Challenges, Nature miracles, Trosa förbifart/Infart Västra, Trosa is the place

Låt örnen flyga – Where eagles fly

Sea Eagle at Käftudden Trosa
Sea Eagle at Käftudden Trosa
For English readers, look below the Swedish text

Naturskyddsföreningen får stöd av hundratalet boende på Tureholmshalvön

Naturskyddsföreningens begäran till Länsstyrelsen att ompröva beslutet om att inte göra någon miljökonsekvensbeskrivning för projekt Infart Västra Trosa får nu stöd av 132 boende och två föreningar på Tureholmshalvön Gillbergsvik/Käftudden, som insänt en skrivelse till Länsstyrelsen.

Exploateringen av Tureholmshalvön och Västra Trosa är numera en förutsättning för att vägen ska byggas enligt kommunens finansieringsbeslut.

Tureholmshalvön håller höga naturvärden med flertalet rödlistade arter, däribland havsörnarna som kommunen använder i sin reklam. Deras livsmiljö hotas nu av den exploatering kommunen och halvöns största markägare har tänkt sig genomföra.

Exploateringsplanerna strider mot gällande praxis för artskyddet. En miljökonsekvensbeskrivning bör göras och omfatta även de exploateringsområden som nu är ihopkopplade med vägprojektet.

Här kan ni läsa skrivelsen i sin helhet (engelsk version kommer efter den svenska texten)

20170108-exploateringen-av-tureholmshalvo%cc%88n-och-infart-va%cc%88stra-trosa-beho%cc%88ver-en-miljo%cc%88konsekvensbeskrivning_sida_1

20170108-exploateringen-av-tureholmshalvo%cc%88n-och-infart-va%cc%88stra-trosa-beho%cc%88ver-en-miljo%cc%88konsekvensbeskrivning_sida_2

20170108-exploateringen-av-tureholmshalvo%cc%88n-och-infart-va%cc%88stra-trosa-beho%cc%88ver-en-miljo%cc%88konsekvensbeskrivning_sida_3

Trosaskogen Tureholmshalvön

Vill ni också berätta för Länsstyrelsen, Trosa kommun och Trafikverket att projektet Trosa förbifart/Infart Västra Trosa samt exploateringsplanerna för västra Trosa och Tureholmshalvön behöver en miljökonsekvensbeskrivning?

Kontakta Länsstyrelsen och ange ärendenummer: 7648-2016, epost: sodermanland@lansstyrelsen.se, Trosa kommun: trosa@trosa.se, Trafikverket: investeringsprojekt@trafikverket.se

Har ni frågor om ovanstående skrivelse kan ni e-posta mig på anna@fargaregarden.se

Vill ni läsa Naturskyddsföreningens skrivelse kan ni göra det HÄR.

“Låt örnen flyga…” (lånat av Evert Taube från sången Änglamark)

Sea Eagle at Käftudden Trosa
Sea Eagle at Käftudden Trosa

SSNC is supported by 132 citizens on Tureholm Peninsula

SSNC request to the County Board to reconsider the decision not to make an environmental impact assessment for projects Trosa new big road now receive the support of 132 residents and two compounds on Tureholm Peninsula Gillbergsvik / Käftudden, as submissions a letter to the County Board.

The exploitation of Tureholm Peninsula and Trosa new big road is now a prerequisite for the road to be built according to the municipality’s funding decisions.

Tureholm Peninsula is high conservation with several endangered species, including sea eagles that the municipality uses in its advertising. Their habitat is now threatened by the exploitation municipality and the peninsula’s largest landowners have imagined implement.

Exploitation plans contrary to current practice for species protection. An environmental impact assessment should be made and include the development areas which are now paired with the road project

Here´s a googletranslation of the letter to the authorities:

THE EXPLOITATION OF TUREHOLM PENINSULA AND TROSA NEW BIG ROAD NEED AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

To the County Board with a copy to Trosa muncipality and Traffic Authorities from property owners in Käftuddsvägen, Tureholm Peninsula, Trosa

SSNC has sent a request about reconsideration of the County Administrative Board’s decision regarding the significant environmental impacts during the construction of Trosa new big road, Decision 10.02.2012 No. 343-3342-2012 and the county administrative board has decided to reject the request. Case 343-7648-2016.

Landowner To Trosa Forest 1: 1 has submitted a plan inquiry to Trosa regarding construction of 100 residential At Gillbergsvik and a marina for 100-150 boats in Gillisviken, the Property owners in the area have therefore learned that the plans hanger together with the road project Trosa new big road and further exploitation of Tureholm Peninsula planned in big scale.

SSNC request is correct becaus the road project now depends entirely on whether the development plans of the Western Trosa and now available Tureholm peninsula is feasible. Trosa municipality financing decision involves the exploitation of Western Trosa and Tureholm Peninsula is necessary to build the road, not the other way around as the agreement with the Traffic anger that the way will enable the expansion of Western Trosa.

We believe that these points mean that en environmental assessment of the western entrance and exploitation plans for Tureholm Peninsula should be done immediately:
– Area as covered by road construction concern integrated only to those investigated, 60 have I Hungaskogen available but more than 840 recipients have filed Tureholm Peninsula.

