Letter: ‘HS2 and why we should not silently accept this state sponsored ecocide’

This reader believes just because HS2 is not in our back yard, doesn’t mean that we should sit back and “silently accept this state sponsored ecocide”

protest against HS2 - group of people walking across a field

OnTheWight always welcomes a Letter to the Editor to share with our readers – unsurprisingly they don’t always reflect the views of this publication. If you have something you’d like to share, get in touch and of course, your considered comments are welcome below.

This from David Moorse, Shanklin. Ed

HS2 some facts and figures! Costs – benefits!

The cost….

  • 693 local wildlife sites
  • 108 Ancient Woodlands
  • 33 legally protected SSSIs
  • 18 Wildlife Trust Nature Reserves
  • Five Internationally protected Wildlife sites
  • Two RAMSAR sites – wetlands of international importance
  • Four taxpayer-funded Nature improvement sites (that was money well spent!?)
  • 22 Living landscapes – (wildlife corridors essential to the survival of locally endangered species)

Total area destroyed (about 50 square kilometers) = 1/8th of the entire areas of the Isle of Wight – it is equal to the total area of every Woodland and every Forest on the whole Isle of Wight.

£250k for every one metre of track
What is it costing to destroy such a vast quantity of our Natural Heritage? £250,000 for every one metre of track! Now think of walking from London to Birmingham… five paces cost a million pounds!

On the up side though … Look at the benefits:

  • A few people will take 20 mins less to get from London to somewhere on the outskirts of Birmingham.
  • A few others will get much richer, pocketing huge chunks of the £Billions of Taxpayers money.

Have your say
Just because it’s not in our back yard, doesn’t mean that we should sit back and silently accept this state sponsored ecocide!

Just one final question….. why is this a good idea?

Image: djim under CC BY 2.0

Friday, 20th November, 2020 10:45am


ShortURL: http://wig.ht/2o57

Filed under: Green Issues, Island-wide, Letter to the Editor

Any views or opinions presented in the comments below must comply with the Commenting 'House Rules' and are solely those of the author and do not represent those of OnTheWight.

Leave your Reply

10 Comments on "Letter: ‘HS2 and why we should not silently accept this state sponsored ecocide’"

newest oldest most voted

This should not happen ! We used to live in Herts and this will devastate local wildlife !

Something similar: DESPITE the Planning Inspectorate in their 560 page long report, objecting strongly the Government has recently sanctioned a £2 billion plus road development scheme around Stonehenge. The PI report states: “introduce a greater physical change to the Stonehenge landscape than has occurred in its 6,000 years” and continues to say “to ignore this warning is to threaten the gravest act of desecration knowingly perpetrated by… Read more »

I am with David Moorse.People are saying HS1 did not destroy Kent-O.K.-but how many counties will HS2 affect. It really is TOO much. Never mind China-would you like to live there?

Unfortunately many MPs hadn’t got a clue what they were talking about (surely not!) in some of the debates and the time saving aspect on journeys was of course a load of old tosh. The important bit was the capacity of the existing lines which is the main hold up. However with HS2 new lines then there would be more capacity for more trains which is the… Read more »
Colin, how can you dismiss the HS2 project’s huge-scale destruction of wildlife habitats that David Moorse lists in his letter as being ‘disturbed’? The impact is not temporary, but permanent. Habitats are being DESTROYED by this project. Ancient woodlands cannot be replaced by planting some more trees, England already has far less native woodland than any other European country, and much of our ancient woodland was destroyed… Read more »
Hi Tamara. Habitats have been disturbed/destroyed since year dot. Otherwise we wouldn’t have civilizations, towns and cities. My point was that nature and wildlife adapt and also fill in the spaces created after changes to the land. As iowchris points out in a later post, Kent wasn’t destroyed by HS1. Motorways which tore up the countryside when first built now provide verges and larger areas where flora… Read more »

I am not advocating preserving “anything and everything”, Colin. Is this how you view ancient woodland and sites of international importance for wildlife? And motorway verges do not replace ancient woodland or scarce wetland habitat.

The implication given by the author that these hundreds of wildlife sites, woodlands, SSSIs, etc. will be destroyed in their entirety is simply nonsense, as is the implication this is all so “a few people will take 20 mins less to get from London to somewhere on the outskirts of Birmingham”. When you start out like that the rest of your argument loses any possible credibility. As… Read more »
We heard the same emotive and exaggerated language about HS1, how many people have gone and seen how it turned out? Guess what, it didn’t destroy Kent! It didn’t steamroll through the Garden of England! Wildlife sites weren’t destroyed forever. Any infrastructure project will have a short term impact, but nature quickly recovers and the environmental mitigation works have delivered a net improvement. HS2 will be no… Read more »
The total reason behind HS2 is to increase capacity. The maximum capacity of a rail route is governed by the slowest trains using the line which, in the case of the West Coast Mainline (WCML) are freight and slow, stopping passenger trains. In order to increase the number of trains on the WCML there are three choices; reduce freight and slow, stopping passenger trains; increase the capacity… Read more »