UPDATE - January 2020: The planning application has been withdrawn!!! We do not have all the details yet as to why this has been withdrawn. UPDATE May 2019: we are still waiting for this application to be discussed at the East Oxford Area Planning Committee meeting, this campaign is still alive! We need as much support as we can muster to attend that meeting. We will find out a week before the meeting if it is on the agenda and I will notify supporters by email; hopefully, lots of people can make it to the public meeting to demonstrate our disapproval in person! Lets not give up the fight! A planning application has been submitted for a new build development that would provide 9 apartments (in a mix of 1, 2 and 3 beds) in a 21⁄2 storey building and 22 parking spaces. The proposed plan would also require an access road to be built at the end of Lewis close and along the boundary of the C.S Lewis Nature Reserve run by the Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire Wildlife Trust. I spent my childhood playing in the C.S Lewis reserve and now bring my own children there to explore the wonders it holds. It truly is a magical place and C.S. Lewis based his writings about Narnia on it, although back then it was his back garden! The reserve comprises mature woodland slopes and two ponds. The larger pond is noted for spawning toads and giant horsetail surrounding it. The nature reserve and surrounding area currently supports birds, reptiles, badgers and roosting bats among other wildlife. The area is also suitable for protected species such as Great Crested Newts which have been spotted in the area. The proposed development and access road will create noise, light, dust pollution and many more negative impacts on the environment and wildlife. A preliminary ecological appraisal has been undertaken and although does cover some of the impacts on the potential wildlife others have been omitted. The report does make some suggestions to mitigate the impact such as a protective, closed fencing around the development area, a review of the design to ensure no light spill or disturbance post development, undertaking work outside the main bird nesting season etc. However I strongly feel that despite these measures to mitigate the impact the development will still have a detrimental effect the area and wildlife. One persons objection on the oxford city council planning webpage for this development also points out that a close solid fence could actually compound the danger to the animals. Lewis close leading up to the reserve is peaceful and quiet and safe for the many children that use it to access the reserve. It is such a wonderful place and the access road and property development that is planned to run along it will no doubt pollute the lake, increase the traffic making it unsafe for pedestrians and spoil this place of amazing magic and beauty. This area is of national and historical significance and should be preserved for generations to come. The nature reserve and the adjacent Lewis Close is peaceful and quiet. Many residents and visitors go there for the peace, tranquility and the inspiration it offers. The nature reserve and the house that C.S. Lewis lived in is of huge literary and historical importance and would be spoiled by this development. I felt strongly that this development should not go ahead and decided to start this 38 degrees campaign. Please help me to stop this development from happening so future generations can continue to be inspired by its wildlife and wonder.

Animals such as monkeys, meerkats, reptiles and turtles are wild animals who belong in their natural habitat, not in cages and glass tanks in somebody’s home. Over 1000 species of mammals, birds, invertebrates, reptiles, amphibians and fish are bred and captured for the exotic pet trade, and it is our argument that the complex social, physical and behavioural needs of these animals cannot be met other than in their natural habitats. Furthermore, there is strong evidence linking the trade in exotic animals with habitat destruction and the extinction of species in the wild. In tandem with the suffering of such animals in transit - including many documented deaths - young animals can grow into dangerous adults which can become unmanageable in domestic environments not conducive to satisfying their welfare needs for increased space and food. As mentioned in the petition above, a similar campaign was launched in Scotland by the charity One Kind to great effect. With the backing of RSPCA, PDSA, Animal Welfare Party, Captured Animals Protection Society, Four Paws, Wild Futures, Born Free Foundation, plus a host of other significant organizations, the Scottish campaign instigated a review of Scottish Government policy, with the debate centering on the introduction of a Positive List System, which would permit for the keeping of an exotic pet only if its suitability to life in private ownership were incontrovertibly assessed by such a system using clear, transparent and evidence based criteria collated on species conservation, the dangers of invasive disease, ease of good husbandry - including proof of appropriate knowledge of needs and care - and the clear availability of care guidelines, and enforcement measures. In order to ascertain the exact number of licenses issued by local authorities in Wales I contacted all 22 councils. At the time of this petition's submission I have received replies from exactly half of these, making the number of licenses issued by local authorities to exotic pet shops so far 68. This number, of course, does not include internet sites, whether separate to or part of the pet shops mentioned. Thus, it is clear that thousands of exotic animals are being traded in Wales. The welfare of such animals is a matter for public concern, and I believe a debate should take place about the propriety of such a trade in Wales. Fundamental to any overview must be the suitability of wild reptiles and large birds to lives as exotic pets, and the regulating of standards for their care, with the ultimate objective of ending the trade in such species altogether. Please help us to end this vile trade in Wales by signing this petition. It doesn't matter where you are, your signature will help show the Government of Wales the strength of feeling against the capture, importation, breeding, and sale of wild animals in Wales.

