Readers' letters

To date, unless I have overlooked something, nothing has appeared which gives the views of those who are quite content to remain with the present administrative authority. Perhaps I may be allowed a little space to put forward my own opinion on this long running saga.

The campaigners claim "in polls more than 80 per cent of local people want to return to Yorkshire" and also that a clear majority want to return to the county of their birth".

Just how many people responded favourably to the poll and what percentage would that represent of the total population of West Craven?

It is now almost a quarter or a century since the boundary changes took place and, for a not insignificant number in this area, Lancashire is the county of their birth!

"Won't change cost a lot?" is another question posed on the leaflet I received, a point on which the campaigners are very coy. Yes, we in West Craven do pay more to Pendle in council tax than our neighbours in Skipton but all things have got to be paid for. If comparison is made between what North Yorkshire/Craven provide for their residents and what is received from Lancashire/Pendle in this area, there is no doubt who is better provided for.

One only has to read the Craven Herald week by week to realise this. Free parking in Pendle, swimming baths, a sports centre and a library that is the envy of librarians for miles around, the development of a town square, steady improvement to Letcliffe Park and many other improvements have come to Barnoldswick, Lancashire. What of Skipton?

Your paper says it all through various reports and items of correspondence.

The Unite Craven group say that they are campaigning to restore the old county boundaries. Does this mean the restoration of the Three Ridings? If so, I might be tempted to give them my support for the wealth of the old West Riding was predominantly in its industrial centres.

North Yorkshire is a rural county with some light industry, while West Craven depends upon its heavy industries. What sort of weight would our one or two elected representatives carry on either Craven District or at Northallerton on the County Council? Very little I'm afraid.

Yes we have got a revised postcode, perhaps due in some part to the campaigners' efforts but their claim to have won the right to add "Yorkshire" to the address is, as any thinking person will realise, just a sop from the postal authority to whom the county is an irrelevance if the postcode is correct.

During the 1870s the Bradford Observer once described Barnoldswick as a "village situated on the very borders of the most uncivilised part of the West Riding". Perhaps that overstates the case today but the fact remains that no matter which county West Craven comes under, we will continue to be on the very borders of it and, historical connections aside, we must look to whichever authority will best help us to develop and prosper.

Dennis Cairns,

Penyghent Way, Barnoldswick.

Annexed territory

SIR - Many of your readers may be Yorkshire exiles - without moving home. In 1974 the Government decreed that their part of Yorkshire would be taken over by Lancashire or Cumbrian councils.

These councils promptly marked their extended 'empire' by installing county signs at their administrative boundary - in defiance of the Government's Statutory Instrument, which required the traditional county to be preserved. These new road signs were an underhand way of saying the annexed territory was no longer part of Yorkshire.

We all thought this nonsense would be put right in the local government review of 1994/5, when Humberside and Cleveland were thankfully abolished. But they did not even consider the parts of Yorkshire along with the Pennines. That has got us fighting mad! We hope all true Yorkshire folk in the areas affected and elsewhere will back our campaign to redraw the maps with true county boundaries.

Geoff Hoyle,

Campaign for True Identity,

Burnside Crescent, Skipton.

Pay double

SIR - Further to Mr Moorhouse's second homes protest (Craven Herald Letters, March 6), his second home could possibly have been purchased by any member of the local community had they been able to afford the sort of prices people like him are prepared to pay.

He should recall that, for decades under the old rating system, second homes were charged full rates. Then, under 'poll tax', second homes paid double that tax. All Mr Moorhouse's hoary old chestnuts about why second home owners shouldn't pay full rates or tax were raised all through this period and rejected by both local and central government.

Then came council tax and Parliament, whose members are perhaps the biggest single group of second home owners, decreed that rebates of up to 50 per cent were to be allowed, citing the very arguments they had previously rejected. Incidentally, I don't recall any MP declaring an interest.

