Neighbour Response Summary

Planning Application Ref: R/85/51A/GDO Location: Land to the south east of existing agricultural buildings off High Lane,West Scrafton,Leyburn Proposed Development: Application for prior approval under Part 16 of Schedule 2 to the Town & Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 as amended by the Town & Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) (Amendment) (no.2) Order 2016 and in accordance with the electronic communications code under the Telecommunications Act 1984 Schedule 2 as amended by the Communications Act 2003 for the installation of a 17m wooden utility Pole (15m above ground level) with mobile communications antenna and equipment cabinet Case Officer: Andrew Bishop Valid Date: 08-Dec-2020 Application Type: GDO - Prior Approval Telecommunications

Neighbour Responses Harriet Corner 1,Coverham Abbey,Coverham Abbey,Middleham,Leyburn,North Yorkshire,DL8 4RL Having spoken to next door neighbours to this application at Moorhen Farm,they tell me that there is excellent broadband and 4g service ALREADY in this particular part of the Dale,so why is this trial of any benefit to residents of Coverdale?

Harriet Corner 1,Coverham Abbey,Coverham Abbey,Middleham,Leyburn,North Yorkshire,DL8 4RL I am writing,having already commented several times on your planning portal for this application (which I gather has crashed) to express my strong objection to this mast.

Firstly,how can the YDNP,who are meant to be protectors of this unbelievably precious Dale,think that it is alright for this trial to take place,with its masts and ancillary infrastructure. The ecology and birdlife in the SSSi next door to this site includes a nesting site for a hen harrier,amongst many other rare species and the damage that EMF exposure would do to this could be catastrophic and irreversible.

Having spoken to the next door neighbours to this application at Moorhen Farm (who I see from the application incredibly haven’t been consulted for their views),they tell me that there is already excellent broadband and 4G service available in this particular part of the Dale and that they are seriously concerned about the health risks of living with their four young children so close to a mast and that they would even consider moving away.

I urge you to please stop this rollout,until a proper detailed consultation has happened,involving ALL residents of this Dale (I only knew about his by reading in the newspaper about it,after the decision had been taken by Middleham Town Council for Coverdale to take part in this trial). Parish Councils also have not been given the full picture of what this trial entails.

Alan Jones Wellhouse,Horsehouse,Leyburn,North Yorkshire Quickline communications is the lead partner of a consortium named 'MANY'. MANY has not performed a proper consultation and has provided false and misleading information at parish council meetings. There is written evidence of this which I have already drawn to NYCC's attention. MANY has not performed a systematic need/benefit/risk analysis but supplanted it with an approach focused on storytelling. This approach is exemplified by a piece of low quality output co-authored by a member of the Lancaster University Management School,and member of MANY,titled 'Performing a Myth to Make a Market'. Anyone wanting to form an opinion of the quality of MANY's operations could start with this. I have written evidence that MANY classifies concerned residents who raise objections to its proposals as 'anti 5G campaigners' - while simultaneously proclaiming its 'ethical' approach. MANY is happy to count ignorance or confusion as informed consent. This project should be paused and examined in closer detail to assess its all-round fitness for a national park,to assess alternatives,and to examine the methods used by MANY. Alan Jones Wellhouse,Horsehouse,Leyburn,North Yorkshire I am aware of the responsible line taken by planning officers to postpone a decision on the mast at West Scrafton (R/85/51A/GDO). This gives concerned residents an opportunity to engage Neil Heseltine and other members of the Planning Committee to bring attention to the project behind the application.

In the meantime,and purely as a matter of information,I want to forward the above attachment to you. The three-page article in the December 2018 issue of The Lancet raises points which may bring the establishment of a "5G test bed" into conflict with the primary statutory purpose of a national park. The short article,which is an exemplar of the large hinterland of rational doubt surrounding the wisdom of a vast and uncritical expansion in wireless communications,is sobering and worth reading in its entirety but I have picked out a couple of quotes.

'Evidence also exists of the effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation on flora and fauna. For example,the reported global reduction in bees and other insects is plausibly linked to the increased radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation in the environment.'

'It has been widely claimed that radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation,being non-ionising radiation,does not possess enough photon energy to cause DNA damage. This has now been proven wrong experimentally.'

'A recent evaluation of 2266 studies (including in-vitro and in-vivo studies in human,animal,and plant experimental systems and population studies) found that most studies (n=1546,68∙2%) have demonstrated significant biological or health effects associated with exposure to anthropogenic electromagnetic fields.' N Corner Coverham Abbey Coverham It has come to my attention that submissions made by residents regarding the above planning application might have gone ‘missing’. This in itself seems an extraordinary state of affairs,but in light of what has been taking place and what is proposed to take place in Coverdale regarding this entire scheme,maybe not wholly surprising.

I would like to place on record my objection to the above planning application.

I have lived in Coverdale for the vast majority of my life. It is a very special place indeed. Such a special place,that it has been included in the Yorkshire Dales National Park in the first instance. Part of my farm is also an SSSI. The part nearby which you are considering erecting a very high telecommunication structure. It begs the question of just how much protection you would need to have in this country,if this application is allowed to go ahead...... ?

All of us who have the privilege of living in the YDNP know that with that privilege comes restriction,primarily those relating to planning. There is not one of us who does not understand this,and most of us have indeed fallen foul of those close restrictions whenever we ask for planning permission.

Here we seem to have a situation whereby a telecommunications system,with the attendant visual intrusion,is being allowed to go ahead with a stunning lack of consultation with local residents and it seems to have the National Park’s blessing !

We all know how these things start - oh,just one mast please,then three,then...... how many would there need to be before this beautiful dale is utterly changed in character forever ? What if the plan is to have them every three hundred metres ?

This entire roll out needs the brake putting on it,until the massive ramifications are truly understood. Let me say at this stage that I am not a natural ‘objector’ and I understand that there will be different views to mine in the resident body,but surely Coverdale is a completely inappropriate place to run this sort of ‘experiment’ ?

Why is it in a National Park ? Why is a substantial part of my farm an SSSI ? Why do people visit Coverdale ? Please consider these questions when considering this application.

J Harrison-Topham Cotescue Park,Middleham I am sending this objection by email as the planning portal is not working.

I am writing on two counts:

1. As clerk to the parish council of Coverham and Agglethorpe we have not been consulted. A meeting with MANY was initiated by me in December which failed to answer many queries and they are carrying out further consultations and presentations in the early part of this year and I do not think it appropriate for a consent to be given until the local parishes have been properly consulted. You say that all parishes are supportive - this is not true and some concerned inhabitants from the other parishes have been in touch following my December zoom meeting with MANY saying that they did not know anything about the project which clearly shows that some parish councils have NOT completed the consultation process properly.

2. As the owner of the Caldbergh Estate (approx 1.5 miles) from West Scrafton I have not been approached or consulted. I have concerns on many fronts not least the ecological impact on Caldbergh Moor which is part of the Nidderdale SSSI - the largest and most important example of heather moorland in Western Europe. It is home to some of the most endangered birds and insects. Given the importance of this area I am astounded that neither the National Park nor MANY see fit to consult with the landowners of the SSSI.

From the presentation I have seen by MANY it was full of inaccuracies and untruths and I would be horrified that the National Park should be considering approval without a full exercise and consultation with the local communities and land owners.

Please register my objection - I look forward a full consultation.

S Holden No address given I am herewith registering my objection to the installation of the West Scrafton 15m utility pole. This is a completely inappropriate and unsightly intrusion into the National Park. It is also only 300m from heather land which is classified as the highest protected category of moorland that there is. Beamed EMR is now understood to be damaging to both flora and fauna,as well as insects,& most crucially pollinators,on whose health our very lives depend.

Partially to due to Covid restrictions the MANY project representatives have admitted there has been less than adequate consultation about the intention,never mind the details of this project,the whole of which should now be put on hold until adequate consultation has taken place. It appears we don't even have until 12th Jan to submit our objections,as publicised on the planning portal,another reason for this specific decision to be postponed.

I appreciate that hitherto,health concerns - of which there are many - have not been permitted as reasons for objections to such planning applications. However,a Dutch court has recently over-ruled this consideration,which now sets a precedent for other countries to take health concerns on board. Many of us concerned about this application are EMF sensitive and concerned that people living,working or walking anywhere near this mast will be unable to tolerate the beamed radiation coming from it.

I would also like to register that this letter has been very rushed,as until half an hour ago,I was under the impression that we had until 12th to submit objections that would have been a bit more carefully and fully constructed.

For the above reasons and more,I strongly recommend this planning application be refused.

R Dudley Edwards Kings Cottage Reeth I am writing to submit my objections to the application for the instillation of the Mast at West Scrafton.

There have been many independent studies linking wireless radiation exposure to a number of serious health conditions including Cancer and Infertility. Pregnant women,babies and the elderly are particularly at risk. I’m sure you would not want to have this legacy on your conscience.

5G will not only penetrate the bodies of humans but also bees birds animals and trees. This whole project is shortsighted both agriculturally (Imagine the response when local farmers discover what’s happening to their livestock) and economically I believe potential tourists would give the Yorkshire Dales a wide birth once more facts come to light. Please for the sake of future generations call a halt to this.

C Horner 14,Wensleydale Avenue,Leyburn,North Yorkshire,DL8 5SD I have been notified that without prior warning,placement of objections to the High Lane,West Scrafton mast planning application ,is now closing this evening. It was my understanding that the closure date on the planning portal stated the 12th January and I would be grateful if you could explain why the closure is being rushed through,as I now am required to rush my objections? There is great alarm amidst the community regarding the mast application. This may have been avoided if a proper due consultation process had been fulfilled. As it stands,there are no references to any such process available. Residents are entitled to be involved in discussion regarding change to their local environment that will impact upon their lives. There is not any way that a I5m wooden pole equipped with an equipment cabinet will blend into the moorland landscape. It’s only natural to question what attributes it could possibly bring within the Dales National Park. What springs immediately to my mind,is risk. This will be high risk. 1 The mast will be situated in close proximity to a farm dwelling. That is completely unacceptable. Even if the directional aspect of the mast is faced opposing the dwelling,how will the occupants be expected to navigate their lives around this without a guaranteed limit of exposure to dangerous high levels of electromagnetic radiation? The additional ubiquitous nature of the radiation also will make it impossible for other residents situated nearby to avoid. It will deter visitors to the area. This cannot have been considered,yet the council is responsible to ensure the wellbeing of all of the citizens within its jurisdiction. 2 A grave concern is that neighbouring moorland is classified as SSSI,the highest category for protected moorland. We have this in place for good reason. The moorland is a living conservation area and commands the highest respect. We have no right to endanger the wildlife environment. 3 There has been no informed discussion regarding the proposed power of the installed mast. The residents have no reference to technical data of the intentioned frequencies,or if there will be future plans to upgrade the mast to increase the range or functionality. The mast will pose a potential fire risk,which in the event of such would be completely devastating to the protected area. 4 A phone mast creates a negative impact on property sales in the district. That will also impact negatively on farming land. With strong objection.

