112

We are finding this paragraph sound but do raise the following comments. This new paragraph has removed mention of natural capital as far as we can see. The paragraph does not mention of natural functioning of ecosystems which would be beneficial.

In relation to green infrastructure, there is a Green Infrastructure Plan from 2007 online, but there is also a Green Infrastructure Study (Dec 2020). The latter maps out ‘core areas’ for grassland, woodland and wetland but there is no explanation what this means.

This statement fails to mention the role of GI in mitigating the impacts of recreation and vistors on mores sensitive protected sites.

‘The natural environment’ section needs to be improved and expanded as it currently is unclear or incomplete. It needs to recognise and include the issues that the natural environment, both within and adjoining the Plan area, is facing including biodiversity loss, climate change, habitat fragmentation, pollution etc and how the proposed Plan may impact on and address these issues. Currently, it could be read as the only issues facing our natural environment are those identified under (109), which is clearly not the case.

In (109) the Plan needs to recognise that recreational disturbance impacts affect not just internationally designated sites, but a wide range of other sites that are important for wildlife, including County Wildlife Sites (CWS) (locally protected sites).

We welcome the amendments and additions, respectively, to (112) and (115) which help to recognise that the protection and delivery of quality GI is key to delivering many of its objectives and growth cannot be regarded as being sustainable without this.