| Home |
| Order/Chaos/Farce |
| Punitive measures |
| Health fears about disposal methods |
| Hopes and fears for public inquiries |
| Rural regeneration |
|
Health fears about disposal methods [ Back to Trust in Governance ]Given the scale of culling there was unease about disposal methods. For those living near landfill and burial sites there were immediate and ongoing environmental health and safety concerns. The pyres, seeing the pyres built and some of them were in public places on public roads and seeing them burning. And I remember going over a main road and counting them and I could see 14 pyres burning in one go and the smell yeah, was horrible. (Agricultural related , interview, 2002)
...What is being tested for in the surrounding streams? what exactly is classed as a danger? and if problems did arise, how would they be monitored and resolved. All these issues do tend to make you anxious. (Community, diary, 2002)
Diaries written in 2003, do acknowledge some disposal site management initiatives as helpful, including ‘Open Days’ and distributing regular newsletters to local communities: I have included this newsletter in with these diaries as it contains quite a bit of information on a few different aspects, I think it is good about the wildlife which is emerging on the site. (Community, diary 2003)
Anxieties about disposal were exacerbated by a perceived lack of credible information, this respondent writes about a local public meeting with a panel of ‘experts’: I felt rather angry by the way in which the questions are handled. The answers are often vague, have no supporting evidence or are dismissed with ‘I"ll have to get back to you on that’ or, ‘I can"t comment’. (Community, diary, 2002)
Despite reassurances that health risks from smoke particulates, dioxins and sulphur were not significant, panel members who lived with the daily reality of the sight and smell of the pyres reported health concerns: We certainly have had more colds, wheezing coughs and things like that. I"m more inclined to say well, it"s probably because we"ve just spent winter in a caravan, which although it"s got heating and things like that, it isn"t ideal. But certainly my husband thinks there"s more to it than that. If the smoke and everything was going to cause something, there"s no way being in this area there"s no way we could have avoided it... (Community, interview, 2002)
. . .there was some anxiety in the community, and there still is, over the long term effects of that smog. It was over the town for six weeks, it was terrible, I mean it was blowing over the churchyard; it must have been like Auschwitz. I mean it was a terrible smell. (Community, interview, 2002)
By April 2001, public opposition eventually led to the ending of pyres as a disposal method. In particular, opposition to a mass pyre in the north of the county with a capacity for 1000 cattle per day, acted as a catalyst. A panel member, living near the proposed site, questioned public consultation: Nobody knew anything about that until some of the residents nearby saw these things coming in, you know, saw the wagons coming in, and the army there and everything, and someone said ‘what"s going on?’, ‘what"s all this for?’ (Community, interview, 2002)
A public meeting held after the mass pyre had been lit, proved to be the turning point. A panel of experts failed to convince the ‘public’ that the large pyre was safe, particularly after a member of the public disputed the science: We had a public meeting [. . .] J [a research scientist working within carbon chain degradation processing] spoke, the old sleepers they were using had gone the course and got chemicals in them that were coming over the town, and there"s a sort of health anxiety over that actually. (Community, interview, 2002) [ Back to Trust in Governance ]
|
|||
| |||
Site Design by FractalWeb with the generous support of Cumbria County Council
|
|||