K Chaytor-Norris I am writing to submit my objections to the application for the installation of a 17m wooden utility Pole (15m above ground level) with mobile communications antenna and equipment cabinet being erected at High Lane,West Scrafton. I wish to submit a formal letter objecting to the proposed works,however due to difficulties with the planning portal not allowing me to gain access to the supporting documents please see the below. I am aware that Quickline did not consult West Witton Parish Council and in fact only spoke to two councillors in the process,meaning there was no record of discussion had with the full Parish and therefore the application is misleading. The consultation carried out does also not include neighbours who are displeased at the least to see this application arise and would be most upset if the application was granted. In putting forward this objection to the above mast,I acknowledge that current planning law makes it difficult to take into consideration any reasons opposing such applications other than those of siting and visual amenity,although I will outline these issues,I also provide some indication of why thus limited set of valid objections is problematic. It will not only show health effects of microwave radiation can be severe but also that there is legal ways to challenge the law’s limitations that we intend to draw upon should the mast be approved. The pole will be visible from some distance and thus disturbing the sightline,the number of apparatus’ listed above will clearly not be possible to camouflage with it being located in an open area. The description of the site on the application documents is misleading. It suggests that there are no residents near the mast,when there is a farmhouse alone situated in close proximity. We have no information as to the area of the exclusion zone within which residences and other inhabited buildings are not permitted. However,it appears that this mast is to be situated near houses,some inhabited by frail elderly persons and others by young children. Moreover,the placement of the proposed 5G telecommunications tower near houses,will effectively debar all those with electrical sensitivity from working,living and walking in the vicinity,including on the nearby Greenway. “Wellbeing for all sections of the community” will,therefore,clearly be contravened (NPPF 2019 Section 8,para 92). Experience elsewhere shows that property prices are likely to fall by some 20% in the vicinity of the mast,thus seriously disadvantaging those living near it. While writing,my further understanding of this matter is that it is mandatory that the Council and the applicant consider the possible impact of mobile phone masts,most especially 5G,on schools in the area and their pupils. It is within your own powers as a council to make sure our children are safe. Sustainability demands that precaution. So please take this into full consideration. Finally,I would urge you to consider these points with a view to refusing this application or,at the very least,for further information to be requested from the applicant to provide clarification in the form of the missing technical reports.

L Terry Farmoor Services LLP,Estate Officer,Swinithwaite,Leyburn,North Yorkshire,DL8 4UH I am writing to submit my objections to the application for the installation of a 17m wooden utility Pole (15m above ground level) with mobile communications antenna and equipment cabinet being erected at High Lane,West Scrafton.

I wish to submit a formal letter objecting to the proposed works,however due to difficulties with the planning portal not allowing me to gain access to the supporting documents please see the below.

I am aware that Quickline did not consult West Witton Parish Council and in fact only spoke to two councillors in the process,meaning there was no record of discussion had with the full Parish and therefore the application is misleading. The consultation carried out does also not include neighbours who are displeased at the least to see this application arise and would be most upset if the application was granted.

In putting forward this objection to the above mast,I acknowledge that current planning law makes it difficult to take into consideration any reasons opposing such applications other than those of siting and visual amenity,although I will outline these issues,I also provide some indication of why thus limited set of valid objections is problematic. It will not only show health effects of microwave radiation can be severe but also that there is legal ways to challenge the law’s limitations that we intend to draw upon should the mast be approved.

The pole will be visible from some distance and thus disturbing the sightline,the number of apparatus’ listed above will clearly not be possible to camouflage with it being located in an open area. The description of the site on the application documents is misleading. It suggests that there are no residents near the mast,when there is a farmhouse alone situated in close proximity.

We have no information as to the area of the exclusion zone within which residences and other inhabited buildings are not permitted. However,it appears that this mast is to be situated near houses,some inhabited by frail elderly persons and others by young children.

Moreover,the placement of the proposed 5G telecommunications tower near houses,will effectively debar all those with electrical sensitivity from working,living and walking in the vicinity,including on the nearby Greenway. “Wellbeing for all sections of the community” will,therefore,clearly be contravened (NPPF 2019 Section 8,para 92).

Experience elsewhere shows that property prices are likely to fall by some 20% in the vicinity of the mast,thus seriously disadvantaging those living near it.

While writing,my further understanding of this matter is that it is mandatory that the Council and the applicant consider the possible impact of mobile phone masts,most especially 5G,on schools in the area and their pupils. It is within your own powers as a council to make sure our children are safe. Sustainability demands that precaution. So please take this into full consideration.

Finally,I would urge you to consider these points with a view to refusing this application or,at the very least,for further information to be requested from the applicant to provide clarification in the form of the missing technical reports.

R Harrison-Topham Ashes Farm Caldbergh Following our conversation this afternoon I thought it would be helpful if I was to give you some thoughts in relation to the above planning application. I write as parish clerk to the Caldbergh with East Scrafton parish meeting and,indeed,in a personal capacity as well.

The agricultural valuers Association ('CAAV') have recently issued a note setting out information which landowners thinking of hosting a telecommunications mast should expect to have. CAAV are a long-standing reputable professional organisation and their comments merit consideration. Accordingly I attach a copy of the note extracted from their website.

The MANY proposal is described as a 'testbed' for a limited period of some two years. In principle,the proposed mast must therefore be regarded as a temporary structure which should either be removed on completion of the test period or subject to a new application.

One would normally expect that a comprehensive plan for connectivity of residents of the area should be presented and that this should compare the merits and costs of the various technologies before submitting a recommendation. No such plan currently seems to exist but it should be an essential precondition for any planning application at the end of the initial period. At the moment various departments of state pursue their own priorities,the Home Office with an emergency services plan,and the DCMS with the rural testbed while DEFRA hovers in the background thinking about Landscape Commissions. Hopefully some order will ultimately be imposed on this chaos.

There are obvious objections to the proposed telecommunications mast. There is a parallel application at a nearby site for an emergency services mast. No doubt the Authority will examine the feasibility of combining the two applications. Both applications envisage 15 m masts which will be unduly prominent in the places proposed. The average Telegraph post in the Dale is between half and two thirds this height. Neither mast should exceed the height of surrounding trees or buildings.

Two recent planning applications in Coverdale,that for the so-called 'giraffe house' at Melmerby and the unauthorised tower building at the Forbidden Corner,were both turned down on appeal in large part because of their prominence in height terms.

I have no special knowledge of the dangers of radiation,non-ionising or otherwise. However it seems clear that further scientific work is required before a satisfactory consensus can be achieved. Any approval for a mast of this nature should therefore allow for its subsequent withdrawal if it emerged that the radiation proposed would significantly adversely affect the achievement of the national parks first statutory objective. For example West Scrafton is close to a newly established lek for black grouse,a development sponsored by the Authority,and much recent treeplanting at Caldbergh further down the Dale was carried out by me to provide part of the varied habitat required by these birds. We have recently seen Grey hens at Caldbergh and it would be a tragedy if migration down the Dale was to be inhibited by radiation from a wireless mast. Caldbergh is also a summer site for beehives whose residents create excellent honey.

I would also suggest that a condition of any planning approval should be to submit details of any change in the equipment on the mast and that such a change should itself need to be approved.

I hope that these comments are helpful.

I Harley No address given I wish to add my voice of objection in support of the objection letter you have received from Lauren Terry. I am also disappointed that there appear to be shifting sands,ie dates by which objections should be notified. Please do not dismiss these concerns as the concerns of nutcases. The scientific evidence is becoming clearer and clearer. The methods by which we achieve connectivity should be reassessed.

J Brown Roova House,West Scrafton I wish to express concern about the process of seeking planning consent in this case,because inadequacies in this process have combined to make impossible a rational decision about the application itself. The prolonged consequences of the Covid-19 pandemic and the recent distractions of the Christmas/New Year celebrations have combined to limit significantly knowledge generally of the potential implications of the proposal. Indeed,an objective view of the process might lead an impartial observer to wonder whether or not this inauspicious timing was deliberate. Certainly,the coincident failure of the Planning Portal might raise concerns about the impartiality of the planning process in this case.

J Brown Roova House,West Scrafton As an addendum to my e-mail,yesterday,about the planning process for the mobile telephone mast proposed in West Scrafton, attached,below this e-mail,is my e-mail to your colleague,David Snelson,to which there has been,to date,no response.

This delay in response amplifies my concern about the planning process for the proposed mast.

There is a wide range of uncertainty about the consequences of a 5G telephone system and what isn't clear is whether or not approval for the mast,operating initially at 4G,could facilitate subsequent operation at 5G without any further consent being necessary. In addition,I am concerned about the capacity of the National Park to assess the detail of technical concerns about 5G operation without access to independent specialist advice separate,completely,from assurances provided by the applicant.

I can understand the desire to enhance mobile telephony within the County and,specifically,within the National Park. Nonetheless,there appears to be some evidence already that advice provided by NYCC and MANY may not be correct...at least in some key areas. In this context,it seems to me imperative that there is an opportunity for technical detail to be assessed independently by suitably qualified and experienced persons. This should,at least focus attention on specific,real concerns rather than a general disquiet about lack of detail.

L James No address given I strongly object to any 5G mast in North Yorkshire and in fact the whole of the UK. H Alderson Scar House,Arkleside,Leyburn,North Yorkshire,DL8 4TU My objection is as follows: 1. Lack of consultation or engagement with the entire Coverdale Community. As a resident of Coverdale High Dale I was first made aware of the 5G project via a community information leaflet from a concerned resident. Having attended an ad-hoc meeting with MANY organised for the Agglethorpe and Coverham Parish in December,I was alarmed to hear that MANY are citing majority support for this project when infact many people in the Dale are not even aware of it. During this MANY meeting,the research Head for the project,Katy Mason,commented that they were using a data sampling technique of 'Snowballing'. 'Snowballing' is a non-probability based sampling method whereby research subjects recommend other subjects to be interviewed. Hardly,surprising therefore,that the results of the research indicate support for the 5G project...... It would seem unreasonable to me that the YDNP should grant planning to this project when the YDNP has itself had to undergo rigorous process in order to attain the recent Dark Sky status.

