing and Environment Committee, and whoever else was involved in the details of the Tree Planting scheme – to supply answers to a few questions arising:-

Who made the decision to leave any deer cull out of the public consultation?
Who took the decision that non-lethal measures would be discounted and then communicated to SNH?
Who precisely decided to plant the trees on Tullos Hill, and why wasn’t the deer population immediately identified as a reason to find another location?
Who decided tree guards’ visual impact was preferable to a deer cull?
Whose aesthetic judgment decided the tree guards were unattractive?
How many trees were vandalised in Phase 1?
How much public money was spent in Phase 1, and how much is planned to be spent in Phase 2?
Was a consultation with Torry Community Council taken, and if so, were the deer discussed?
How many deer were counted by SNH, and how many are to be culled?

Rays of hope

Thankfully animal activists, citizens of Aberdeen and people around the globe have become involved in campaigns and petition creating to stop this senseless slaughter. Concerned people should contact their local Community Council members, the Housing and Environment Committee, Committee convener Aileen Malone, and other elected representatives to ask for answers to these questions, and to demand an inquiry into the consultation’s management, and to request a new, honest one.

A civilised government would want to put any cull on indefinite hold until this affair is cleared up. Deer should not be slaughtered because people in government don’t want to spend money – and given the involved Councillors’ amazing ultimatum: raise funds for fencing, or we shoot animals – is it time for some changes in their number?

– Letter from James Scott ( SNH ) to Richard Nicholson ( ACC ).

– Further reading: Critical Society quarterly e-journal.

Mark Edwards’ Hard Rain Project – Times Are A Changin’

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Environment, Events, Featured, Information Comments Off

Mar 252011

By Suzanne Kelly.

Some 100 people of all ages and backgrounds packed an Aberdeen University lecture room on 22nd March; most of us were not entirely sure what to expect.

Mark Edwards – internationally known photographer, writer and witness to 40 years of global problems was there to deliver his ‘Hard Rain’ lecture and still photography presentation.

By the time he had finished it was clear that each person present had taken away food for thought on a host of global issues, however much or little they had known before they arrived.

Mark made a brief introduction explaining the Hard Rain Project’s genesis. At the time of the first moonwalk in 1969, Mark was traveling in the Sahara desert’s unforgiving landscape, got lost, and was subsequently rescued by a nomadic tribe. They offered him food, shelter and a fire to sit by, and then they produced a radio. Bob Dylan’s ‘A Hard Rain’s a Gonna Fall’ came out of it; a track inspired by the Bay of Pigs Cuban Missile Crisis.

Edwards considered his personal situation, the simple nomadic lifestyle, and the moonwalk and out of these events grew his idea of illustrating each line of this moving, evocative song. Some 40 years on, the Hard Rain project was touring the world. It features still photography taken from all quarters of our world, and illustrates the issues, which we have to face urgently. Edwards took his Aberdeen audience:

“…on a journey through the past to a future which is ours to change.”

The photographs are as beautiful and as diverse a collection as you could possibly imagine – Edwards has captured virtually all aspects of humanity and of the earth. These photographs and Mark both bear witness to the increasingly urgent issues we must solve now: famine, destruction of habitats, human suffering, war, climate change, waste, disrespect and misuse of people, animals and the planet. The things Mark has seen in his travels have not led him to despair; he retains faith in human initiative and human spirit, which he sees in the shantytown inhabitants’ resourcefulness.

As to the photographs: there is a bulldozer in the Amazon cutting a scar through the lush jungle; there is a sea of ghostly, dead tree stumps in an arid wasteland; there are dead and dying women and children from around the world. I am haunted by a photo of an oil-covered bird taken in Brazil, which is accompanied by the line from Hard Rain ‘I’ve been out in front of a dozen dead oceans’.

This photo presumably was taken years ago, but it could have been the recent Gulf of Mexico oil disaster. (You have to ask yourself why one oil disaster was not enough to ensure we never let it happen again).
But I am most haunted by (as were several of the students I spoke to including Deepu Augustine and Rita Lwanga) of a poignant image of a newborn baby lying on its side, small hands and feet visible, wrapped in a hooded garment, dead. It was lying in a shallow, womb-like grave about to be buried. The number of children who starve to death is legion.

As Mark says when addressing all the various issues:

“Perhaps our greatest mistake is taking our easy lifestyles for granted.”

Edwards explains that “we broke the first law of nature” – for instance how the death of a leaf and its natural decomposition create fertile soil on which new life will grow. The problem is that we have created a host of chemicals, which do not break down. He does not bombard us with numbers and statistics, but those he does use are unforgettable. In discussing our chemical dependence and proliferation of chemicals throughout the food chain globally, he says that any pregnant woman anywhere in the world today will have somewhere between 8 to 17 kinds of pesticides in the placenta.

