MAYBE I have got it wrong but reading the articles and letters about the Wicken Fen Vision, it seems as if the people living in the areas that will be affected do not want to be subjected to it. If I am right and the support for the Vision is coming fro
MAYBE I have got it wrong but reading the articles and letters about the Wicken Fen Vision, it seems as if the people living in the areas that will be affected do not want to be subjected to it. If I am right and the support for the Vision is coming from people living outside the affected area then their support is no more than attempted dictatorship by the majority. Sometimes, if it is in the national or local interest, people have to be dispossessed, moved away or live near unpleasant things. However, this is not the case for Wicken Fen, the Vision seems to be quite the reverse and not in the national interest (loss of 22 square miles of good arable land at a time when world food shortages are being predicted).
The Vision wants to take an enormous area of land. What possible reason can there be for such a large area to be set aside for nature conservation? What can be done in 5000 hectares that couldn't be done in a tenth of that?
I ROBERTSON
Ely
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here