Jump to content

Prospect Farm Gun Club Win Appeal

Geoffrey Settle

Recommended Posts

Well what do you think about the Clay Pigeon fraternity winning their appeal to site a gun club right next to Risley Moss SSSI Nature Reserve and in the middle of the new Rixton Moss Wildlife Nature Site and a gun shot away from a local fishery and Rixton Clay Pits SSSI. The Woolston Eyes bird life already has to suffer the 28 day soot of the Star Clay Pigeon club.


Not only that but there will be a fourth 28 day shooting site in the Rixton Moss area :| .


What price should we place on preserving the jewels of nature in Warrington?


See Warrington Worldwide story.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

What were the 'very special circumstances' mentioned Geoff and by '28 days' do you meann that's how many days a year it will be open ?


Goodness only knows I haven't found that bit yet - it's just unbelievable. Yes 28 means any 28 days in the year but not more. The shoot itself will be now increase its opening hours from 28 to 156.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So once per fortnight for about 5 1/2 hours (all of it during daylight hours, obviously), on average, at a time?


Hardly a constant nuisance is it.


There are 4 of the 28 type with no limit shooting all day and not on the same 28 days for each which could be 156 days shooting ducks, birds etc.

Then there is the clay pigeon shoot which can now shoot for 156 days at 700 shots per hour. So in theory that makes 312 days shooting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well them ducks and clays ain't going to shoot themselves.


The Star Clay shoot is only about 3/4 mile down the road from me and while I can just about hear the guns on a still day if I'm out in the garden, most of the time any noise they make is drowned out by the Thellwall Viaduct. The same would be true just the other side of the water at the Rixton site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LIVE DUCK SHOOT !?!  That's damn right barbaric..... sorry I really don't like animals being shot for fun !!


Geoff.... as a councillor and one who is/was on the Dev Control Planning Committee how come you don't know what the 'very sepcial circumstances' are ?  Did they not say at the inquiry ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That all sounds a bit strange as the news report clearly says 'Martin Joyce, the inspector, ruled that there were "very special circumstances" which outweighed the fact that the shooting club would normally be regarded as an inappropriate development in the Green Belt.'

As for uploading PDF's... no idea as I've never tried.  I don't think you can do it through photobucket etc although you could if you converted each page to a JPG. How many pages is it ?
Others on here may kow where you can upload PDFs to to share via links.............

If it the planning inspectors report that should have a direct link through the planning portal that you could post a link to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 pages DIZZY - David and Gary have a copy if you want to email them 8)


Lets see if the relevant 3 pages fit on here - happy reading :|



Very Special Circumstances

62. Having found that the use of the site for clay pigeon shooting would be

inappropriate development in the Green Belt, in respect of policies in The

Appeal Decisions APP/M0655/C/13/2196229, APP/M0655/A/13/2196226

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate 17

Framework and the judgement in Fordent Holdings, and thereby harmful by

definition, it is necessary to consider whether there are any material

considerations which would amount to the very special circumstances

necessary to overcome this harm, and the other harm identified in relation to

the other main issues. This includes the reduction in the openness of the

Green Belt found in respect of the second issue.

63. The material considerations put forward by the appellant in the context of this

issue are several. Positive policy support derives from Paragraph 81 of The

Framework, which places a duty on Local Planning Authorities to plan so as to

provide opportunities for outdoor sport and recreation in the Green Belt.

However, there is no evidence of the Council making provision for such

beneficial use of land in the Green Belt in either the adopted UDP or the

emerging CS. In relation to site-specific elements, evidence was provided to

show the need for additional clay pigeon shooting activities in Cheshire and the

North West, particularly those accessible to all able and disabled users, whilst

the proposal would make a significant contribution to the Olympic and

Paralympic legacy as there are no other facilities of an equivalent standard in

the north of England. It would not be practicable for a use of this type to be

located in an urban area or on the edge of a settlement in view of the likely

impact on residential amenity but, in Warrington, any site outside built-up

areas is likely to be in the Green Belt, because of the coverage of the

designated area within the Borough. Given these constraints, the site is well

located in terms of access to the motorway network for users from within the

region and the high quality of the facilities, coupled with the investment that

has and would take place, would provide substantial social, economic and

community benefit to the area. Finally, landscape and habitat enhancement

would accrue from the extensive planting that is involved in the scheme, and

the proposal would bring an area of unused land back into beneficial use.