Mark describes himself as a witness; he does not have all the answers. But he will tell you that we urgently need to increase education around the world, end child labour (which is nothing short of slavery: buyers of cheap imported goods and clothing please do take note), pay fair prices for crops, encourage family planning, and end extreme poverty. Another statistic he has hit us with: the GDP of the world’s 48 poorest countries is equal to the wealth of the world’s three richest people.

A series of photos taken in Haiti show the human impulse to slip away from rational thinking and regress to superstition (a ‘voodoo’ ceremony to pray for long-overdue rain is depicted), and later work shows a flock of brightly-clad Haitian school children. Edwards then makes interesting comparisons between the 1930s American Dustbowl draught and Ethiopia’s similar situation today. He compares Industrial age London’s shantytowns to today’s third world shantytowns, they both were born of similar circumstances and had similar problems and potentials.

“The past is not over and the future has happened many times”

– or put another way – those who do not know the lessons of the past are doomed to repeat its mistakes and tragedies.

His bleak, depressing photos of urban sprawl were based in Mexico City; but if we are not careful the same thing can easily happen in Aberdeenshire on a smaller scale.

The difference in the quantity of goods the Americans have is staggering and it does not make them any happier

We are, after all, getting rid of acre upon acre of (supposedly protected) green belt land to build hundreds of identikit houses, a 21,000 seat stadium where we currently have important wildlife and rare plants, and a car park/mall is planned for our only city centre green sink and beauty spot – Union Terrace Gardens.

Rather than increasing public transport, we plan to cut a highway through our countryside with the AWPR. And we are going to shoot (sorry, cull) the Tullos Hill Roe Deer, as our elected officials have deemed that building fences or protecting saplings with plastic are more expensive options). Mark makes a remark that some politicians are:

“…defending political positions they know are no longer appropriate…”

I think I do not need to look any further than Aberdeen City Council for an example of Mark’s assertion. I get the feeling that 99% of Edward’s audience is receptive and probably actively concerned for our environment – I find myself wishing we could get the local Council to see ‘Hard Rain’.

Edwards shows us a family in Bhutan; they are outside their home and have all of their, not very many, possessions spread around them. Next we switch to an American family of four – again in front of their home with all of their goods. The difference in the quantity of goods the Americans have is staggering and it does not make them any happier: Bhutan is, in fact, the country with the highest percentage of happy and satisfied people on earth.

Edward’s talk is part of the Aberdeen University Students’ Association Climate Change Projects.

Jamie Peters is the Climate Change Project Co-ordinator and he advised me that the Climate Change project has been packed full of events this past week including; tree planting, cookery demonstrations, gardening, meetings and discussions. Reusable bottles and bags were distributed as well as bookmarks with tips on energy saving and recycling. The Climate Change Project at Aberdeen University:

“aims to improve life around the campus, provide something fun for students to get involved in and at the same time save 1,000 tonnes of CO2.”

Fraser Lovie, a policy adviser at the University, congratulated the Climate Change Project for bringing Mark Edwards and his exhibition to Aberdeen and welcomed Mark’s hints that a new touring exhibition, based on Hard Rain, is in development, that will support the behavior change agenda in Universities and Colleges.

STOP PRESS: At the time of writing, it is uncertain whether funding will be found to keep the Climate Change Project going: I certainly hope they will continue their work.

After a glass or two of wine and a few words with Mark Edwards and others (he is affable and keen to talk), I made my way home. Another Bob Dylan song came into my head – ‘The Times They Are A Changing’;

“… if your time to you is worth saving, you’d better start swimming or you’ll sink like a stone, for the times they are a changing’.”

Change has never happened faster in human history than it is happening now. But exactly what are we changing our world into?

Regent Walk is the scene of the Hard Rain Project outdoor exhibition, which accompanied this lecture; it will be up for a month. I urge you – go and see it.

SOME FOOD FOR THOUGHT:

Quotations from the Hard Rain Project Lecture

* “In the next 24 hours deforestation will outweigh the carbon footprint of 8 million people”

* “If forests are the lungs of the world, we have had one lung removed”

* “All humanity is in trouble; time is the enemy; indifference is the enemy”

* “We have Stone-Age impulses, Medieval beliefs, and God-like technology”

* “There is no ‘them and us’”

Q&A from the Hard Rain Website:

“Mark has been traveling and taking photographs in over 150 countries in the last 40 years. He first decided to illustrate the global environmental crisis in 1969, and Hard Rain really began to take shape as a live presentation in 2000. The DVD has been in development for about a year, since interest in the presentation has exploded.

“How many cities/countries has Hard Rain been seen in?

“The exhibition has been seen in over 50 cities, with a tour of India immediately following Copenhagen. The presentation, on which the DVD is based, has been seen in hundreds of venues on every continent.