Many towns are now building enclosed fenced areas in existing parks, because they realise the benefit for dogs and the whole community. Chatham has recently built one in the sports ground on Maidstone road, Many dog breeds can't be let off lead such as Huskies for example, and a dog park in an existing park would give them the chance to socialise, train and exercise more. This is not a petition to enforce dogs only be in the enclosed area, who doesn't want to use it keeps walking their dog as usual around the park. Mote Park has the space and would thrive even more if dog owners knew they had the chance to take their dogs there without worrying they will run off. Sign the petition and share so we can get it to the council.

It is important for the safety and well being of horses and riders.

In this day and age I firmly believe that Hunting with Hounds is barbaric and unnecessary. This awful suffering must end if we are to be considered a civilised Nation

Canada Goose is a Canadian outdoor clothing company who uses real coyote fur as trim on the hoods of their parkas. Despite the fact that the majority of Canadians abhor the use of fur, Canada Goose actually celebrates the trapping and killing of wildlife for unnecessary, decorative fur trim. In an effort to sway the public, Canada Goose has a “fur policy." Unfortunately the statements made in this “policy” are not intended to inform the discussion on fur, but rather misinform the public with the sole purpose of carrying on with ‘business as usual’. Most Canadians already know that the fur trade is inherently violent, and that fur products derived from this violence are also inherently frivolous

Badger culls are not policed by anyone, the police when pushed on any breaches in guidelines (meaning a criminal offence has taken place) will refer complainants to Natural England who in turn do nothing. It's time the police to show they are neutral and not as evidenced time and again an actual pro-cull organisation.

I am a wildlife sculptor with a studio in South Devon, which is also between two farms shooting badgers, less than two miles from the popular town of Totnes. Since the badger cull started here just three weeks ago, we have seen a huge dropping off of visitors, including during Devon Open Studios. Licences have been issued to approximately 200 farms in the South Hams to shoot badgers between sundown and 12 noon, every day for a minimum of six weeks, during the region's busy tourism season. Unlike previous years, the farmers themselves are allowed to shoot badgers instead of using trained professionals. There are serious concerns over public safety with two of the five badger culling farms overlooking the busy town of Totnes having previously witnessed a fatal shooting and public order offences involving knives. In 2004 a 13 year old was shot dead in the fields of Lower Cholwell Farm, caused by a gunman failing to follow basic safety guidelines with a high-powered rifle. Several of our busiest beaches are now directly below and well within stray-bullet range of badger culling farms, such as the popular Blackpool Sands, Slapton Ley Nature Reserve, Torcross, Bigbury, Bantham and Thurlstone Beaches. Meanwhile there are at least 5 badger shooting farms around Kingsbridge and the same around Totnes. On Sunday 11th September shooting has been heard directly behind a popular Pub at the edge of Totnes, at 11pm when there were still people drinking outside admiring the view of the river Dart. Even those in Bridgetown are within 2 miles of shooting in Ashprington. If you truly wanted to be safe in Totnes there is nowhere to turn. Official badger culls are also accompanied by a rise in illegal persecution and the South Hams is no exception. In 2013 holiday makers were horrified by the sight of a field strewn with the bodies of gassed badgers overlooking Blackpool sands. These had been paralyzed from the effects of carbon monoxide poisoning, and will have died a slow and painful death by starvation and thirst. On 11th September this year several poisoned badgers were discovered on Wall Park Road leading to the popular Berry Head Hotel and Country Park, again in clear view of visitors. Rolling out a badger cull here has given a green light to other forms of badger persecution, regardless of its impact on tourism. Anyone who has spent any time at all in West Somerset during the badger culls, knows how toxic those tourist village names have become. I certainly shall never visit Exmoor again as there are things I witnessed there that I shall never forget. Just imagine what will happen if our tourist industry gets tarnished with being a region soaked in badger blood, with visitors afraid to walk the countryside for fear of a stray bullet, or of finding a shot, poisoned or gassed badger. As the tourism industry creates more income and more jobs than the hand full of farms taking part in the South Hams Badger Cull we should not have our jobs, our prosperity, and our personal security held to ransom by just 0.5% who are killing badgers.