Like Mr Moorhouse, most of the full time residents in rural parishes such as Kettlewell do not or cannot make use of county or district services such as education or social services. Apart from refuse collection, winter road maintenance and education, most of these services are in any event not available locally, or they require a 30 mile round trip to get to them. If Mr Moorhouse's argument was valid, why shouldn't we also get a 50 per cent rebate?

Mr Moorhouse "purchases food and domestic necessities locally". Those of us who watched the TV documentary some two years back about second homes in Upper Wharfedale still recall the unforgettable scene where the husband was saying they bought "everything locally" whilst his wife was being filmed shovelling the contents of a large fridge into an equally large cool box prior to loading it into their car and setting off to their weekend home.

On conservation grounds, I wonder if Mr Moorhouse can justify owning a second home in the country when both the previous and present Governments have said that green belt land and the countryside must be sacrificed to provide the several hundred thousand homes forecast to be needed over the next decade or so.

I agree with Robert Heseltine that second homes should be charged double council tax at the very least.

As a matter of fact, most day visitors to the national park do not contribute significantly to the economy of the Dales. I think Mr Moorhouse protests too much.

Ian Cuthbert,

The Elms, Kettlewell.

Fair shares

SIR - Mr Moorhouse has a novel argument as to why he should only pay half the council tax of the rest of us. That is because he does not use the services, such as education and social services, he should not pay.

Nor do I. Can I have my money back?

It has long been accepted in civilised societies that education and social services should be funded by all. Those with children now are partly subsidised by the rest of the community. When those children flee the nest, the parents will continue to subsidise the education of future generations. We cannot "pick and choose" the local services we want.

If Mr Moorhouse wants a second home in a living community then he must pay an equal share towards its upkeep. Otherwise his second home will be in a dead village which only comes alive when the chattering classes arrive in their green wellies and beautifully polished Land Rovers.

Mr S Dobson,

Keighley Road, Skipton.

A tidy up is needed

SIR - We all love the countryside - can we show it?

The roadside and particularly the lay-bys are littered with tin cans and bottles, sweet papers and cigarette packets rotting away.

The tourist season will soon be upon us and if the road sides are left without any attempt at a clean up, by mid summer the situation will be very much worse. Many understand the 'broken window policy' - could we operate a 'roadside clean up policy'?

May I ask every resident of Craven when walking the dog, or just walking, to carry an old rubber glove and a plastic bag and pick up the litter on their patch. We must unite in this effort because en masse we make a difference.

This Saturday and Sunday would be a good time to start then we can keep gently at it through the summer.

Bunty Leder,

Lythe Cottage,

Grassington.

Hostility to smokers

SIR - All my life I have had to put up with the ignorance and arrogance of people around me who thought it was a fun thing to smoke, who thought it nice to share their disgusting habit with me.

I have had to put up with them at work and at play and am still forced to.

These disgusting people now have the audacity to blame the merchandisers of death for their addiction and demand compensation for their own stupidity.

Surely it is people like myself, who have had to put up with them throughout the whole of our lives, who should be getting the compensation.

For the meals that have been ruined at a restaurant by a smoker too selfish to go outside.

For the films at cinemas where I have been forced to endure streaming eyes and feeling sick, to choose between leaving or staying to watch the end. Then later, lying in bed with eyes burning and aching for an hour or two.

For the sickening smell of it on public transport, pubs and other places.

For the smell of it on one's clothes and hair.

Yes, I think I should be compensated for my 65 years of having to live and work and play with relatives and friends who thought I should share their filthy habit.

G Naylor,

Alpha Street, Salterforth.

Increase is too much

SIR - Craven Cats Protection League are disgusted and disappointed with Craven District councillors for the sudden increase in the cost of hiring Skipton Town Hall and the extra costs which our helpers would have to stand by not being allowed the use of the Town Hall private car park.

We are a voluntary group and we work hard raising funds to neuter and look after stray and unwanted cats. We spend all the funds we now raise and therefore would have to reduce the number of animals we help at any one time.