“How has Dylan lent his support?

“Dylan and his label, Columbia Records, have been extremely supportive of Hard Rain right from its public launch as an exhibition at the Eden Project in 2006. They have also been very supportive of Hard Rain by allowing us to use the lyrics in the exhibitions.

“This year, the Royal Photographic Society recognized Mark Edwards and Bob Dylan by presenting them with the Terence Donovan Award for their achievement with the Hard Rain Project.”

What is Urban Sprawl and Why Should I Care?

Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Environment, Featured, Information Comments Off

Mar 042011

The Aberdeen City and Shire landscape today bears little resemblance to the landscape of the past. Voice’s Suzanne Kelly asks – Is this progress, or is this progress towards ill health, lack of biodiversity, and urban sprawl?

Back in the late 1950s, NASA (the American National Aeronautics and Space Administration) started its missions and started photographing our planet from space.

Over the decades a major change in our planet became apparent to the NASA scientists: we were rapidly destroying green areas, quickly expanding the surface area our cities, and covering previously green areas with non-porous material – usually asphalt and concrete.
The face of the planet was visibly changing, and the term ‘Urban Sprawl’ came into being.

Urban Sprawl is not just an ambiguous catchphrase – it is a very real phenomenon recognised by scientists and environmentalists from NASA through National Geographic.

If any of these items sound familiar to you, you will understand Urban Sprawl and why it has to be slowed if not halted:-

increased air pollution and ‘particulates’ from car use, and associated health problems (asthma, heart disease, effects on unborn, types of cancers)
Increases in other forms of pollution, including light pollution
Inadequate facilities, e.g.: cultural, emergency, healthcare, and so forth for population size
Inefficient street layouts
Inflated costs for public transportation
Lost time and productivity due to time spent commuting; less personal time for relaxation and recreation
High levels of racial and socioeconomic segregation; deprived neighbourhoods
Low diversity of housing and business types (identikit houses packed closely together)
Health problem increases e.g. obesity due to less exercise and more time in cars
Less space for conservation and parks
High per-capita use of energy, land, and water
Loss of biodiversity

Urban Sprawl is changing Aberdeen and the Shire – and it is virtually irreversible

Last week I received an email from J Leonard, an Aberdeen Planning official. He explains that we need to kill (or cull if you prefer) the small number of deer on Tullos Hill in order to protect trees the City has a grant to plant (£200k value in total). He explained that when the trees are grown, deer and squirrels can then live in the area (thankfully the deer have been spared), and that Tullos Hill is ‘in the heart of an urban environment’.

This is what Urban Sprawl does – it takes over the greenbelt land bit by bit, until there is only a bubble of natural land left here and there, or what builders euphemistically call ‘wildlife corridors’ – small areas of land connecting remaining green areas. I was speaking to an older Aberdeen resident who distinctly remembers a time before the Altens Industrial Estate existed, and tells me of a green paradise teeming with many types of wildlife.

Now we have a few open areas but notably south of the city centre, we have turned part of the coast into a waste tip we had to cap just recently, and we added a sewage plant to the coast and are planning hundreds of houses in this sensitive area. Aberdeen Football Club intends to put a 21,000-seat stadium on land adjacent to Loirston Loch in the River Dee SAC (Special Area of Conservation).

We are failing to listen to the residents in these areas who currently enjoy a relatively rural area and whose lives will change greatly

The area holds remaining pockets of creatures such as (apparently protected) otters and bats as well as rare plants and animals (as per the Council’s own sign on Loirston Loch). There will be no real environmental benefits associated with this stadium (indeed the pre-planning reports come up with about 40 negative permanent environmental impacts – but says we will get a ‘wildlife corridor’ where we now have open fields and an uninterrupted SAC).

However, we are told we will get ‘job creation’ and an ‘iconic building’ by Margaret Bochel of Aberdeen City Planning who endorsed the stadium plan. Somehow, the only place the Council and AFC are willing to put this building is on greenbelt land, which we will never get back and which will never be the same.

We are told that Aberdeen needs to ‘ensure its future prosperity’, and our elected officials, builders, planners and business organisations tell us we must keep building and expanding. The Aberdeen Western Peripheral Route, a new runway / airport extension, the 21,000 seat ‘community’ stadium, and of course transforming the Victorian gardens of Union Terrace Gardens into a ‘public square’ are large examples of proposed new structures — structures which we are meant to believe equate to economic prosperity (despite costing the taxpayer tens of millions or more per project).

The housing developments springing up like mushrooms are, we are told, going to be ‘modern’, ‘competitive’, and ‘attractive to inward investment’. We are failing to listen to the residents in these areas who currently enjoy a relatively rural area and whose lives will change greatly: they have resoundingly said they do not want development. We are told there is a housing shortage (although many homes and office buildings in the city centre are vacant), and these developments are needed from Stonehaven to Inverurie and throughout the shire – on any bit of ground available.