– General Plan 2015 has not been preceded by any depth study of Tureholm Peninsula, that can show no natural disturbed damaged or destroyed in and with such a strong Exploitation as municipality plans. En environmental impact study for the implementation of the new road should therefore cover available the entire Tureholm Peninsula.

– Tureholm Peninsula have high natural value with a number of red-listed species, for example sea eagles, as Trosa uses in its advertising for the municipality. During a severe exploitation of Tureholm peninsula runs the risk of being disturbed out completely, something as not compatible with prevailing legislation on the protection of species where the sea eagle is indicative of the practice.

– Large parts of Tureholm Peninsula is close to Askö nature reserves and coastal areas also constitutes a reference area for Askö as has been able to maintain long-standing measurement series tack to the pristine environment. The areas are now threatened due to development plans. Evidenced According to the case covered areas available nearby sanctuary of the protective provisions.

– A Location at Käftudden far out into Tureholm Peninsula has been subject to reserve-Investigation, but put on hold because the landowner to Trosa Forest 1: 1 opposed reserve formation. It suggests the area Keeps High natural value and have conservation value nature. Käftudden mentioned by the municipality as a future development area in the financing decision for the road project. It is not compatible with current environmental legislation.

– General Plan 2015 indicates nowhere to Tureholm Peninsula and Western Trosa will account for 89% of total exploitation of the municipality for the next 20 years. It is indicated only in the financing decision for the road project. The decision was taken without there been any investigation into the environmental impact of such a load of Tureholm Peninsula .. At the increased cost of road exploitation plans will need to be expanded further, resulting in even greater pressure on natural areas.

– Tureholm Peninsula’s largest landowners (Trosa Forest 1: 1) is the only major landowners who commented positively on the cofinancing of infrastructure project, which means that development plans for Tureholm Peninsula will relate bebyggande of Trosa Forest 1: 1 in the main. Trosa Forest 1: 1 covers 840 ha of Tureholm peninsula, map attached.

– Traffic on Utterviks road will increase by 129%, according to the Swedish Transport Administration in the entrance West Trosa. It will affect the environment through increased noise and emissions, and increased disturbance of including eagles who regularly reside in the area.

– General Plan 2015 reporting on a map (page 96 of the MCP) to urban pressure on the areas marked with red lines. The scope of the planned buildings can not be seen. Dash marks also go to many places of beach protected areas. Some other indications that the region will account for 89% of the growth target is not in the comprehensive plan. The public has thus not been able to influence municipal development plans Tureholm Peninsula.

– Development of an area far from the town of Trosa means demands on infrastructure such as schools, preschools, communications, healthcare and water and sanitation. Such expansion will affect the environment negatively.

– Tureholm peninsula covered in large part by expanded shore of a decision by the Administrative Board. This suggests that high natural values have been inventoried.

– Development plans at Gillbergsvik means 140% increase in the housing stock in the area and despite the fact that the plans have been known to the municipality for a long time, they have not been specified in the Comprehensive Plan 2015.

– Gillberg’s plans have already begun to be realized by the landowner by logging in protected areas beach. Environmental Exploratory dives have been carried out despite the fact that no plan process has been initiated by the municipality. An informal positive initial reply seems to have been given without hearing the affected property owners in the area.

– Tureholm Peninsula’s natural landscape serves as air purifiers and air conditioners to urban areas, which have become increasingly important to maintain because the eastern Trosa has lost a large part of the air purifying natural areas.

– Tureholm Peninsula nature constitutes today an undisturbed area for many worth protecting animal and plant species and is a frequently visited the quiet recreation area for residents and visitors. The outer archipelago can be reached even by those who do not have their own boat. The municipal funding for the Western entrance with attached development plans Tureholm area means that the public stands to lose 927,000 to 1,644,000 square meters of natural landscape to live in.

– The urbanization of Tureholm peninsula means that today’s unique and worth protecting nature is lost for all future generations.

Review of decisions concerning significant environmental impacts, or the admission of new environmental impact assessment, in view of the new conditions that prevail, should therefore be also believe we are.

Property at Käftuddsvägen, Gillberg’s area on Tureholm Peninsula.
Appendix of names behind this letter is attached.

Trosa January 8, 2017

So let the sea eagle live!

If you have questions about the letter you can email me at anna@fargaregarden.se

Anna

Sea Eagle at Käftudden Trosa
Sea Eagle at Käftudden Trosa
Advertisements

19 thoughts on “Låt örnen flyga – Where eagles fly”

    1. Yes it is. There are lots of people who care for nature and they supported this letter immediately. Mankind can be good sometimes:)
      Now, lets hope we have authorities that also care for nature. To convince them is the hardest part.

      Liked by 1 person

  1. Just following up and enjoying looking in more detail at your blog. I am thinking of adding Trosa into my animal sags for the 21st century. My weasel and black kite go to Linnes Garden and Tofslindalen and Dalarna if I remember correctly. I don’t tend to use the real names but look up nature reserves ! Hope your peninsular can be saved for the sea eagles and for those who live and visit Trosa.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. We try our very best to get the politicians to realize the value of nature. It is not easy, but we will keep trying. What a lovely idea to take inspiration from Trosa nature.

      Liked by 1 person

What do you say? / Vad säger du om detta?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.