Coverdale Connect and Protect has held several Zoom meetings concerning the application to the Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority’s (YDNPA ) planning committee on February 9 2021 for permission to install a 5G mast at West Scrafton
Zoom meeting on February 2:
Residents throughout Coverdale would have better broadband and mobile phone connectivity via the commercial use of emergency services masts and fibre-based broadband than the 5G testbed and trial which runs only until March 2022, it was stated during a Coverdale Connect and Protect Zoom meeting on February 2.
This group has asked the Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority (YDNPA) to refuse approval for a 5G mast at West Scrafton in Coverdale not only for environmental reasons but also until there is a thorough, impartial investigation into the impact of 5G technology on humans and animals.
When introducing the Zoom meeting Harriet Corner from Coverdale said: “I truly consider [this dale] to be one of the wonders of the world in terms of its beauty and nature. I had a rural childhood but now there’s little left of the wild spaces I used to know. The landscape is littered with masts, pylons and wind turbines.
“Let’s protect this incredible place for our children and grandchildren rather than put the landscape, the ecology and the health of our community at risk. But let’s solve our connectivity issues in a safe way that covers the entire dale.”
Anne Pilling, who lives outside Horsehouse in Coverdale, explained that MANY (Mobile Access North Yorkshire project) was a publicly and privately funded consortium supported by North Yorkshire County Council which had been given £4.4m of government funding to trial 5G in the county. She said the test area included West Witton, East Witton and Middleham but not the northern end of Coverdale beyond Gammersgill where the need for broadband and mobile phone connectivity was the most acute.
She reported that emergency service masts installed at Coverhead and Braidley could be updated to provide a commercial service and that on January 21 YDNPA had given permission for an emergency service mast at Gildersbeck.
“From my enquiries with EE this will provide 3G or 4G commercial service which should cover the [5G] test area,” she said and added that she had been told that within six months this would also provide a mobile phone roaming service.
She told the meeting that rather than the 5G test area having the least connectivity more than 90 per cent of the households in it already had access to superfast broadband. She added that fibre broadband was the gold standard as it was safe, faster than 5G, reliable, weatherproof and heat proof.
West Witton parish councillor Graham Bottley warned: “My real concern is if 5G is brought into these areas with its inferior service that will prevent [residents} ever getting fibre broadband. My view is it will harm the community in terms of worse provision of service.” He said that in the past West Witton residents had been told they would never get fibre-based broadband and yet this year it would be installed in that village.
Raymond Brown of Coverdale said that 60 per cent of residents he had spoken to were in favour of the 5G mast. He questioned the statements made during the meeting that 5G was a health risk to people and the environment. He pointed out that the World Health Organisation and Public Health England had stated 5G was safe.
Mike Sparrow responded that such agencies and the British Government accepted the guidelines and safety standards set by the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) But, he added, the Appeal Court of Turin had judged the ICNIRP to be conflicted as a consequence of its members having direct or indirect relationships with the telecommunications industry, and accepted funding either directly or indirectly from it.
“The point we are making … is that there are alternatives that would work better that wouldn’t expose us to the same potential risks.”
He said he had read many academic papers in which scientists argued there were reasons to be worried about 5G and non-ionising radiation. He listed several studies which had reported on the adverse impact upon insects, animals, birds and trees.
There was, he added, the problem of latency – just as there had been with cigarette smoking. So it could take decades before the impact upon health was known. He said insurance companies were so concerned that they were unwilling to insure for any damage caused by such technology.
“If they are not going to indemnify us for any damage to our communities… how are we to believe it is safe?” he asked.
Planning officer’s recommendation
A planning officer has recommended that the YDNPA planning committee should approve the application for a 5G mast at West Scrafton.
In his report it is stated: “This project is looking at how 4G/5G technology will benefit rural communities and is specifically targeting areas with limited or no current coverage, ‘not spots’, which include the Coverdale area. The proposed installation will form an important link in the chain and needs to have line of sight with other local sites.” (These are at Yarker Bank Quarry at Leyburn and Penhill Farm, West Witton.)
The report continued: “[The] business model is to provide broadband coverage to the locations that the Main Network Operators (MNO’s) do not. These would otherwise remain as ‘not spots’ within the National Park. “The site is not near to a statutory safeguarding zone such as a school.
“Paragraph 116 of the NPPF (National Planning Policy Framework) says that the need for an electronic communications system should not be questioned.
“It is considered that there is a justifiable need for a telecommunication site to be provided at this location.” And on health issues it stated: “The applicants have provided a declaration confirming that the proposed installation complies with the International Commission for Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNRP) guidelines for exposure of the public to radio frequency and electromagnetic fields.
“All hardware on site would carry certification that indicates conformity with health, safety, and environmental protection standards. The mast would be located a significant distance from any residential property. The siting does not give rise to any perceived health risks.
“Nevertheless, objectors say that certain scientific studies are critical of ICNIRP safe exposure guidelines and consider that the development will have an adverse impact on the health of the public, wildlife and the environment and that a precautionary principle should be applied. The objectors refer to various scientific studies but none that can be applied directly to this site.”
Among those who have objected is Professor David Hill, chairman of the Environment Bank. See: Are the Dales being used as a guinea pig?
Statement by Coverdale Connect and Protect
On Tuesday February 9th members of the Yorkshire Dales National Park planning committee will be asked to rule on whether a 15 metre high mast should be erected in the unspoilt Coverdale hamlet of West Scrafton.