2. Profileration of masts across the Dale During the last 12 months a mast has appeared at Braidley and one is currently being erected at Coverhead. We have been told that these masts are for the use of the Emergency Services only. The proposed mast for the 5G project at West Scrafton (together with the additional 2 masts required by this test project) gives 5 masts across the Dale. I urge you as protectors of this unique and beautiful Dale to view this application in context with the other masts currently in situ. Surely a cohesive approach to telecommunications is what is required here?

3. Detriment to health and the environment MANY cite that there is no detriment to health or the environment from 5G technology. There are others that counter this and cite scientific studies to suggest that EMF associated with 5G is damaging. I feel that this planning application should be considered using independent specialists in this field and not relying soley on the submissions by MANY.

M Sparrow Thirns Farmhouse,Healaugh See full response attached. A Currie I am writing to register my strong objection to the installation of a 17m wooden utility pole [15m above ground level] with mobile communications antenna and equipment cabinet being erected at High Lane,West Scrafton. Since the closing date on the Planning Portal is Tuesday 12th Jan,I hope you will acknowledge receipt of these comments today and take them into account.

Siting and visual impact - This pole is a significant visual intrusion into this magnificent section of Coverdale,not only to the local residents,but also to the large number of holiday makers and walkers who visit the area specifically to enjoy its cstunning beauty.

Health - Whilst Planning has hitherto not been accustomed to taking health considerations into account,a recent Dutch Court Hearing has established that health issues,well below ICNIRP guidelines,can indeed be included as considerations alongside siting and visual impacts in planning considerations for telecommunications poles. There are hundreds of easily-found peer-reviewed scientific papers which evidence the harm EMR does to human beings. ICNIRP guidelines do not include any mention of the potential dangers to those with metal implants. Special Interest consideration - this pole would stand 300m from SSSI classified moorland heather. Also easily found on the internet are numerous papers detailing the EMR harm to flora,fauna,insects and particularly pollinators,on which our very future depends. Local residents - this is not the safest way of improving internet coverage for local residents,if indeed they require it. Additional Dangers - this type of utility pole has been known to ignite,which would result in hazardous moorland fires .

I hope you will see fit,to give the above your serious consideration.

S Leach See attached response. J Maddan Please can I add my objection to the above mast. As a community we think there should be a pause while all the evidence is scrutinised about what the MANY project is really about and whether it is what is wanted by the local community. The so called consultation has been almost non existent despite what MANY has claimed.

The ecological impact from EMR is now well documented and this infrastructure seems wholly inappropriate and unnecessary in such a remote and beautiful part of the Dales landscape. Please can the precautionary principle be applied until all the evidence is looked into. There is little evidence showing 5 G is safe except the sayso of the industry.

There are some very interesting zoom presentations into the science and possible hazards held most Thursday evenings 6 pm with answers and questions.These are being done to mainly give locals an insight into what 5G is etc and the latest science on EMR Mike Sparrow was a keynote speaker on this issue at the recent Planet in Crisis Let me know if this would be of interest.

I am sure a presentation could be arranged for your planning department and any other park official who maybe interested in the issues involved. M Grayson County Hall Northallerton North Yorkshire DL8 8DG Mark has forwarded onto me the your email informing him of the letters against the proposed infrastructure at West Scafton.

As the project manager for North Yorkshire County Council on this project I would like to update you on the project and the response that we have received from within the community.

The application is related to the Mobile Access North Yorkshire (MANY) project which is part of the government funded Rural Connected Communities testbed and trials project,which is looking into the benefits that improved ultrafast broadband and mobile coverage can bring to communities.

Prior to Mark submitting the application the project received support from the following seven parish councils with whom we engaged; Carlton,Melmerby,West Witton,Caldberg with East Scrafton,West Scrafton,Middleham and Leyburn. During several of the parish meetings we came up against the anti 5G campaigners however the only parish who we did not receive support from is Coverham with Agglethorpe. However we do have support from a number of parishioners and businesses within this parish.

The anti 5G campaigners have leafleted the whole of the area spreading misinformation about the project,5G and what we are trying to do in the area.

The project has planned a further engagement events for the beginning of February to further inform the communities about the project.

The project has carried out a number of interviews with residents who are struggling with the lack of digital connectivity,both mobile and broadband which is effecting their daily lives and see it only getting worse as everything becomes digital.

Can you advise if there is anything that we can do to support this application further.

Tracy Harker,West Witton Parish Council West Witton Parish Council supports this application and believes that improvements in connectivity and participation in the MANY 5G trial will have many benefits to residents and businesses in Coverdale and West Witton Parish. it could encourage young people to stay,or move to the area and be of benefit to people who run businesses or work from home. Access to help from the emergency services would be improved in remote areas with improved 5G access. Sarah Close Kellgill Farm,Agglethorpe,DL8 4TN I am writing in support of the planning application ref: R/85/51A/GDO for a telecommunications mast to be constructed at High Lane,West Scrafton,Leyburn. My family are residents of Coverdale who would significantly benefit from improved mobile and broadband connections. We currently have a substandard broadband service,and there is no prospect of this being improved in the near future. We feel disadvantaged,and are unhappy that we pay the same as everyone else across the Country,for a wholly unacceptable signal. The mobile signal is no better; we are restricted to certain providers,due to a very low signal strength. We know where to stand on the farm where we can get a signal,but these places are very few. As farmers (which is classed as one of the most dangerous occupations),we require a better service and signal,if an accident did occur we would be unable to call for help,due to the weak signal across most of our farm. It also means we cannot update systems online on and around the farm,which is something the Government are pushing for. We are still mostly paper based,due to not trusting the connectivity and stability of the infrastructure. I also work,and in recent months this has been wholly from home,I am unable to gain entry to my work systems,attend online meetings,and open documents in a timely manner,due to the terrible signal. This is not professional and is very frustrating. In this day and age,we should be able to work remotely and have the systems in place to do so. Home schooling is also a challenge and if our son did not already go to school as a child of key workers,he would have to attend as a disadvantaged child due to the terrible connectivity,which means we are unable to log onto his online classes. The MANY project offers us an opportunity to do something about it. Some parts of Coverdale are lucky enough to have fibre to the premises (unfortunately this does not include us),and it cannot be relied on to provide total coverage and there are many properties that will not get any increase in speeds or new infrastructure for a long time. Like most parts of the UK,communication needs to be a mixture of both good broadband and mobile coverage. The MANY project has carried out significant community engagement. This project gives us an opportunity to change Coverdale for the better,whilst influencing future Government policy. We need to bring Coverdale and similar areas in line with the rest of the UK so we can ensure the sustainability of the area. I publicly back the project and their request for planning.

A Simpson Gildersbeck Farm Melmerby Please see attachment S Lambert No address given Dear Letter in support of the Planning Application R/85/51A/GDO– telecommunications mast I am writing in support of the planning application ref: R/85/51A/GDO for a telecommunications mast to be constructed at High Lane,West Scrafton,Leyburn. I am a resident of the Coverdale who would significantly benefit from improved mobile and broadband connections. Mobile and broadband connections are very poor in the area of Coverdale where I live. 5G would hopefully resolve this problem and make the Dale one of the most connected places in the UK regarding broadband and network services. I aim to start up my own business in the Dale however poor broadband speeds will limit this potential. An example of how bad the broadband really is in the dale is that when updating my works computer ( 110GB update) this took around 110 hours to update at a download speed of 1Mb/s. This is shocking and not viable however this is the only option that I have due to the shocking broadband and network speeds of the dale. 5G would overcome this. I publicly back the project and their request for planning.

A Hunt Prospect House Carlton Leyburn I am writing in support of the planning application R/85/51A/GDO for a telecommunications mast to be constructed at high lane,west scrafton There are several other masts in coverdale,and if this new mast is installed,maybe some of the old masts won't be needed and can be removed. I live at the top end of carlton and at present we have slow,unreliable broadband and no mobile phone signal.Within the last month we have been without broadband,phone,or both on 4 occasions.To report this on 2 occasions this meant standing in the snow for over 30 minutes,and one morning after phoning the dentists for an emergency appointment we were waiting for a call back.Eventually we discovered that we had no dialtone and the dentists had tried to phone but they just got an engaged tone.If this had been a medical emergency it is frightening to think what could have happened.Online banking and shopping is essential now,but to receive the one time passcode everyone wants to send a text to a mobile phone.In carlton it must be very difficult for children to receive their education,especially if there are multiple children in the household.Farmers are at risk working outside as they cannot call for help.All businesses must have multiple problems with our broadband and no mobile phone signal

Looking to the future,technology will keep moving forward and fast,reliable broadband and mobile phone signal will be considered essential by most people.Without it,school children and students will suffer,they have already had so many setbacks recently.Businesses,including farming,will struggle without modern communications,people will choose to leave the dale,and others will avoid moving here as they cannot access these essential communications for their own and future families needs

I publicly back the project and their request for planning

G Hunt Prospect House Carlton Letter in support of the Planning Application R/85/51A/GDO– telecommunications mast I am writing in support of the planning application ref: R/85/51A/GDO for a telecommunications mast to be constructed at High Lane,West Scrafton,Leyburn. As a resident of Coverdale ,I feel that I would significantly benefit from improved mobile and broadband connections. There is no mobile reception indoors and only minimal outside,if you can keep your head still enough. People in urban areas and other parts of the Dales have had coverage for many years now and if you have this connectivity people tend to take it for granted – connectivity is not going to go away,this year highlights this. If this funded opportunity does not go ahead it will never be financially viable for the community to do it privately in the future. The changes to work practices accepting remote,home based employment can fundamentally improve the prospects for existing residents. New business models can become possible and higher paid work for young people to encourage them to remain and thrive. As both a walker and mountain biker I would appreciate the greater safety of improved connectivity. Not just enabling contact to help but using the what3words app precise geolocation as well. Having observed the similar mast at Braidley,in my opinion they are not any worse than the telephone and power poles around so much of the Dales. Indeed I had to cycle some distance above Arkleside towards Dead Mans Hill to even see it. The MANY project offers us an opportunity to move towards levels of connectivity that will give us normal access to business tools,social networking,health care,banking and who knows what in the future. The MANY project has carried out significant community engagement. This project gives us an opportunity to change Coverdale for the better,whilst influencing future Government policy. We need to bring Coverdale and similar areas in line with the rest of the UK so we can ensure the sustainability of the area. I publicly back the project and their request for planning.

