On 11 May 2009 at 10:16am Johnny Morris wrote:
I just read the Lewes news article about the latest planning shocker where Circa Fish used to be. The article mentioned the destruction of a habitat for bats. Aren't bats a protected species ? I thouight that developers are required to go through a rigourous process before disturbing them, or destroying their homes. Does anyone know if this was done, (pressumably a site assessment would have ben a planning condition) and if not, why not?
On 11 May 2009 at 1:19pm Long Eared Fruit wrote:
All bats are protected, but in this district there appears to be a knee jerk reaction after the event rather than a proper assessment prior to the event (demolish first). Do you recall seeing any survey carried out on recent developments? Are there any available? The Lewes House site is a good example - the archaeologists have been digging it over for the last year, the tree felllers were active prior to that and yet more recently, they have expressed concern about the slow worms and bats (the bats were resident in the properties they demolished over a year ago). As always, Lewes council rides roughshod above everything and everyone.
On 11 May 2009 at 6:39pm Johnn Morris wrote:
Is it legal to demolish properties containing bats without specific permission?
On 11 May 2009 at 7:30pm Annette Curtin-Twitcher wrote:
I don't know about demolition, but some years ago I got English Nature to serve a stop notice on some building works going on at a building where I knew bats lived in the attic.
They were allowed to go ahead, but they couldn't do any work for months until the baby bats had grown up and left home or summat.
On 11 May 2009 at 10:42pm jonnyboy wrote:
Check out the Bat Conservation Trust website. There are pages relevant to planning law. "The presence of a protected species is a material consideration when considering a proposal that, if carried out, would be likely to result in harm to the species or its habitat (see ODPM/Defra Circular, para 98)"
On 12 May 2009 at 11:14am Johnny Morris wrote:
Thank you bat people. So was there a material consideration in the westgate St site, and the Lewes house site, or did they just pressume there was no relevant wildlife living in these sites?
On 12 May 2009 at 1:27pm Taff wrote:
There are none better than animals to naturally find a suitable home. Thats one of the things they are good at.
Sadly some so called bat lover cost a Sussex resident between £20K-30K to build a 'bat lover bespoke bat house' for a bat that has never been witnessed there. That decision must have required some super dooper intelligence.
Dont get me wrong, I like almost all animals but please let them use their natural instincts and not what we think is the better for them.
If you really care put your voices in to the question od suitable pesticides, griothe enhancers etc that seem to be diminishing our insect population, the bottom of the land mammal and flying creatures food chain. What will the bats have to feed on in 30 years time?
On 12 May 2009 at 6:47pm Johnny Morris wrote:
You are quite right Taff to say that bats are good at finding a home. They are a protected species so pressumably it is not always very easy. They seem to have found homes in the Lewes House site, and on this patch of ground in Westgate, and who knows where else. Unfortunately both those sites have either been demolished or destroyed, and let us all hope that the protected animals within weren't killed in the process.
Either way this is not about our opinion on how to protect bats, it is about the law, and upholding it. That is why I would like to know what happened here, because our Council has a very poor reputation, and it seems possible that the incompetence may have spread into the area of protected habitats as well.
On 14 May 2009 at 10:54pm batman wrote:
Personally, I love Robin more than the Bat.......no but, seriously, get a life you bunch of sad mofos.......what is more important a bat, robin or a house? t.w.a.t. comes to mind..........