THE National Trust is to consider appealing against the refusal of a controversial plan to flood 37 acres of agricultural land in the Tamar Valley. Caradon planners turned down the proposal for the second time in four years because of insufficient information on potential erosion in the River Tamar and river navigation problems. The trust?s scheme to restore an inter-tidal wetland habitat at Haymarsh, Cotehele, was welcomed by conservation and wildlife groups but opposed by many local people. A petition of almost 700 names and many individual letters against the application were sent to Caradon District Council?s planning department, raising concerns about the effects on the river, visual impact and loss of agricultural land. St Dominick and Bere Ferrers parish councils also opposed the project. Planning officers, who had recommended the scheme be approved, said unlike in 2002, the experts? reports this time gave them a much higher level of certainty that any implications of this project on the river would be ?modest?. A spokesperson for the National Trust said: ?We are extremely disappointed by this decision, especially as it goes against the robust recommendation to approve the application made by council?s officers. ?The trust is now considering whether to appeal but we need to look at the reasons for refusal and review our options accordingly.? Ward member Cllr Roy Levack said the reports by Plymouth Marine Laboratory and water environment specialists HR Wallingford were not convincing enough: ?They are saying it is probable the effects on the river would be minimal but nobody is saying it will definitely be all right. ?It?s not like putting up a house that can be taken down again. Once this goes ahead there is no way back.? In 2002 the National Trust?s plan was refused for similar reasons and the effects of unsightly mud flats on the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Planning officer Peter Whitehead said to create the wetland this site would be like mud for the next five years: ?It would be unattractive during this transitionary period but the question is whether it is worth it. ?What would develop is an extremely rich habitat for wildlife ? reed bed habitats are being lost as sea and river levels rise and the National Trust is keen to replace one.? He said when you start to mess about with the river system it had consequences. ?When you start coming through the flood banks there is potential for erosion further down the river banks or deposition of sediments in other areas ? this can have an effect on the navigability if it silts up. ?The experts? reports, however, had given us a much higher level of certainty that any implications on the river would be modest.? SODITT (Save Our Dyke in the Tamar) spokesman Derek Scofield said common sense had ruled the day: ?I don?t believe anyone could make a decision as momentous as this one on ifs and maybes so I am very pleased the committee has taken the sensible approach. ?This is an extremely sensitive valley and there are things that are going to be happening to it naturally. I do not think we should be interfering with it without some solid science.?