Geoff Hunt

L Morris Saddle Rooms,Tupgill Park,Coverham Please see attachment Mr R Russell & Ms R Parker Coverley House Carlton Letter in support of the Planning Application R/85/51A/GDO– telecommunications mast We are writing in support of the planning application ref: R/85/51A/GDO for a telecommunications mast to be constructed at High Lane,West Scrafton,Leyburn. We are full time residents of Coverdale who believe that we would significantly benefit from improved mobile and broadband connections. The MANY project appears to offers an opportunity to do something about it. Some parts of Coverdale are lucky enough to have Fibre to the premises,but unfortunately this can not be relied on to provide total coverage and there are many properties that will not receive any increase in speeds or new infrastructure for a long time. Like most parts of the UK,communication needs to be a mixture of both good broadband and mobile coverage. We need to bring Coverdale and similar areas in line with the rest of the UK so we can ensure the sustainability of the area. We publicly back the project and their request for planning.

Dawn Suttill Haydon Carr Carlton I object to the erection of a 15 metre high radio mast giving off radio frequencies. Yes i live at the other side of the dale but as yet there is no evidence that 5G does not cause harm to the environment,wildlife and human life. I have very good broadband ,computer access and mobile connection. I agree there needs to be an adequate mobile signal for health and safety reasons and when accidents happen in hard to reach areas,but this mast and 5G does not guarentee this signal will become available. i am sure there are other means of getting a more efficent signal,underground cables,booster boxes for homes from their providers.

It is proposed this mast will give connectivity to rural communities but this mast will take away the "Rural" and it will be a blot on our lovely landscape. People come to the dales for its 'rural' aspects and some visitors come to get away from technology and have peace and quiet. I believe we need to keep some areas rural for the sake of the environment.

I,like many others are waiting to get more information from MANY for me to take a more educated decision on this proposal but at the moment i am against this. Dawn Suttill Haydon Carr Carlton Thank you for your letter in reply to my comments re; installation of a mast in West Scrafton. I feel i need to add more to my comments. Firstly our house is directly opposite the proposed mast site,aswell as being an eyesore ,a blot on our view of Roova Crag, i feel this is more than a planning issue and it is a health issue. Yes,our house is on the opposite side of the dale but those beams are going to be radiating even further. How close is it to a public footpath? The purpose of this mast is to roll out 5G technology,for the purpose of improving connectivity to the Dale,this mast will emit beams of radio frequency electromagnetic fields. Research has shown this to be harmful to human cells,health (wildlife and the environment). Mobile Access North Yorkshire have not provided sufficient information to disprove this. And this is a trial,no guarentee it is going to work. I feel we don't need a dangerous mast that is proposed for a trial of a year and then what? (resources: uk.gov,Ofcom,environmental health and ICNIRP websites,ref: electromagnetic fields,Prof J W Frank,16/10/2020.) Meanwhile Openreach are in the process of bringing superfast broadband/fibre optic to the Dale in a less damaging way,in the hope of giving connectivity to individual households. I am concerned that the Yorkshire Dales National Park are considering allowing our beautiful Coverdale to be used as a test bed for technology! Agreeing to this mast could be detrimental to the health of Coverdale residents,its wildlife,livestock and the environment. (references as above) I was born and raised in Coverdale and have lived here nearly all my life, it is an area of outstanding beauty. I walk,cycle or run every day in this area. I have endured months of cancer treatment in the past and survived. I do not want to be exposed to anything that could damage my health again. I know life and everyday activities are a risk but most is in my control,this is out of my control.

R Marshall-Rowe Wensleydale Cottage Aysgarth Letter in support of the Planning Application R/85/51A/GDO– telecommunications mast I am writing in support of the planning application ref: R/85/51A/GDO for a telecommunications mast to be constructed at High Lane,West Scrafton,Leyburn. I am a resident of the Coverdale who would significantly benefit from improved mobile and broadband connections. We struggle and feel disadvantaged by not having any mobile reception. People in urban areas and other parts of the Dales have had coverage for many years now and if you have this connectivity people tend to take it for granted – connectivity is not going to go away,this year highlights this. The MANY project offers us an opportunity to do something about it. Some parts of Coverdale are lucky enough to Fibre to the premises but unfortunately this can not be relied on to provide total coverage and there are many properties that will not get any increase in speeds or new infrastructure for a long time. Like most parts of the UK,communication needs to be a mixture of both good broadband and mobile coverage. The MANY project has carried out significant community engagement. This project gives us an opportunity to change Coverdale for the better,whilst influencing future Government policy. We need to bring Coverdale and similar areas in line with the rest of the UK so we can ensure the sustainability of the area. I publicly back the project and their request for planning.

Graham Ford Quarry Lodge,Cover Lane,West Scrafton,Leyburn,North Yorkshire,DL8 4RY 1. As a couple in their upper seventies living in an isolated part of Coverdale,we feel very vulnerable without access to any mobile signal. Our communication is totally dependent upon a landline that has the potential for interruption.

2. The maximum speed of our internet via landline is less than 10Mbit/sec. Due to the routing of this landline it is very unlikely to be upgraded. A 5G mobile signal would provide a real future,especially if anyone took over the property and wished to run a business from here.

3. As an ex Chartered Engineer who worked in telecommunications,I am convinced that the future lies with the mobile network. It may take a decade,but I can readily see the end of all landlines with their multiplicity of poles,etc,and its replacement by a FEW mobile masts to serve the community. The provision of such masts should be viewed as a real benefit to the landscape and certainly not the reverse. J Conway 1 Dairy Cottages Coverham I live at the Dairy Cottages at the bottom of Tupgill Park and fully support the better coverage in Coverdale for the future. I work from home remotely and really need good reliable broadband and mobile coverage,at the moment we dont have mobile coverage at the cottages. In addition,being in the vulnerable age group I do all my shopping on line. I am really looking forward to better coverage for Coverham and for all who live in this beautiful part of the Dales.

Richard Wells 14

East Witton I wish to object to the above planning application R/85/51A/GDO – the erection of a telecommunications mast at West Scrafton.

I do so on the following grounds:

1. Mobile and broadband communication in mid and lower Coverdale is more than adequate for the needs of the people who live here. I fail to see the necessity for an expensive publicly-funded programme. 2. A proliferation of masts in Coverdale is a visual intrusion in a sensitive landscape. 5G connectivity is relatively new and untested. Until the technology can be considered environmentally safe I would urge the planning authority to adopt the precautionary principle and pause any further roll-out. Coverdale is home to several species of bird which have undergone significant population declines in Europe in recent years. The National Park Authority has a duty of care to birds such as curlew,lapwing,hen harrier and black grouse now more than ever. I believe that responsibility would be seriously compromoised if this application was approved. 3. There has been insufficient openness by the organisation promoting this scheme. With more than £4m of public money at their disposal residents fear that they are not in possession of all the facts relating to the scale and scope of the project.

J & A O'Keeffe Highbeck Lodge,Brecongill,Coverham,Leyburn,North Yorkshire,DL8 4TJ We write in full and unreserved support of the planning application ref: R/85/51A/GDO for a telecommunications mast to be constructed at High Lane,West Scrafton,Leyburn,North Yorkshire. As householders and permanent residents of Coverdale,we,along with our three teenage children,would significantly benefit from the improved mobile and broadband connections at home that this project would bring. Having lived and worked in the dale for over 20 years we are seriously disadvantaged by not having any mobile reception whatsoever at home. We live at the bottom of a hill and need to drive to the top of the hill to pick up any mobile reception. Our internet connection is poor and as a Vodaphone Customer,we have been given notice that the Sure Signal that gave us the facility to receive a text message,yet insufficient to make a voice call,is being discontinued from March 2021. As a modern society,in the UK and worldwide it is assumed in every aspect of life that everyone has connectivity and this right is taken wholly for granted by the majority of the population. Internet and Telecommunication Connection Society assumes connectivity. We are required to bank online; pay our taxes online; renew our right to Vote online; pay our council tax,vehicle tax and household bills by direct debit or online; shop for non essential and essential goods online. When undertaking tasks and making transactions online the security systems set up ask for mobile phone security access codes,without the access code the transactions cannot be authorised. Television Our location means we are unable to receive a terrestrial TV signal,we rely on Sky Television,at vast expense,to be able to watch the television. Although we pay the same as every other customer for the internet,Sky and Mobile Phone services the non-existent or poor connection means we cannot watch on demand channels and are unable to stream programmes or download series,content or information. We are frequently left without the internet (due to cabling issues and the infrastructure not being fit for purpose,the technology companies are not held to account and we spend the same money for a significantly inferior service. The mast would enable us to access and watch television and receive these online services. Social Isolation The Covid-19 Restrictions have meant that we have all been unable to visit family and friends. When most people across the country can use the internet and mobile phones to keep in touch we are unable to do this. We cannot use Zoom and communicate with anyone in real time unless we break lockdown restrictions and advice to stay at home,drive to a location to pick up the poor mobile signal available and sit in the car to speak. Our children want to play online with their friends and communicate through social media channels but this opportunity is limited by the poor telecommunications. Keeping in touch with their friends is crucial to our children’s emotional health,well being and development. Education Due to Covid-19 Lockdown Restrictions our three children are all home schooling with their state schools. The demand for effective communications is unprecedented,they are meant to participate in real time online lessons using Google Meets and Microsoft Teams. Our eldest child (in A Level Year) has resulted in driving to pick up a mobile signal and then working in his car using my ipad to take part in the lessons. He had to take up a place in school as a vulnerable child because he couldn’t access the online learning materials. Learning could have taken place at home if the communication network had been fit for purpose. The poor telecommunications in the first lockdown resulted in our youngest child being given GCSE Workbooks to work through (two years early) so he could do something worthwhile at home,as he was unable to access any of the online materials. Poor telecommunications are in these times seriously limiting access to education and could have a seriously negative impact on future attainment and life choices open to our children. Work We run a business from home that employs 22 people on permanent year round contracts. The poor telecommunications make running our business much harder,less cost effective and efficient. We work outside on site and in Coverdale within a three mile radius of the premises training racehorses. Our industry sector is a high risk working environment due to the fact that we work with animals and the welfare of our staff and horses is paramount. We have to work very hard to ensure that safety and welfare are not compromised by the lack of phone signal or internet connection. When accidents happen the involvement and response of the emergency services is made harder due to the lack of phone signal and connection in the area. The UK Government and our industry bodies assume that we have effective telecommunications,all information is disseminated by internet,email and text message. Communication with HMRC is all online with security back up systems relying on telephone,internet and text messages. Our business banking is online,energy companies are online,Payroll and Pensions are online,Covid- 19 Financial Support Schemes,Applications and Information are all online. All tasks are so much harder because we do not have the access that other businesses take for granted. We travel a lot with work and need to communicate with customers using WhatsApp,Text and other mobile based applications on the move. Mobile phone access enables effective communication with our customers. The MANY project,at last,offers the opportunity to address the equality of access. Although some parts of Coverdale are lucky enough to get Fibre to the premises unfortunately,this will not provide total coverage for the area. We know that there are many properties that will not see any investment in infrastructure in the foreseeable future. Like most parts of the UK,communication needs to be a mixture of both good broadband and mobile coverage. The MANY project has carried out significant community engagement we have taken the opportunity to find out more about the project and feel well informed in giving our support. This project gives us an opportunity to change Coverdale for the better,whilst influencing future Government policy. We need to bring Coverdale and similar areas in line with the rest of the UK so we can ensure the sustainability of the area. We fully support the project and the necessary request for planning.