Bats are European Protected Species (EPS) due to their decline and vulnerability across Europe; this means they require legal protection that covers individual bats and their roosts. Bat crime is the second most encountered wildlife crime following raptor persecution. Wildlife crime against bats, is often in the form of roost destruction and disturbance, which is not just devastating for the species directly affected at a local level but also for wider conservation efforts. Legislation dictates that any structures or place which a bats use for shelter or protection are protected from damage or destruction whether occupied or not. This legislation has been incorporated into planning policies. This means that planning authorities have a legal obligation to consider whether bats are likely to be affected by a proposed development. They are breaking the Law's in place to build a Leisure centre which is a crime punishable by up to 6 years in prison. Please see below link to the Bat Survey proving Bat activity in the park and area's they fly which is directly where they plan to build: https://publicaccess.barnet.gov.uk/online-applications/files/372770CAD090DE52FC3D178648D0BBE7/pdf/16_6118_FUL-BAT_ACTIVITY_REPORT-3510707.pdf The other proposed site for the Leisure centre - Danegrove playing field: ( A disused field nearby) On the original proposed plans : The site is also currently under-used due as previously highlighted to its topography, poor drainage and the availability of better facilities elsewhere. Danegrove Primary School currently makes use of other recreational space and has indicated that it would have no objections in principle to the site being brought forward for enhanced sports and leisure facilities which it would also be keen to use. So why use a site that is high in Bat activity and other protected species such as Owls, Hedgehogs, Wrens and Robins?

Schwarzkopf, here's an important message for you. Animals are not ours to abuse or test products on. There are now many alternatives to test your products to make sure they're safe for use and do not pose a danger to consumers. Animals do not need to suffer for your products to pass their safety tests, get onto shelves or into consumers homes. Not only is animal testing unnecessary in the world we live in today, it's completely unethical and unimaginable that any human being could cause that amount of pain to a sentient being for the sake of cosmetics. It's important to rid of animal testing in cosmetic companies because it's unethical and unnecessary. It may also be important to know that in fact your sales could potentially rise. Veganism and activism against animal cruelty is growing every single day. Every vegan and every animal activist is a potential customer for cruelty free companies so this may be something to consider.