64. Dealing firstly with the policy position, it is a matter of fact that there is no

positive policy within either the UDP or the CS relating to the provision of new

facilities for outdoor sport or recreation in the countryside. Policy GRN9 of the

UDP permits such provision subject to a number of criteria being met, including

that there is no unacceptable increase in noise likely to harm the amenity of

nearby residential property or the value of other environmentally sensitive

areas or features. Policy PV7 of the CS seeks to promote the visitor economy,

including the diversification of the local economy in the countryside, provided

there is no harm to the openness of the Green Belt or the character of the local

landscape. However, the Council accept that no direct provision has been

made for new facilities for outdoor space or recreation in the open countryside,

or Green Belt in particular, in either plan. The provision of clay pigeon shooting

facilities appears not to have been considered at all, albeit that I am not fully

aware of whether such need was promoted by relevant bodies in the

consultation stages of the two Plans.

65. The absence of specific provision runs counter to the provisions of Paragraph

81 of The Framework, which seeks positive planning by Local Planning

Authorities to enhance the beneficial use of defined Green Belts such as by

looking to provide opportunities for outdoor sport and recreation. Moreover, it

seems to me that the provisions of Paragraph 81 need to be considered also in

the context of the fact that Paragraph 89 states that the provision of new

buildings such as appropriate facilities for outdoor sport and recreation would

not be inappropriate provided the openness of the Green Belt is preserved and

Appeal Decisions APP/M0655/C/13/2196229, APP/M0655/A/13/2196226

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate 18

there is no conflict with the purposes of including land within it. Therefore,

whilst the use of the land for this type of sport, having regard to Fordent

Holdings, may be inappropriate development, it is clear that Paragraph 81 has

to be taken to mean that the Green Belt is suitable in principle for such

development. In this context, it is also significant that there is no land within

Warrington outside the Green Belt where outdoor sport could be provided, as

the only areas beyond existing developed areas which are not designated as

such are those shown on the UDP and CS as intended for employment-based


66. The need for this type of facility has not been quantified in terms of actual

demand from members of the public for a clay pigeon shooting club, but the

absence of a facility of the extent and quality of that proposed in this case was

not challenged by the Council at the Inquiry. Additionally, it is clear that the

site itself would provide opportunities for disabled people to take part in this

type of sport, and it is no part of the Council’s case that it could not be

undertaken without causing harm to residential amenity. However, I do not

consider that these matters, and the landscaping and habitat improvements

that are likely to accrue, are determinative on this issue, as they would be

likely to be needed irrespective of whether or not the site was in the Green

Belt. Additionally, I give little weight to the claim that the land would be

brought into a beneficial use through this use as neglect or otherwise of

agricultural land cannot form a reason for new development which would not

normally be acceptable or appropriate.

67. It is also difficult to be certain about the extent to which economic or social

benefits would arise from the development, as it seems to me that this is a

specialist type of sport that would not appeal to the population at large.

Equally, provision of an up-to-date facility to further the Olympic and

Paralympic legacy is also not dependent upon a Green Belt location in this

particular area. Similarly, the benefit of bringing a use previously carried out in

an unregulated manner, albeit on fewer occasions, under tighter controls,

whilst positive, is not determinative in itself on this issue.

68. The Council’s view is that the material considerations put forward do not

amount to the very special circumstances needed to outweigh the harm to the

Green Belt and that caused by harm to protected bird species in the area.

However, I have found that any harm to birds could be adequately mitigated

and this leaves, therefore, only the principle of the use, having regard to The

Framework, and a limited impact on the openness of the Green Belt. In this

respect, the provisions of Paragraph 81 of The Framework, coupled with the

lack of positive provision for outdoor sport and recreation in an established

Green Belt through the Council’s own Plans, plus the benefits of the

development which, whilst not determinative alone, combine to create, in this

particular case, very special circumstances that outweigh the harm identified


69. My conclusion on this issue is that the material considerations put forward, in

combination, create very special circumstances that outweigh the harm to the

Green Belt created by an inappropriate use and by a limited loss of openness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to my other half they are a plastic cartridge with a brass cap.  You pull the trigger the 'thing' hits the brass cap with 'shoots' out the bit that hits the clay.

The plastic cartridge and brass cap then come out of the gun intact when you unload..... and then you pick it up and put it in the bin.

He explained it more technically than that but that is how my brain translated it.

We went once for a day and it was great fun although I couldn't hit a damn thing so just watched in the end:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No idea...

Sorry only just noticed the other posts we must have all been posting together.

Geoff... here's the direct link to the full PDF Appeal Decision document to read online incase you wanted to use the link anywhere else.......


Appeal A: APP/M0655/C/13/2196229  and Appeal B: APP/M0655/A/13/2196226




Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depends what size it is according to google.......... one sourse re: how far does the 'shot' go says 'The old formula was to take the shot diameter in thousandths of an inch and multiply by 2.2 to get the maximum range in yards... so no. 7 shot at 0.100" diameter would fly 220yds max'


Maybe Geoff knows......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...