We hire the Town Hall and also we rent stalls at other charity events held there. We put a lot off effort into our events and work jolly hard.

Some Craven District councillors seem to think that we ought to sell more cups of tea and treat the matter as a joke.

Some of the councillors seem to think we make too much profit and we should be able to stand these increases.

We are a registered charity and our charity work cannot stand these extra costs. These increases should bring in far more than the council say is needed.

Why has the Town Hall been so neglected by the council? Many charities who just organise events without stalls of their own will probably have to cancel them.

Brenda Heaton,

Craven Cats Protection League,

Rombalds Drive, Skipton.

Condemnation

SIR - At a meeting of the Craven Naturalists and Scientific Association's Council I was instructed to write to you about the hire charges at Skipton Town Hall.

The council was unanimous in its condemnation of Craven District Council's very large increase in hire charges.

Their anger, they felt, will be shared by other similar organisations, feeling that the Town Hall should be available to such organisations at a reasonable cost.

CKM Imrie,

Secretary,

Craven Naturalists and Scientific Association.

Saving is tiny

SIR - May I suggest that your headline "Penalising Bus Users" to Mr Woodburn's letter (February 27) was mistaken. As indicated in Mr Woodburn's first paragraph, it is the subsidy on rail cards that we are withdrawing not the subsidy on bus passes, therefore if we are 'penalising' anyone it would be rail users.

As Mr Woodburn indicates, the saving to the council of less than £7,000 is in fact tiny in comparison with the total council tax. However, the extra expenditure of £8.30 per card for each user is also quite small. But it was not merely the actual saving which was the concern of the committee but the principle of paying a subsidy, out of the public purse, especially in these times of financial stringency, for a facility which more than pays for itself.

In fact as the discount earned on each fare is 33 per cent, the extra cost of the card can quickly be saved, eg on two day returns from Clapham to Leeds, and, of course, the more the card is used the greater the benefit; £16 (now £18) for a whole year of almost unrestricted cheap travel is a very good bargain indeed.

The decision on both the rail card subsidy and that for bus passes was well debated and a cut on the passes was excluded as buses tend to be used more by pensioners and others on low incomes and generally for shorter journeys.

The decision was, of course, made democratically by the committee, not by myself, and is it not refreshing to be criticised (even if only implicitly!) for a low council tax than for a high one?

Ralph Atkinson,

Chairman,

Economic and Development Committee,

Craven District Council.

Humans are selfish

SIR - We humans are very selfish. In our claims for the right to roam we never seem to consider those who have been here for thousands of years.

On the fells near here, curlews, tewits, skylarks and other ground-nesting birds have always built their nests and raised their young.

In the last six years I have watched that colony dwindle almost to nothing because of visitor pressure. Walkers, dogs, 4-wheel drive, scrambler and mountain bikes and hang gliders: all do their bit to chase creatures from their habitat, possibly for ever.

All over the Dales birds, animals and plants are in danger because of the increasing presssure of humans thinking that the countryside is their playground and forgetting that we are just part of nature and need to respect all life.

Hilary Fenten,

The Shaws, Selside.

Raw moors are a crop

SIR - I read with interest the letters last week about the attitude of the Craven Herald to the "right to roam" debate.

The claim of two readers that only areas of mountain, moor, down and common land need to be opened up and that cultivated land will not be included may well be the intention.

What was not said, and does not seem to be understood, is that the vegetation, no matter how sparse, which grows on these mountains and moors is a crop. Although it is not cultivated in the normally accepted sense, it is the crop on which the hill farmer feeds his stock. This stock is what provides him with his livelihood and income.

You only have to see the erosion which has been caused in the Three Peaks area and on the footpath to Buckden Pike by the constant tramp of walkers to understand the concern.

Even if only for this reason, farmers are justifiably concerned about opening up vast areas of land.

