Letter to ‘The Cornishman’ published 29th April.

From comments in the press and those circulated, for example, by Penzance Chamber of Commerce, it now seems clear that British International Helicopters will be flying from Land’s End Aerodrome when they leave their present site. The aerodrome lies within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and abuts a designated Heritage Coast. Presently there are 10 Cornish choughs being monitored by the RSPB between Pendeen and Gwennap Head. Thousands of visitors enjoy a variety of recreational activities in this beautiful part of Cornwall. We are told that BIH are compelled to realise the capital on their Eastern Green site, but at what cost to this region?

The regular drone of aircraft from Land’s End Aerodrome is a common sound along the coastal plain between Bartinney Downs and Whitesand Bay. If BIH also fly from the airport, they could be approximately three times as loud as the fixed wing, taking off and landing about every twenty minutes during high season. Such an imposition, of the same noise and noxious emissions that the people of Eastern Green and Gulval currently endure, added to the existing aircraft noise experienced at Land’s End, needs urgent formal appraisal.

This is not something new. In February 2009 the Land Use Planning Adviser for the National Trust asked Penwith District Council if they would be calling for an Environmental Impact Assessment concerning Westward Airways application for runway lighting, as the aerodrome was in a ‘sensitive area’ due to its AONB designation. In July 1997 the Government Office for the South West, ruled that Land’s End Aerodrome needed an EIA concerning their application to extend runways and install lighting. If BIH operate from Land’s End Aerodrome the environmental consequences are likely to be more severe than either of those developments.

Do the Parish Councils of Sennen and St Buryan, St Just Town Council, Cornwall Council, our MP, and the Duke of Cornwall have evidence of the culmination of noise levels and emissions that the BIH move could cause? If not, will they acknowledge their responsibility to the people they serve by calling on BIH to provide an EIA? The significant encroachment on the environment, roads, businesses, residents and tourism that the relocation might cause, deserves nothing less than the rigorous scrutiny an EIA offers.

Caroline Passingham, Kelynack