A,P & J Stephenson Moorhen,High Lane,West Scrafton,Leyburn,North Yorkshire,DL8 4RZ Please record our objection to the above planning application.

• I do not believe the project of which it is part properly addresses the connectivity needs of Coverdale,and in particular,we do not need a 5G 'test bed'.

• It duplicates other efforts to provide these and I do not wish to see an uncontrolled proliferation of masts in Coverdale.

• There has been insufficient openness about the project,and the information which has been presented has not included all the facts,and in some cases misled residents.

Hazel Cambers Appletree Cottage,Carlton,Leyburn,North Yorkshire,DL8 4AZ As a resident of Carlton,Coverdale,I would like to endorse this application which I hope will resolve the lack of a mobile signal in our village. In this day and age it is no longer acceptable to not have a mobile signal which should now be considered as a basic facility alongside water,electricity and a landline. We do of course have a landline but over the past 12 months we have had repeated problems with the line not working or being so poor due to interference that the internet will not work. We have had 8 different Open Reach Engineers come to fix or attempt to fix the problem which is still ongoing. Almost all have told us that the problem is the telephone lines in the village are now very old and really need replacing but this is unlikely to happen as neither BT or Open Reach want to fund the cost. For the vast majority of households in the UK,if your landline stops working then you will still have access to a mobile signal and to the internet using that signal but that is not an option for us. I cannot begin to convey the level of frustration this causes.

I could also site numerous other difficulties that occur with delivery drivers,banks wanting to send pin numbers and last but not least for emergency contact as has happened last week when a breakdown to a lorry meant the driver had to go knocking on doors to ask for access to a landline. In a pandemic when many elderly are sheilding that is not easy.

I do hope the park authority will give swift approval to this application. Chelsey Stanfield Moorhend Farm Bungalow,High Lane,West Scrafton,Leyburn,North Yorkshire,DL8 4RZ Please record my objection to the above planning application. I do not believe the project of which it is part properly addresses the connectivity needs of Coverdale,and in particular,we do not need a 5G 'test bed'.

I Brotherton Moor Ghyll,West Scrafton,Leyburn,North Yorkshire,DL8 4RT 1 We write in objection to this application whether it be for open-ended trial or 5G roll-out for whichever is not to us clear. 2 We believe there should first be survey of all Coverdale households to establish mobile wishes and needs; and whether 5G would meet these. 3 Very considerable sums of money have recently been spent on upgrade from copper to fibre eliciting at least from our view no appreciable gain in internet connection which was more than adequate before the upgrade; and still unable to get mobile phone reception in the home. We understand 5G also unlikely to achieve this. 4 5G seems particularly ill-suited to rural areas if,as we understand,waves travel only a short distance and are readily interrupted by topography,walls,buildings,even vegetation and not least the thick walls of most Dales homes. All this cries out for a tailored solution to satisfy both residents' needs and landscape constraints. 5 This poor connectivity of 5G would seem to imply the erection of 'relay' poles and associated paraphanalia twixt the main antenna mast and the multiplicity of homes. There has already in the last couple of years been a proliferation of poles and wires with the upgrade from copper to fibre,with a near doubling in West Scrafton where we live. These are by far the most incongruous and intrusive elements in an otherwise highly attractive village and detrimental to the National Park. This is something the NPA should be seriously and actively concerned about; doing all it can to obviate,mitigate or whatever word you fancy the damaging effect of intrusive poles,kit and wires by working with the local population and would-be providers. 6 We are not competent to comment on health and safety issues. However we note there are eminent scientists on both sides of the argument; and until resolved the potential nature and severity of such issues suggests caution. In this regard,can we note we are probably the nearest dwelling to the proposed mast and seemingly in direct view and not too distant; and would certainly not welcome antennae pointing in this direction. You might too spare a thought for possible ill effects on the voiceless beasts in the adjacent cow houses. 7 If any of our assumptions above are incorrect,we apologise. But we have found it challenging to find out about the proposal and in particular the proposers' long term intentions. We cannot help but feel the thing is being pushed through without proper local consultation. Ideally there would now be a pause to establish as in 2 above what Coverdale residents want and need. As it is,we note MANY is organising two Coverdale Community online engagement events. The first on 4 February is five days before your planning meeting to recommend on the application; the second is after your meeting. So much for the views of Coverdale residents. Clearly a proper decision requires genuine and meaningful consultation; and we would suggest the application needs to be deferred pending this. In that event,if we change our view on any of the above,we will write again. If we don't,please take it that our objections stand.

L Spooner Middleham House Carlton Please record my objection to the above planning application for a mast in West Scrafton on the following grounds:

1. I am not in favour of the 5G project of which it is a part as it does not address the connectivity needs of residents in the lower part of Coverdale.

2. I do not wish to see a proliferation of masts and booster stations in Coverdale.

3.I do not think we have been given sufficient information about the project and who would actually gain from it.

David Hill Environment Bank,Low Bramley Grange Farm,Bramley Grange,Grewelthorpe,Ripon,North Yorkshire,HG4 3DN In terms of my background I have lived in the Dales (we have property and land in and around Muker) since 1993 and my wife originated from Muker. I am the founding owner and chair of The Environment Bank Ltd,previously a Board Member of the Government’s Joint Nature Conservation Committee and Deputy Chair of Natural England. I currently chair the Northern Upland Chain Nature Partnership that comprises the Yorkshire Dales National Park,Northumberland National Park and the North Pennines,Forest of Bowland and Nidderdale AONB’s. I am also currently chair of Plantlife International,Board Trustee of the Esmee Fairbairn Foundation and a commissioner with the Food Farming and Countryside Commission. I would like to register my objection to the installation and operation of 5G masts,as being promoted by this specific application,until such time as there is conclusive evidence that their deployment represents no harm to both the ecological receptors in an area and human health. The paper by Frank in the BMJ is compelling and indeed he advocates the application of the precautionary principle,a view that I would support. The basis for my objection is as follows : 1. The Dales are being used as a guinea pig,an experiment for a technology that is not needed in this area - superfast fibre broadband is currently more than sufficient to facilitate high quality communications for the purposes of local people,because of the investment that has been made. Indeed,the investment has provided far greater broadband services in the Dales than exists in Nidderdale. Presumably the Dales have been chosen because they are ‘super-sparse’ in human terms which of itself suspiciously indicates an awareness of the potential for impacts on people – otherwise why not test the technology where it will be most useful ie in metropolitan areas – towns and cities. 2. The ecological receptors in the iconic landscapes of the Dales are of international significance. In particular,the populations of Hen Harrier have the highest level of legal protection of any species in Europe; the populations of Black Grouse have been gradually increasing as a result of substantial European,UK and private funding to reverse their dramatic declines such that the Dales are one of the most important places for them in the whole of the UK; the populations of Curlews,an ultra-high iconic species for the area,are globally significant. If there is any potential for the unknown consequences of 5G to impact on any of these species (and there are many more besides these) then that would be an impact of international significance. Without any research we simply do not have the evidence to make a judgement on the issue. 3. The socio-economic value derived from the ecological and landscape importance of the Dales,dwarfs the revenues from agriculture. Tourism,and eco-tourism particularly,where people come to experience our wild landscapes and their associated species,represents the most significant income stream to rural communities and businesses. Any potential for impact must take account of the socio-economic impacts that deployment of 5G could bring as a result of affecting these receptors. Enjoying the real thing should not be substituted by some half- baked notion that people can get the same experience on their phone many miles away from the area! 4. In addition to the unknowns of the technology on the iconic wildlife,mast density will substantially reduce the landscape quality of the area by importing man-made structures into the few remaining ‘wild’ landscapes left in the country. Furthermore,the potential for impacts on human health must,in combination with potential effects on iconic wildlife and landscape impacts,create such a substantial risk that National Park Authority committee members cannot permit the application (or any such application) in the absence of proper evidence. This is not,in fact,a matter of judgement since there is no evidence on which to base that judgement. 5. Hence proper process must be followed here : the precautionary principle MUST be applied in the absence of sufficient accurate and robust data,collected through an impartial and planned investigation in the coming years. J A Lumb Swidney Lodge Melmerby I understand that an application will be considered by the Planning Committee of the 9th Feb 2021 and I would like to record my support for this item. There has been a campaign against 5G,which may have some of its support from outside our area,but there is general support in our dale and at a Parish Meeting held in August 2020,there was unanimous support,with no recorded objections to mobile coverage and 5G development in Coverdale. Having taken a post graduate course in Radiation Chemistry in 1972,I am of the opinion that the wavelengths deployed in the use of fifth generation phone transmissions have no detrimental health risks and the same objections where sited when the television transmitter was planned at Bilsdale and then in 1988/9 when the first mobile relay masts were planned in Hambleton and Richmondshire. Please therefore record my support for application R/85/51A/GDO

T Sardo The Cottage,Braidley,Coverdale Please record my objection to the above planning application. I am a resident of upper Coverdale with no mobile coverage and very poor access to the internet when connection is available.

I do not believe the project of which it is part properly addresses the connectivity needs of Coverdale,and in particular,we do not need a 5G 'test bed'.

It duplicates other efforts to provide these and I do not wish to see an uncontrolled proliferation of masts in Coverdale. Spoiling the natural beauty of our Dale.

