I see that MSA Extra, the company behind the proposal to ‘develop’ (ie. destroy) Smithy Wood have taken out a very large advert in your paper. I am writing in the hope of balancing this one-sided commercial interest.
MSA’s points are entirely spurious. For instance:
The managing of woodland is not an adequate ‘trade-off’ for the loss of irreplaceable ancient woodland.
The illustration in the paper shows the proposed MSA as being completely green which is very misleading. This application would involve cutting down a large part of the woodland and replacing it with Tarmac.