Whether or not such building works will ensure future prosperity (can you ensure future economic success at all?), there is one truth about all of these projects: they are all examples of Urban Sprawl.

What’s so important about Air Pollution, Light Pollution, and Biodiversity? Air Pollution

The link between air pollution and forms of heart and respiratory disease is now well acknowledge and documented.

There are cities such as Los Angeles and Hong Kong which issue daily air quality reports – recognising that bad air quality can directly cause illness such as asthma attacks.

Vehicle exhaust is a considerable factor in creating air pollution; ‘particulates’ created as a product of combustion engines are a part of the air pollution cocktail as are carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide and sulphur. A brief search of the British Medical Journal yields results such articles as:

And a quote from ‘Air pollution and daily mortality in London: 1987-92 reads:

“The 1952 London smog episode was associated with a twofold to threefold increase in mortality and showed beyond doubt that air pollution episodes could be harmful to health.”

Car parking lots are coated with various chemicals associated with vehicles; these get into the soil with rain and snow. And thus these pollutants can enter the food chain.

Light Pollution: Really?

Until the Industrial Age, the planet was dark at night. Now (as satellite photos demonstrate) city areas emit light all night long. The problem with this is it is definitely affecting the breeding cycle of birds, insects including butterflies and moths, bats and other creatures. We are changing an integral part of our ecosystem. These creatures are largely responsible for pollinating our crops and keeping other insect pests in check.

Light pollution is a real and worrying phenomenon, and we need to reduce night-time lights. If nothing else, saving electricity and energy will help save cities money, and global warming certainly is not helped by lighting up large portions of the night sky. There is also research to show that light pollution can slow down the way in which air pollution breaks down.

It is safe to say that having a red, glow-in-the-dark football stadium on what is now greenbelt open land in Loirston will be detrimental to creatures that can currently live and hunt there.

each new housing estate is eating up our greenbelt land and urban sprawl threatens our health and well-being on several fronts

Mark Parsons, Mark Shardlow and Charlotte Bruce-White are all experts in the fields of insect life and conservation; they have authored an article ‘Light pollution – a menace to moths, and much more for Butterfly Conservation. In it they present strong evidence from around the world that manmade light pollution is interfering in a very negative way with insect ilfe cycles.

Recommendations the article makes include:

Light should be kept to a functional minimum in all areas
Lights that emit a broad spectrum of light with a high UV component should be avoided
Aquatic environments and areas of high conservation value are potentially particularly sensitive to light pollution. Lighting schemes in these areas should be carefully planned to avoid negative impacts

This last point is totally contrary to what is proposed at Loirston Loch.

Biodiversity

Again, the ecosystem is being changed at an alarming rate. We are removing habitat – and without land to live and forage in, we will continue to lose animal populations and whole species.

What alternatives are there to continuous building and more urban sprawl?

How accurate are these assertions we have to keep building and using up the greenbelt? The stadium for instance – how necessary is it? The existing stadium at Pittodrie could be modernised. Norwich FC recently rebuilt its stadium – the same is most definitely possible for Pittodrie. Cities across the UK have lost millions bidding for, and hosting international competitions; prosperity is not automatic with a stadium.

We have to keep pumping money into the Aberdeen Exhibition and Conference Centre. As to reported housing shortage, we know that there are thousands of empty houses both in the public and private sectors, and rather than new builds, using some of our vast quantities of unused offices and converting these to homes would be the more economical and more ecologically sound way forward.

Aside from the tens millions of pounds of taxpayer money any one of these new structures will drain from the public purse from consultation through to design, execution, use and maintenance, there is another price to be paid. Each of these projects, and each new housing estate is eating up our greenbelt land and urban sprawl threatens our health and well-being on several fronts.

Wildlife tourism could be encouraged – as it is, the RSPB estimate that Scotland is visited by thousands who want to see our unique birds and other wildlife – perhaps we could preserve habitats, encourage our existing wildlife, and promote our natural resources more widely?

The EU is taking this very real problem seriously, and the US is realising the ramifications as well – perhaps it is time for Aberdeen’s planning and development professionals to wake up to urban sprawl’s threats as well.

Further resources:

EU Environment Agency publication, “Urban Sprawl in Europe – the ignored challenge”
Butterfly Conservation (Magazine of the Butterfly Conservation) Issue No. 106 ‘ Light Pollution – a menace to moths, and much more’

Want to take action?: Write to your local community council, city council planning department, MSP and MEP to express concern Visit your local wildlife sanctuaries, the city’s coastal areas, Loirston Loch Support conservation charities such as the RSPB, Butterfly Conservation, the John Muir Trust

Older Entries Newer Entries