There has been insufficient openness and transparency about the project,the information which has been presented has not included all the facts,and in some cases misled residents.

A & D Keates Topham Arms House Melmerby See attached response D Green Topham Stable Cottage Melmerby See attached letter C Bowers Penhill Cottage West Witton Please record our objections to the above planning applications

I do not believe the project of which it is part properly addresses the connectivity needs of Coverdale,and in particular,we do not need a 5G test bed.

It duplicates other efforts to provide these and i do not want to see an uncontrolled proliferation of masts in Coverdale.

These has been insufficient openness about the project,and the information which has been present has not included all the facts,and in some cases misled residents.

Graham Dye Byemoor Farm,Melmerby,Leyburn,North Yorkshire,DL8 4TW I note with interest this application to establish the means for Coverdale to have the undoubted advantage of good communications for its residents and businesses,which it is entirely fair to say,it does not have at present.

The single timber pole of modest dimensions will almost certainly go unnoticed by the vast majority of people as do the many thousands of other poles in this dale providing electricity transmission and telephone communications.

Unless one is of the belief,false in my view,that the antenna,which will sit at the top of this post,are likely to ‘fry’ residents and wildlife in the environment with micro waves then to all sane observers this application should be approved without any concern whatsoever.

If,however one sides with the activists in the undergrowth,anonymously active in our dale under the guise of ‘Coverdale Connect & Protect,’ then clearly such a pole and equipment is going to shorten our lifespan.

I and likely the majority of residents,who are unable currently to enjoy the undoubted benefits of excellent modern communications here,will however be delighted to see the Planning Authority grasp common sense with a firm hand and determine this application by granting the provider approval without delay.

I would therefore encourage all members to raise their hands in the affirmative and fully support the application. C Baldwin-Cole Moorland Horsehouse As a 22 year old woman who lives in The Yorkshire Dales National Park,specifically Coverdale,although just outside of the ‘test bed’,I am of the opinion that the plan to include 5G connectivity to this rural community while other,more suitable options are available,is an unnecessary addition to our place of residence. The MANY letter,which is dated 19th January 2021,has only come to our attention (my household) in the last 24 hours as it was forwarded to us by a neighbour as we did not receive our own copy. It refers to the intention of delivering ‘ultrafast broadband and mobile connectivity’ to our rural area,however I am under the impression that 5G is not the same as broadband and so I believe this wording to be of malintent,unless further infrastructural developments are intended under the same scheme,which have not been outlined in the information provided. I perhaps am in a privileged position,being that my house has Superfast Fibre broadband,which is more than sufficient while living in Carlton Highdale,which has patchy mobile signal that is much patchier than the suggested ‘test bed’ area of the same Dale. However,I am unsure whether it is with the inclusion of the MOD masts which work alongside EE to provide emergency service signal or whether it is simply a feature that EE provides as they are owned by BT which means I can make and receive calls and texts while connected to the BT Wi-Fi we have in our home. The initiative to provide 5G to ensure households can work from home,which has obviously been an increasingly important feature over the past year,is a redundant factor in my eyes. Providing mobile coverage for the rural area does not necessarily mean the coverage is strong enough to be picked up inside a typical Dales house which is laden with thick stone walls and roofs,which begs the question,would it be any better than providing strong,reliable Wi-Fi to each house instead? With the MANY project being considered for our area,we are at high risk of losing the chance for a much more suitable Government funding scheme ‘Planning for Gigabit Delivery for 2021’ which is making £5bn funding available for fibre broadband which states ‘the hardest to reach communities in rural areas should be prioritised’. Since Openreach is in our Dale almost every day connecting more and more houses to the Superfast Broadband,the desire is there for reliable Wi-Fi and landline in home as opposed to mobile signal,as I am aware of neighbours who have paid thousands out of pocket to connect their homes which were deemed too far away from the main line to be free of charge. Would this not be of more significant benefit since such forums as Zoom,Video Call and Screen Sharing are of the most widely used ways of working from home,most predominantly from a desktop or laptop instead of a mobile phone. And as calls can be made from landlines anyway,is mobile signal really that important on top,I am not sure. The priority of the YDNPA to entice Young Families to the Dales is a good initiative,seeing children grow up amongst the rural setting is second to none. Living in an area which does not rely on mobile signal and 24/7 connectivity is part of the beauty of the Yorkshire Dales as a place of residence,however if you walk halfway up any of the moors signal can be found very easily. As a 22-year-old myself,I plan to raise a family in a setting such as this and would find not having mobile service but decent broadband more than sufficient. A while ago I was on the National Parks website and was shocked to see under the FAQ’s a question,which I believe to be planted by the organisation in all honesty (as many FAQs are just to get information out),asking ‘Can I get Wi-Fi in National Parks?’ and the answer to state ‘Not unless its supplied by your accommodation or the pub you’re sitting in. You might not even get a phone signal.’ But what is so wrong with that? If the 5G connectivity is to increase the desire for Tourism in the area,which is what I believe a large part of the scheme to really be for,then the beauty of the National Park is being missed. People come from urban areas to switch off,take a breath and get away from the stresses of work and home,quite evident in the huge increase of walkers I have seen since Lockdown in March 2020 began. But if your phone is still pinging when you are sat outside a Dales’ pub watching a sunset over the moors (albeit not at the minute but hopefully in the not-too-distant future),is that 1-0 to connectivity or not? What is the necessity of having mobile coverage every second of the day,when the Wi-Fi at home is as reliable as the Superfast Broadband is,as well as providing calls and texts regardless. If the query to be safe while out in the countryside,then there are emergency service lines available throughout the Dale as well as apps such as What Three Words which pinpoint your exact location regardless of mobile signal. Instead of trying to introduce a higher calibre of mobile phone service to a test bed community which already has decent coverage,focus on helping those who live in even more rural and supposedly vulnerable settings who live with patchy Wi-Fi,which cuts them off entirely sometimes. Such a staple in homemaking nowadays is Wi-Fi and I do not think I would be opposed if the same level of connectivity that proposed 5G would bring to the community could be provided by discreet and underground Fibre infrastructure instead,rather than the need for 45ft masts invading the space of permanent residents and emitting Electro Magnetic Radiation to them on a daily basis. I hope my specific opinion as somebody outside of the usual dales’ demographic provides an insight to you that not all residents are supportive of this project.

Mike J Sparrow Thirns Farmhouse Healaugh Richmond North Yorkshire DL11 6UW

Attn. Andrew Bishop, YDNPA Planning Department 8th January 2021

West Scrafton telecommunications mast planning application Letter of objection

As a resident of the Yorkshire Dales National Park, I write to register my objection to the planning application for the above telecommunications mast.

The basis for my objection is as follows:

1. Consultation

The applicant claims that they have consulted with the community about the proposed development. However, I am advised that many residents and members of the Parish Council have not been consulted and were not aware of the application, or its proposed purpose.

2. Provision of advice relating to safe exposure

The ICNIRP safe exposure guidelines that are promoted by Public Health England do not take account of safe exposure levels for children, people with implants or those that suffer from Electromagnetic Sensitivity (EMS). No advice has been provided by the applicant about risks posed to individuals that fall into these categories, nor as any research (to the best of my knowledge) been undertaken to establish how many people in the local community fall into each category.

3. Statutory nuisance

Based on currently available scientific evidence I contend that the Radio Frequency Radiation (RFR) that will be emitted by the mast constitutes a statutory nuisance as a consequence of the harm that it may cause to human health and ecology. To this extent I believe that the authority’s planning officers should take account of the following, with reference to the pollution cause by RF-EMF.

(a) Environmental Protection Act 1990 (EPA 1990) requirements

(i) Under Part III Statutory Nuisances and Clean Air, and as explained in Section 79 (1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, the authority has a duty to,

'cause its area to be inspected from time to time to detect any statutory nuisances which ought to be dealt with under sections 80 (or Sections 80 and 80A) and, where a complaint of a statutory nuisance is made to it by a person living within its area, to take such steps as are reasonably practical to investigate the complaint'.

(ii) Clauses (a) and (d) of Section 79(1) of the EPA 1990, define matters relevant to this objection that may constitute 'statutory nuisances' as being,

1

• any premises in such a state as to be prejudicial to health or a nuisance,

and,

• any dust, steam, smell or other effluvia arising on industrial, trade or business premises and being prejudicial to health and a nuisance.

(iii) 'Effluvia' includes 'vapours, invisible particles or auras', and the use of the word has a long-standing association with magnetism and electromagnetism through the evolution of particle physics.

(iv) The Authority’s duty to act (as stated in paragraph 7, above), is not displaced by any Regulations made under Section 2 of the Pollution Prevention and Control Act 1999. RFR Wireless and Wi-Fi non-ionising radiation is not a substance regulated under Section 2 of the 1999 Act, so Section 79(10) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 cannot apply.

(v) Consequently, the Pollution Prevention and Control Act 1999, and the EU Directive on Industrial Emissions (Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control) 2010/75/EU, brought into effect under the 1999 Act, does apply to the subject matter of this complaint, and should be given due regard through the use of the procedures that the Authority are obliged to enact under the EPA 1990.

(b) Pollution Prevention and Control Act 1999 (PPCA 1999), and the EU Directive on Industrial Emissions (2010/75/EU)

(i) The objection is founded on the argument that broadcast Wireless 'effluvia' is pollution/industrial waste in the specific circumstances where the general public, or individuals, have not consented to the resulting nuisance caused as harm, or injury risk, created by exposures that they/we cannot avoid.

(ii) The Pollution Prevention and Control Act 1999, in Section 1(3), defines 'environmental pollution' as,

'pollution of the air, water or land which may give rise to any harm ... (to include) ... (a) pollution caused by noise, heat or vibrations or any other kind of release of energy, and by 'air' includes air within buildings and air within other natural or man-made structures above or below ground', arising from 'activities' that are defined in Section 1(2) of the Act, to include, the depositing ... of any substance'.

(iii) RFR Wireless non-ionising radiation emissions are deposited into air (through ion exchange). The deposits (by ion exchange) are generated by the release of electrical energy, and the deposits are harmful as the evidence we submit in support of this statutory nuisance complaint proves.

(iv) The charity Electrosensitivity UK (ES-UK), which supports people already electro-sensitive, and informs the public of the health risks of electro-magnetic radiation, argue that,

'only reduced 'electrosmog' can make life tolerable for those functionally disabled by it and prevent more people being sensitised to suffering cancers and diseases like Alzheimer's now associated with this environmental pollution'.