The mast is part of a privately and publicly-funded 5G ‘test-bed and trial’ project managed by North Yorkshire County Council which is looking to use this corner of the YDNP to experiment with 5G applications.
Residents are being enticed by the offer of free wireless broadband and mobile phone coverage for the duration of the trial and, not surprisingly, this is attractive to the minority still struggling with poor connectivity.
Big questions remain unanswered however. Putting to one side the mounting scientific evidence that 5G has damaging effects on human health, wildlife and the environment, and the impact of mast proliferation on the aesthetics of an unspoilt corner of the Yorkshire Dales National Park, the kind of fixed wireless broadband and mobile signal that this organisation is proposing is not the best solution for our needs.
More than 90% of households in the target area already have superfast fibre broadband; fibre is the gold standard – safe, reliable and weather-proof – and it should be available to everyone in the dale. Planning permission was recently granted for an emergency services mast which we understand will provide a commercial mobile signal to the target area. So why was this corner of YDNP selected for this experiment? How is this in the best interests of the people of Coverdale? What happens when the funding runs out in March 2022?
When we ask what is going on we are met with silence or obfuscation by NYCC councillors and officers. Coverdale is an unspoilt area of natural beauty, home to rare and endangered flora and fauna. Such a treasured and rare landscape must not be put in jeopardy by a communications trial curiously mired in secrecy. It would be an abdication of the responsibility the YDNPA have to uphold their primary purpose, namely “to conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the national park” and we therefore ask the Planning Committee to defer any decision until our questions have been answered.
Mike Sparrow’s scientific studies
At previous Zoom meetings Mike Sparrow said that there was evidence that the type of frequencies used for 5G could not only have very damaging effects upon birds but also on bees and humans.
Among the peer-reviewed research he quoted was a report by the Oceania Radiofrequency Scientific Advisory Association in Australia in 2018 which stated that 68 per cent of 1,955 scientific studies illustrated “significant biological and health effects”.
The government, he said, had based its assurances to the public on the guidance provided by the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) which maintains that non-ionising radiation (as from 5G) causes harm only at tissue heating levels of exposure and no deeper biological effect.
And yet the Appeal Court of Turin had judged the ICNIRP to be conflicted as a consequence of its members having direct or indirect relationships with the telecommunications industry. The ICNIRP’s guidance was, therefore, held to be “unreliable due to bias”, Mr Sparrow reported.
In a letter to Sir Keir Starmer MP he wrote: “In order to protect and reassure the public, we believe that it is essential that the government is compelled to undertake a full public, independent and transparent enquiry into the published adverse health effects of exposure to electromagnetic radiation, prior to any further expansion of wireless telecommunications network capability. The conduct of ICNIRP and the reliability of its guidance should, inevitably, be examined as part of this process.
“A government that ignores the science, and is prepared to gamble with the health of its citizens is unworthy of trust.”
Supported with references he stated: “There are now thousands of peer-reviewed scientific studies that demonstrate unequivocal evidence that non-ionising radiation at very low levels of exposure cause significant biological harm such as:
· carcinogenicity (brain tumors/glioma, breast cancer, acoustic neuromas, leukemia, parotid gland tumors),
· genotoxicity (DNA damage, DNA repair inhibition, chromatin structure), mutagenicity, teratogenicity,
· neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer’s Disease, Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis)’
· neurobehavioral problems, autism, reproductive problems, pregnancy outcomes, excessive reactive oxygen species/oxidative stress, inflammation, apoptosis, blood-brain barrier disruption, pineal gland/melatonin production, sleep disturbance, headache, irritability, fatigue, concentration difficulties, depression, dizziness, tinnitus, burning and flushed skin, digestive disturbance, tremor, cardiac irregularities,
· adverse impacts on the neural, circulatory, immune, endocrine, and skeletal systems,
· Damage to voltage gated calcium channels (VGCCs) in cells.”
He continued: “Representation has been made to both the Secretary of State for Health and Public Health England in relation to the adverse public health consequences implied by the body of peer-reviewed science referred to above. Government has dismissed the concerns raised, referring simply to their reliance upon ICNIRP guidelines, without any acknowledgement of the scientific evidence that contradicts such advice; or the fact that ICNIRP absolve themselves from responsibility.
“The government has a duty to protect the health and wellbeing of its citizens, including exposure of the public to ‘dangerous activities’, which includes the production of electromagnetic radiation. It has made no attempt to evaluate the risk of existing wireless EMR, or the potential risk posed by the millimetre wave EMR used to deliver wireless 5G.”
And he added that the government had failed to acknowledge or investigate substantive evidence that pointed to the severe harm caused by the electromagnetic field radiation (EMF) of 5G.
“It is ironic,” he said, “that, at a time when science is being invoked to justify the government’s response to Covid-19, the science pertaining to harm caused by EMR is being ignored; a threat which may pose an even greater long-term risk to public health.”
About himself Mr Sparrow said: “I have a background in industry (35 years covering various sectors) which culminated in my leading an international utilities construction and maintenance business. “Part of that portfolio included the construction of high-voltage power lines with associated telecommunications fibre optics. The nature of the business, and the risks entailed, meant that I spent a disproportionate amount of time focused on safety and technical standards. Hence, I am familiar with magnetic fields, induced currents and other electro-magnetic phenomena.”