The way Bolton Abbey estate allows access to open land is held up as a good example of what can be achieved. However, most farmers, many of them tenants, do not have the resources, financial or otherwise, of Bolton Abbey estate to provide facilities required by large numbers of walkers.

There is much to be said about the responsibilities of the walkers if they are allowed to roam, and it is true that a great number of them do behave extremely well in the countryside. Regrettably, there are plenty who do not.

These are the walkers who do not walk in single file if asked to do so but spread four or five across, making a narrow track into a great pathway. Too many people think the national park equals the national playground.

Opening up countryside which is remote means that the wildlife which thrives in these quiet inaccessible places will be disturbed and may leave the area, never to return. There are so few natural wilderness places left in the country as a whole, must they all be overrun by man?

Mrs P Rockliff,

Nethergill Farm, Oughtershaw.

Threat to bird life

SIR - With regard to Mr Bell's letter on open access. The land he describes as remote country is in fact the last wilderness and one of the few safe remaining places for our ground nesting birds.

Like the curlew, lapwing, skylark, golden plover and up to 33 more different types can be found, many of which are schedule one listed birds.

At one time, these birds were a common sight all over the countryside but have now been pushed back by modern day pressures. Leaving the moors and heaths as the last strongholds for these once common birds. These birds nest from April to June, how many people will respect their wishes and keep off?

Matthew Gibson,

Shayhead,

Skipton Old Road, Colne.

Parish says sorry

SIR - It is understood that some of our parishioners have been upset by the removal of Christmas wreaths from their families' graves in the burial ground here at Horton-in-Ribblesdale.

The parish council would like to apologise to anyone who has been upset by this.

This was due to a misunderstanding and the council would like to assure people that it will not happen again.

David A Morphet,

Chairman,

Horton-in-Ribblesdale Parish Council.

Put children first

SIR - Ten-year-olds in Skipton have to live through the trauma of the selection system. The shortcomings of that system have already been well aired in the Craven Herald but the trauma is extended by the bureaucracy of North Yorkshire County Council.

Children in Skipton who want to attend South Craven or Upper Wharfedale schools will not be told whether they have places at those schools until at least March 27.

However, the education authority has known since the beginning of the year that there are available spaces and which children will be given them. Ten-year-olds are waiting to hear if they can go to the school of their choice when the bureaucrats already know they can.

On February 13 I received a letter from North Yorkshire which stated that "arrangements are being made for your child to attend this school (Aireville) for her secondary education at the commencement of the autumn term". When that letter was written there were enough available places at South Craven School to take my daughter in her turn. This misleading statement caused unnecessary anxiety.

Why treat ten and eleven year olds like this? We encourage them to be open and above board but North Yorkshire is being secretive for no apparent reason.

A policy to announce out of area school places on March 27 takes no account of the children who had under the same policy to make their decisions last year. Please put the children before bureaucracy.

Jane Peers,

Halton East.

Enforce traffic laws

SIR - Over a good number of weeks your paper has championed the Liberal Democrats' survey of traffic management.

Would not your paper and our elected councillor do far better by encouraging the police to enforce the laws that are already in place?

Pedestrians would feel a lot safer in our towns and villages if traffic was travelling under the legal speed limit and it was not obscured by illegally dumped vehicles.

I beg you all to put your energies and resources into enforcing the laws we already have.

Paul Whitaker,

Grassington Road, Skipton.

Farm sale justified

SIR - May I correct an impression that farms owned by the county council are to be sold to raise money "to help services hit by budget cuts".

When any part of the farms' estate is sold, the money will only be used to repay debt. This in turn will reduce the interest which has to be paid and be of a recurring benefit to council tax payers.

This year's settlement has been very harsh. The money granted to us by Government is actually less than last year.

In 1997-98 the county council received £133,990 million in support grant plus £113,937 million from the business rate proceeds. For 199-99 the figures are £133,822 million and £113,937 million.

