Below is a typical "objection" to the ludicrous plans to build an industrial estate on a large area of green belt at the Cutacre site, which rather sums up the situation accurately.

"I, with hundreds of others, registered my objection in the informal consultation period, to the proposals to remove Green Belt status from the site at Over Hulton. Prior to the Council vote on 9th December last year, the land grab was reduced by approximately 2/3 as a direct result of the opposition of the people of Bolton but the reasons to object still apply to the smaller area to be taken. I have lived at this address since 1976 and prior to that in Cherrywood Avenue for 5 years. In the 1990s I fought, with others, against proposed opencast mining which was eventually stopped when a protected species of newt was found on site. This stop was only temporary while the newts were moved out of the mining area into newly created ponds in the surrounding area. Ruth Kelly and Frank Dobson, then our prospective MP and shadow Minister respectively, said no opencast at the site under a Labour Government and I was then naive enough to accept that. Disappointingly, that promise was broken but the boundary was pushed back from the original proposals and, in the planning permission granted in 1996 by the Government Inspector, there was a condition that UK Coal would restore the land and indeed improve it to include woodland, grassland, wetlands, conservation area, hedgerows, wildlife enhancement area and 200 hectares of agricultural land. Only 22 hectares of industrial use was allowed and that on the lowered Cutacre tip. With this promise, and in view of the restricted area, objections disappeared. A bond was, eventually, put in place to ensure that this would happen. Although I naively accepted this, many other people did not believe that it would result in the promised improvement and said that we would end up with commercial or housing use because money and greed are more likely to succeed than preservation of Green Belt. The cynics have turned out to be right and Bolton Council proposed in their LDF to release nearly 100 hectares of Green Belt. The original proposal was preposterous but even after a 2/3 reduction in the sacrifice of Green Belt the proposals are still unacceptable. This area which is rich in wildlife and used to be home for farmers who kept cattle, sheep and horses, is the only green separating us from Salford and would have completed the urban sprawl if given up. The Rangers who recently viewed the site have confirmed that the wildlife remains. I have seen diverse wildlife including rabbit, hare, fox, other small mammals, many species of bird and even some deer. Bird watchers were attracted in large numbers recently when a shore lark rarely seen inland was found and photographed on the site. Also, there is a Site of Biological Importance which falls within the proposed Industrial Site! It has been pointed out many times that Britain needs farmers for food security so why should we propose to reduce available farmland when there are brown field sites and empty premises available. The roads would become even more overcrowded than now, with Newbrook Road and the A6 bordering the site frequently at a standstill. The carbon emissions will increase instead of the carbon capture which would arise if promises, including areas of woodland are kept. With the closure of the battery factory, and with all the empty premises for lease or sale, and with much brown field land also available on the M61 corridor, we must not give up Greenbelt so readily. Also, if the proposed development is successful, it is more likely to drag jobs from existing sites than create jobs thus creating more wasted space on existing developments. The only job creation will be temporary and short term while unnecessary building takes place where there should be green space for wildlife, farming and recreation. We should not have to suffer broken promises yet again. I now find that many people feel intimidated by the way that formal representation requests are presented bureaucratically. How can residents untrained in such bureaucracy answer such questions as Do you consider the core strategy is legally compliant? and Do you consider the core strategy is unsound because it is not consistent with national policy? This will deter many people from registering objections and will result in a large reduction in the number of objections from the 600 who registered theirs in the informal consultation period and the 811 who signed the petition. An unprecedented number exceeding 400 turned up at the Town Hall meeting to object to the original proposal to remove almost all the Green Belt. Jobs will not be created and jobs which arise due to improvements in economic conditions should be sited where they are needed most, in empty premises and brown field sites of which there are many.

Summary 1. Broken promises again.
2. Loss of greenbelt.
3. Loss of wildlife.
4. Loss of farming.
5. Carbon footprint increased instead of decreased.
6. Overcrowding of already overcrowded roads.
7. Make better use of Brown Field sites and Empty Premises.
8. Simple migration of jobs more likely than creation see Middlebrook and Bolton shops.

The deadline for objections is tomorrow at 5pm details on how to object are on the County Notice board of the website, many people on here were only too happy to twitch the Shorelark recently, so I urge you to spend 30 minutes of your time to object before tomorrows deadline, you might just help save species like Barn Owl, Grey Partridge, Skylark and many other farmland species which are rapidly declining already (this is a valuable area in the county make no mistake), even if you just put something brief that would help, people seem to have plenty of time when it comes to pointless random posts about anything so come on do something worthwhile