A planning application was submitted to Highland Council to construct an 18-hole international golf course on Coul Links, Sutherland but the applicant is not Trump Golf. The target lies within Loch Fleet Site of Special Scientific Interest, Special Protection Area for birds & international Ramsar wetland, which is predominantly estuary. Coul Links is one of very few expanses of undeveloped & largely unspoilt sand dunes remaining in Scotland, & its special wildlife & landforms are protected by those UK & European legal designations & international treaty. Development would be at odds with Highland Council’s environmental policies. The government’s conservation agency, which objected, describes SSSIs as “areas of land & water that Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) considers to best represent our natural heritage - its diversity of plants, animals & habitats, rocks & landforms, or a combination of such natural features. They are the essential building blocks of Scotland's protected areas for nature conservation … It is an offence for any person to intentionally or recklessly damage the protected natural features of an SSSI." Trump got official approval to destroy Foveran Links SSSI after exaggerating economic benefits, much shenanigans & Scottish Government intervention. That site will probably be denotified as SSSI (confirmed Dec 2020). The present speculator is Coul Links Ltd. led by Mike Keiser, President of Bandon Dunes Golf Resort, Oregon, Trump Golf’s main global rival, & entrepreneur Todd Warnock who similarly claims 'I can make this environment better'. From Oct 2015, press articles publicised proposals for the golf course. Developers blithely spoke of perceived advantages to golf & economy, ignored conservation designations but mentioned new nature trails & wildlife ‘information’. Development propaganda has not informed the public what wildlife, habitat, landforms & amenity will be destroyed & degraded. Exhibitions in Aug 2016 & Oct 2017, to elicit public votes of support, paid scant attention to wildlife & presented flawed ecology. The former relegated a habitat survey to just a tiny cryptic map at Scottie dog eye level. The less truth people know the less insensitive the plans appear. Golf course construction would be an unnatural catastrophe. It would mean excavating, recontouring, burying wet slacks, reseeding with introduced grasses, addition of plastic membranes, irrigating & intensively mowing 40.5 ha, habitat fragmentation, under-grazing & eradication of (valuable grazers & browsers) rabbits & deer, fertilising & herbiciding (& run-off), with substantial collateral damage, immediate & insidious, & bulk habitat & species translocation of 4.5 ha. dune heath, with insects & rare lichens, & 100 rare dune juniper, with displacements on receptor areas, contrary to government's 'A Habitats Translocation Policy for Britain' (2003) recently relaxed. Size & connectivity of habitats are ecologically critical, affecting species populations, diversity, interaction & survivability. Construction traffic, borrow pits & sand-moving would disturb & damage the geomorphology, hydrology (water quality & seasonality), low-nutrient profiles (on which plants rely) & habitat biodiversity over a much wider area. Fine irregular patterns of topography, micro-habitats & vegetation mosaics, like dry hummocks & wet slacks, would be destroyed, displacing specialised, scarce, rare & vulnerable plants & insects. Human disturbance would reduce bird populations in surviving habitats. Dunes naturally have cycles of erosion & deposition. Plans include greens & fairways constructed near foredune crests & a burn outlet, eliminating important species & weakening natural sea defences regardless of risks. This would probably necessitate adding a culvert & an artificial expanse of boulder rip rap, leading to beach narrowing (part National Nature Reserve) & coastal erosion nearby, the judgement of leading geomorphologist Dr Jim Hansom of Glasgow University. Compromise from 'invasive' species, the result of management neglect & rejected SNH grant aid (£230,000 since 2010), & regenerating North American lodgepole pines (misidentified by golf's ecologists as Scots pines), is being grossly exaggerated to excuse 'remediating' so much natural vegetation with manicured mediocrity. Naturalness is a key criterion in SSSI selection. Bracken, gorse, tall herbs & rank grassland support more wildlife than lawns: https://butterfly-conservation.org/files/habitat-bracken-for-butterflies.pdf. Fonseca's seed-fly, thought endemic to Sutherland dunes, requires 'weeds'. Claims about biodiversity net gain from moving fragile habitats & species, controlling Scots Pine, rare & native at Coul, & cessation of duck shooting are ludicrous. Threatened habitats outside the SSSI, in a golf 'remediation' area, are of comparable biodiversity, including Fonseca's Seed-fly, Baltic Rush, Rough Horsetail, Moonwort, Skullcap, Butterwort, Fragrant, Frog & Creeping Lady's-tresses Orchids, Small Blue butterfly & plants at their northern UK limits, like Restharrow & abundant Rock-rose, the food-plant of scarce Northern Brown Argus butterfly. The developers talk of 'sensitivity', 'minimalism', ‘naturalness’, 'utmost care' & the high repute of its designers, but Oregon track record conflicts: https://oregoncoastalliance.org/bandon-dunesbiota-bulldoze-roads  Leading dune ecologist Dr Tom Dargie describes the developer’s surveys & Environmental Statement as ‘unfit for purpose’. He judges the site worthy of (European) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) status, which would have prevented such development being considered.  There is a superfluity of coastal golf courses in Scotland, many undersubscribed, some closing, mostly eroding. The environmentally responsible option is to avoid development within such special, rare & fragile habitats.

This is important because the UK is one of the least wooded countries within the whole of Europe. The country was completly covered in trees when the first people arrived. Now only 13% of our land area is wooded. Woodland is the naturally occuring habitat for this country. Fields, wildflowers, breakland and heathland although great for wildlife are habitats that arose in the abscense of our woodlands. Without woodlands on our east coast the land is being lost to the sea due to erosion. Without woodlands in our uplands the soil and wildlife are suffering amd floods downstream in our urban areas are rife. Most of the UK' indigenous biodiversity resides in our wooded areas because that is the natural habitat they would have had in this country before the great clearances of the forests. Surely for a country which is naturally of woodland habitat it is the duty of the Government to make sure there is plenty of this rich habitat left and that it expands. -Woodlands hold our greatest biodiversity. -Woodlands act as a windbreak (when enough of them) so should reduce effects of wind on urban areas. -They are brilliant places for people to escape to. -Trees help give us clean air and beautify the landscape. -They slow down and in some cases prevent soil erosion. -Trees help to prevent flooding by slowing down the process of water falling as rain getting to the sea. I believe if this cannot be done then the east coast of the country should at least be focused on. We loose meters of land a year to the North sea on the Holderness coast due to soil erosion. Houses cant be built on the cliffs, its a danger for people to be there. With the addition of trees the soil wound be bound together, it would be less saturated and as a result erosion would be a fraction of the rate it is now.