However, the 'new' Labour Government has increased our capping limits by 13.5 per cent, that means that the county council can collect that much more from the council tax payers to pay for its services. Furthermore, it has said that this should be "passported" to education and schools' budgets.

Collecting the money from you and I is a very expensive way of financing local government.

Having decided to spend up to the capping limit and pass the money on to education in the full knowledge that pupil numbers are rising in our primary schools will not prevent a small reduction (.2 per cent) in school budgets.

The sale of farms, mainly to tenants who wish to buy, will play a crucial role in balancing our budget this year and reducing our debt in the long term.

In the first year of a Labour Government we may not be paying more income tax, but the increase in council tax makes this the 18th tax rise since the Government came to power almost 11 months ago.

Coun Shelagh Marshall,

Bow Bridge Drive, Embsay.

Sporting hardship

SIR - I have absolutely no desire to join Mr A Bradley of Settle Cricket Club in the name berating Olympics (Letters, March 6). However I did feel obliged to clarify certain points in his tirade.

My criticism relating to the council-staged Lottery Sports Fund seminar was directed towards the organisers and its chairman, not the lady from Burton who had been cajoled into trying to perform a task which, in essence, was the obligation of the appropriate Craven Council staff member drawing a fat salary.

At least I did show my courtesy by hanging in there whilst others intermittently walked out.

Meanwhile, regarding Mr Bradley's flippant advice upon forming partnerships and community involvement to attract funding, he is preaching to the long-since converted.

For example, I also happen to be chairman of the community-orientated Keighley Amateur Boxing Club which has only recently received welcome assistance for gymnasium structural improvements from the central regeneration budget and the probation service.

There was, however, one very subtle difference between the happenings across the Bradford Metropolitan frontier and those of the aforementioned Craven seminar. That being when I spoke and asked questions at Keighley I was viewed with equality and treated like a proper person. I only carp from the outside when I can not be properly received on the inside.

Despite Mr Bradley's tirade, he still has not furnished me with anything of assistance regarding the points I was trying to raise with the Sports Council representative's own indoctrinations.

Mr Bradley need not lecture me on the sporting needs of those people contented to compete at local level for I had, for example, long been at the helm of building a sports pavilion which has subsequently proved to be one of the best used in Craven, and I have run more junior teams in various codes than some people have had breakfast.

But, probing on behalf of those sportspeople angling to be up there at the national and international level to which the Sports Council representative stressed that part of the Lottery funding was geared, I was shot down by Coun Ibbotson.

Judge me as you wish, but I simply cannot stomach all the elongated "bull". The Sports Council representative portrayed the overall funding establishment like a giant sugar daddy. However, having through our athletes' deeds qualified for one of those so-called "prestigious Sports Council awards", all we actually did receive, in essence, was a very sizeable bill!

Indeed, as I view that situation, the Sports Council needed our athletes' achievements plus those from other sporting teams and individuals across the land, to actually promote itself.

It already costs a monstrous packet to be involved in sport at national level, so can you understand why I carp?

Roger Ingham,

Alderseley Avenue, Skipton.

Burnsall mystery

Editor's note: The latest twist in our story and picture last month about the mysterious replacement of Burnsall's famous maypole with a "feeble" pole and the rivalries with surrounding villages appears to be this poem from an anonymous source somewhere near the Wharfe:

DOWN with the old, and up with the new

But, oh dear, it's cooked up a strange tasting brew

What team has scored such a brilliant goal?

Laying hands on the holy, the Burnsall maypole.

Was it Aptrick United, or Rovers of Thorpe?

I mean, come on chaps, this can't be fair sport.

Perhaps when it blew down last Christmas 'tis said,

It shortened itself by a half and a head!

That picture in't Herald just made my day

Who cares about worldly woes, they're too far away!

l Would Mr Allan Grant of Embsay, who wrote a letter for publication, please contact the editor.

Converted for the new archive on 30 June 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.