(v) The scientific evidence referred to below demonstrates that pre-existing 'electrosmog' will be intensified through the introduction of this additional telecommunications mast, posing additional injury risk to children, and further impairing people already electro-sensitive.

(vi) The 'unknown effects' are addressed in clinical guidance issued by the European Academy for Environmental Medicine (EUROPAEM) in its 'Guideline 2016 for the Prevention, Diagnosis and Treatment of

2 EMF related health problems and illnesses' (Belyeav et. al., on behalf of the EMF Working Group, published in 'Reviews on Environmental Health, July 2016).

(vii) The article reports on the health consequences of electro-magnetic hypersensitivity (pages 9 to 22), treatment strategies for EMF-related illnesses including EHS (page 13), the measurement of EMF exposure (page 17), and on reduction/ preventative strategies (page 20).

(viii) Of paramount importance in relation to this objection are paragraph 22, definition of pollutants requiring control under the PPCA 1999 (below), related regimes for controlling pollution, and the obligations of the Authority under the EPA 1990, the EUROPAEM Guidelines that describe the carcinogenic effects of EMF pollution (page 5), the genotoxic effects (page 6), the neurological effects (page 7), and the effects of the pollutants on infertility and reproduction (page 9).

(ix) Section 1(1) of the PPCA 1999, defines the general purpose of Section 2 of the Act as:

'being to enable provision to be made for or in connection with,

• Directive 2010/75/EU ... on industrial emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control);

• regulating (otherwise in pursuance with that Directive) activities which are capable of causing any environmental pollution, and,

• otherwise preventing or controlling emissions capable of causing any such pollution'.

(x) Articles of Directive 2010/75/EU on Industrial Emissions, apply in the UK as part of the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) regime which operates across the EU. Elements of this regime, can be, but not necessarily are, made subject to regulation under Section 2(3)(a), or 2(3)(b), of the PPCA 1999.

(xi) Annex II of the 2010 Directive provides a list of polluting substances requiring control through the IPPC regime, to include:

'Substances and mixtures which have been proven to possess carcinogenic or mutagenic properties or properties which may affect reproduction via the air'.

(xii) The obection provides evidence (as attached), that RFR Wireless non-ionising radiation is a pollutant that creates these types of harm and injury risks, and that evidence demonstrates that these harm and injury risks are proven. We offer to supplement the evidence provided with this statutory nuisance complaint, if requested to do so.

(xiii) Further, Article 70 of the 2010 Directive on the 'Monitoring of Emissions', brings into effect within the IPPC regime, the requirement that the monitoring of such emissions from polluting industrial processes should be carried out:

'in accordance with CEN standards or, if CEN standards are not available, ISO, national or other international standards which ensure the provision of data of an equivalent scientific quality'.

(c) The European Directive on Waste (2008/98 EC)

(i) The European Directive on Waste (2008/98 EC), sets waste management standards that are applied in the UK through the EPA 1990, repealing earlier EU Directives that the EPA 1990 was designed to enact.

3 (ii) The Directive defines 'irritant', 'harmful' and 'carcinogenic' in Annex III, as properties of waste that may render it hazardous:

• H4 Irritant: non-corrosive substances and preparations which, through immediate, prolonged or repeated contact with the skin or mucous membrane, can cause inflamation.

• H5 Harmful: substances and preparations which if they are inhaled or ingested or if they penetrate the skin, may involve limited health risks.

• H7 Carcinogenic: substances and preparations which, if they are inhaled or ingested or if they penetrate the skin, may induce cancer or increase its incidence.

(iii) Paragraph 22 of the Directive: applies the precautionary principle; highlights the importance of collaboration between industry and regulators; and, acknowledges the dynamics of risk management. The paragraph states that,

'the decision that a substance is not waste can be taken only on the basis of a co-ordinated approach, to be regularly updated, and where this is consistent with the protection of the environment and human health'.

(d) Regulation EC 1272/2008 on the Classification, Labelling of Substances and Mixtures.

(i) Additionally, Regulation EC 1272/2008 on the Classification, Labelling of Substances and Mixtures, draws attention to a classification and testing regime for waste, that includes man-made EMR non-ionising radiation as a substance within the remit of that regime.

(ii) That regime should be applied in England through EPA 1990 procedures, and it is assumed that the IPPC regime (paragraph 21 above), is founded on EC 1272/2008 regulation.

(iii) Regulations EC 1272/2008 excludes dangers to the general public arising from ionising radiation, which are regulated within the scope of the EC Directive 96/29/Euroatom. The non-exclusion of non-ionising radiation brings that type of radiation into the scope of Regulations EC 1272/2008.

(iv) Part 3 of Annex 1 to the Regulations lists health hazards posed by toxic substances including 'specific target organ toxicity - repeated exposure', defined in page 167 of the Regulations as,

'specific organ toxicity arising from a repeated exposure to a substance or mixture. All significant health effects that can impair function, both reversible and irreversible, immediate and/or delayed are included'.

(v) This paragraph describes 'specific target organ toxicity' as a category of hazard that can be caused by substance toxicity/toxicities, that are defined singularly as hazards that have serious health consequences. Those health effects are categorised as:

• acute toxicity

• skin corrosion/irritation

• serious eye irritations

• respiratory or skin sensitisation

• germ cell mutagenicity

4

• carcinogenicity

• reproductive toxicity, and,

• aspiration toxicity

(vi) Each category has stringent criteria for testing and waste management/risk elimination.

Paragraph 3.9.2.5 of the document (page 169 of the Regulations) states that,

'the information required to evaluate specific target organ toxicity comes either from repeated exposure in humans, such as exposure at home, in the workplace or environmentally, or from studies in experimental animals'.

(e) Scope of this complaint

(i) The 'effluvia' that will be dispersed across West Scrafton by the fully operational mast envisaged under this application, constitutes, or will constitute, 'pollution to the environment', as defined in Section 1(3) Preliminary of the EPA 1990.

(ii) West Scrafton and its locality fall into the definition of an 'environment', is as defined in Section 1(2) Preliminary of the EPA 1990.

(iii) The pollution/waste/effluvia is created by the process, or processes, deployed by Telecoms companies and the commissioners of Wireless non-ionising RFR emitted from the mast, antennae and other equipment that are the subject of this application.

(iv) These systems are defined in Section 1(5) Preliminary, of the EPA 1990, as a 'process', meaning any activities carried on in Great Britain, which consequently includes West Scrafton as an amalgamation of premises and land, where the 'process' impacts.

(v) The definition of harm at Section 1(4) Preliminary of the EPA 1990, is reproduced here in full,

‘Harm means harm to health of living organisms or other interference with the ecological systems of which they form part and, in the case of man (or woman) includes offence caused to any of his (or her) senses or harm to his (or her) property'.

(vi) Evidence of the non-thermal effects of RFR outlined below, provides multiple reasons for concluding that non-ionising radiation is harmful to human health. (vii) Additionally, we argue that the EUROPAEM 'Guideline 2016 for the Prevention, Diagnosis and Treatment of EMF related health problems and illnesses', proves the injury risk and nuisance posed by EMR as a pollutant.

(viii) This statutory nuisance complaint is founded on evidence that broadcast Wireless or Wi-Fi 'effluvia' creates pollution/industrial waste, at the very least, to the standard that warrants investigation under the Environmental Protection Act 1990.

4. Harm to health and ecology - scientific evidence

(a) Public Health England (PHE) continues to adhere to the guidelines set by the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), a small NGO widely accused of having conflicts of interest

5 and of bias in the use of existing studies. Public Health England should be challenged robustly as to why they are not taking into account the criticisms of the ICNIRP and the latest evidence of harm to health from wireless radiation shown in the independent scientific research.

• A December 2018 review in the prestigious journal The Lancet of over 2,000 peer-reviewed studies on the impact of wireless technology on human and animal systems revealed that 68.2 per cent discovered significant biological effects. The Lancet review concludes: “This weight of scientific evidence refutes the prominent claim that the deployment of wireless technologies poses no health risks at the currently permitted non-thermal radio-frequency exposure levels”.1

• A 2018 overview of 23 studies in the academic journal Environmental Research by Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry Dr Martin Pall concludes that Wi-Fi causes seven ‘very serious’ health effects including ‘damage highly likely to produce mutations that impact future generations’. Professor Pall states: ‘repeated Wi-Fi studies show that Wi-Fi causes oxidative stress, sperm/testicular damage, neuropsychiatric effects including EEG changes, apoptosis, cellular DNA damage, endocrine changes, and calcium overload…EMF effects are often cumulative; and EMFs may impact young people more than adults’.2

• A 2018 longitudinal study of 79,241 brain tumour incidences in England over 21 years reveals that rates of Glioblastoma Multiforme (GBM), the specific type of aggressive brain tumour associated with mobile radiation, have doubled from 1,250 per year in 1995 to just under 3,000. The researchers concluded that this ‘raises the suspicion that mobile and cordless phone use may be promoting gliomas’ 3

• The 2018 US Department of Health National Toxicology Program study showed a ‘clear link’ between mobile radiation and cancer. When 7000 rats and mice were exposed to mobile radiation for nine hours a day, DNA strands were damaged in brain cells and male rats developed more heart and brain tumours; lower birth rates and higher rates of infant mortality were also observed. The study was reviewed for accuracy by 15 external physicians who confirmed the conclusion that there is a ‘clear link’ between mobile radiation and cancer.4

Attempts to downplay these findings have been rebutted by the study leader Dr Ronald Melnick.

• Cancer researcher Dr Fiorella Belpoggi of Bologna studied 2000 rats exposed to the equivalent amount of radio frequency radiation to which humans are exposed over a lifetime and obtained similar results.5 Dr Belpoggi has commented on attempts to downplay these findings: ‘we are scientists, our role is to produce solid evidence for hazard and risk assessment. Underestimating the evidence from carcinogen bioassays and delays in regulation have already proven many times to have severe consequences, as in the case of asbestos, smoking and vinyl chloride.

• In a 2015 study in Germany, mice grew more tumours when exposed to mobile phone radiation ‘well below exposure limits for users of mobile phones…our findings may help to understand the repeatedly reported increased incidences of brain tumours in heavy users of mobile phones.’ 6

6 • Two recent Swedish studies showed that mobile and cordless phone use leads to a five and four times higher risk respectively of brain glioma, particularly in those aged under 20. The study researchers commented that most tumours develop decades after the exposure period, and that as mobile phones are relatively new, it could take many years for the problem to manifest.7, 8

• Expert cancer researcher Professor Emeritus Anthony Miller, advisor to the World Health Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer (WHO/IARC), states that radiofrequency (RF) radiation from any source – such as the signals emitted by cell phones, other wireless and cordless and sensor devices, and wireless networks – fully meets criteria to be classified as a "Group 1 carcinogenic to humans" agent, based on scientific evidence associating RF exposure to cancer development and cancer promotion. He says: ‘The evidence indicating wireless is carcinogenic has increased and can no longer be ignored’. His evidence includes the 2017 re-analysis of data from the Interphone study, the 2014 French National CERENAT Study, several new publications on Swedish cancer data, and the 2016 results of the National Toxicology Program.9

• Research has shown that industry-funded studies are less likely than independent studies to show a link with wireless radiation and health problems. Prasad et al (2017) write: ‘in our review of the literature and meta-analysis of case–control studies, we found evidence linking mobile phone use and risk of brain tumours…we also found a significantly positive correlation between study quality and outcome in the form of risk of brain tumour associated with use of mobile phones. Higher quality studies show a statistically significant association between mobile phone use and risk of brain tumour. Even the source of funding was found to affect the quality of results produced by the studies’.10

• Joel M. Moskowitz is a Professor Emeritus of radiation at the School of Public Health at the University of California Berkeley and an expert in mobile phone radiation and electromagnetic fields. He states: ‘Millimetre waves such as those in use by 5G are absorbed by the first 1-2 mm of skin and the eye cornea’. Since the skin contains nerve endings and capillaries, bio-effects may be transmitted further and ‘the peer-reviewed research demonstrates that short-term exposure to low-intensity millimeter wave (MMW) radiation not only affects human cells, it may result in the growth of multi-drug resistant bacteria harmful to humans. Since little research has been conducted on the health consequences from long-term exposure to MMWs, widespread deployment of 5G or 5th generation wireless infrastructure constitutes a massive experiment that may have adverse impacts on the public’s health’.11

• A 2018 study showed that due to the heating effect of 5G electromagnetic waves, the exposure times ‘tolerated by the International Council on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection guidelines may lead to permanent tissue damage after even short exposures, highlighting the importance of revisiting existing exposure guidelines.’ 12

Despite these clear and unequivocal research findings, the ICNIRP has declined to update their guidelines. When indicating any potential harmful bioeffects they consider only thermal heating effects of non-ionising radiation and not the non-thermal effects as shown above.

7 The ICNIRP has been accused of bias when issuing safety guidelines which are followed by bodies such as the WHO and Public Health England/Public Health Wales. It is also the case that members of PHE have also been members of ICNIRP. 13

The author of an article in the Journal of Oncology writes: ‘In 2014 the WHO launched a draft of a Monograph on RF fields and health for public comments. It turned out that five of the six members of the Core Group in charge of the draft are affiliated with International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), an industry loyal NGO, and thus have a serious conflict of interest. Just as by ICNIRP, evaluation of non-thermal biological effects from RF radiation are dismissed as scientific evidence of adverse health effects in the Monograph. This has provoked many comments sent to the WHO. However, at a meeting on March 3, 2017 at the WHO Geneva office, it was stated that the WHO has no intention to change the Core Group’. 14

Moreover, a memorandum attached to a resolution adopted by the Standing Committee of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in May 2011 reads: ’it is most curious, to say the least, that the applicable official threshold values for limiting the health impact of extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields and high frequency waves were drawn up and proposed to international political institutions (WHO, European Commission, governments) by the ICNIRP, an NGO whose origin and structure are none too clear and which is furthermore suspected of having rather close links with the industries whose expansion is shaped by recommendations for maximum threshold values for the different frequencies of electromagnetic fields’. 15

In 2013 SSITA (Safe Schools Information Technology Alliance) complained to PHE about their failure to provide appropriate precautionary advice on pulsed microwave-emitting technologies other than mobile phones, particularly the use of wireless networks in schools and homes, and Smart Meters in homes and small businesses. They state: ‘This is arguably a violation of the Right to Health Protection as outlined in Section 4 of the article ‘Precautionary Environmental Protection and Human Rights’ (2007).’ They also state that advice to PHE from the government advisory group AGNIR is inadequate: ‘a large body of published scientific data has found that pulsed radiofrequency microwaves below the guideline levels can cause biological and adverse health effects, although many of these papers were omitted from the AGNIR 2012 report...As stated in the Benevento Resolution (2006) from the International Commission for Electromagnetic Safety, ‘arguments that weak (low intensity) EMF cannot affect biological systems do not represent the current spectrum of scientific opinion.’ 16

To date, 240 scientists have signed an appeal urging the UN and WHO for greater health protection on electromagnetic frequency (EMF) exposure. These scientists, who have published over 2,000 papers in professional journals on EMF and biology or health, state: ‘The various agencies setting safety standards have failed to impose sufficient guidelines to protect the general public, particularly children who are more vulnerable to the effects of EMF. The [ICNIRP] guidelines are accepted by the WHO and numerous countries around the world…In 2009, the ICNIRP released a statement saying that it was reaffirming its 1998 guidelines, as in their opinion, the scientific literature published since that time has provided no evidence of any adverse effects below the basic restrictions and does not necessitate an immediate revision of its guidance on limiting exposure to high frequency electromagnetic fields. ICNIRP continues to the present day

8 to make these assertions, in spite of growing scientific evidence to the contrary. It is our opinion that, because the ICNIRP guidelines do not cover long-term exposure and low-intensity effects, they are insufficient to protect public health’.

(b) With the addition of 5G electromagnetic radiation (EMR) consequent to the proposed mast, levels of exposure of the community to wireless radiation will be increased, with unknown effects. Furthermore any member of the community, including children and those who suffer from electrosensitivity (a condition now recognised by researchers), will be mandatorily exposed 24/7.

(c) I therefore challenge Public Health England’s (PHE) safety assurances, which rest on the ICNIRP claims, as being unreliable due to industry bias and insufficient to assure public health. It is the duty of the National Park’s planning officers to invoke the Precautionary Principle in the interests of protecting public health and the valuable ecology of the park. Accordingly, I believe that the West Scrafton mast application should be refused pending a full, independent and open review of the science that demonstrates the harm caused by RF-EMF.

References

1. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(18)30221-3/fulltext or https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(18)30221-3

2. www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935118300355

3. https://www.hindawi.com/journals/jeph/2018/7910754/

4. https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/results/areas/cellphones/index.html

5. Belpoggi https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29530389

6. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25749340

7. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19513546

8. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25466607

9. https://ehtrust.org/cancer-expert-declares-cell-phone-wireless-radiation-carcinogenic-humans/

10. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28213724

11. https://www.saferemr.com/2017/08/5g-wireless-technology-millimeter-wave.html

12. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30247338

13. https://www.degruyter.com/downloadpdf/j/reveh.2016.31.issue-4/reveh-2016-0060/reveh-2016- 0060.pdf

14. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5504984/

9

15. Huss, Jean (2011-05-06). "B. Explanatory memorandum by Mr Huss, rapporteur - Section 7. Technological progress and economic growth at the expense of environment and health protection - Subsection 29". The potential dangers of electromagnetic fields and their effect on the environment - Report - Doc. 12608. Council of Europe - Parliamentary Assembly - Committee on the Environment, Agriculture and Local and Regional Affairs. Retrieved 2013-04-10. http://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-XML2HTML-en.asp?fileid=13137

16. https://www.degruyter.com/downloadpdf/j/reveh.2016.31.issue-4/reveh-2016-0060/reveh-2016- 0060.pdf

10 Objection letter to planning Application No. R/85/51A/GDO- Installation of a 17m wooden pole (15m above ground level) with mobile communications antenna and equipment cabinet (for Quickline Communications). The above application has been brought to my attention by Richmondshire NO TO 5G. Although I do not live near to the proposed location of the mast I am taking a very close interest in the progress of the MANY Project because I live within the Hovingham / Castle Howard trial zone announced in the NYCC MANY Report. We can therefore expect the technology to be deployed in a similar way in my area. I also enjoy cycling and walking holidays in the Coverdale area. I have several objections to the application: 1. Visual impact. The antenna is to be sited within the Yorkshire Dales National Park and in this particular case, a very remote sparsely populated rural location, with outstanding scenic value. Its elevation and the open landscape will mean that it will be very visible, especially from West Scrafton only about 300m away. Wooden telegraph poles are not unusual in the area but unsightly metal rectangular antennas are, high up the pole, which the drawings state could be up to 12 in number. This is not what you would expect to see in a landscape supposedly enjoying the highest level of protection. This will detract from the feeling of escape from the trappings of technology that residents and visitors could expect to enjoy. 2. Consultation There has been insufficient consultation. The supporting documents state that door to door leafleting of nearby residents has not been done because of Covid restrictions. This is a poor excuse. Everyone living within the proposed reach of the signals should have been adequately informed and given opportunity to comment. They should be provided with a detailed leaflet giving information about the potential health impacts alongside the claimed benefits. There does not appear to have been any attempt to consult wildlife organisations such as the Yorkshire Wildlife Trust or RSPB. This is despite a vast amount of evidence that the radiation arising from wireless communications can impact wildlife. See the Bioinitiative.com website for scientific studies into this. 3. Technical detail There is no information on power levels of the transmitters nor the frequencies at which they will transmit. There is no mapping of the estimated signal strength at locations surrounding the antennas. There is no information about current radiation levels present at the location and at nearby residences. These should be very, very low and if so would be an ideal location, becoming increasingly rare, suited to residents and visitors who suffer from electro-sensitivity, a recognised medical condition. I would recommend that a thorough wide ranging baseline study of current radiation levels be undertaken by engineers totally independent of industry and acceptable to resident bodies such as Richmondshire NO TO 5G prior to consideration of any application as one of the planning conditions. Suitable exclusion zones around the antennas should be clearly marked on the ground so that workers or visitors can avoid the highest radiation areas. The application adopts the usual safe ground by quoting that radiation levels will be within ICNIRP guidelines. These levels are far too high and as such are being challenged both internationally and in the UK by a team lead by Michael Mansfield QC. A very recent court case in Holland has found that after reviewing the relevant scientific literature, signal strengths below 1 V/m can still be considered to have harmful effects on humans. The ICNIRP regulations allow up to 61 V/m. 4. 5G technology It has been readily admitted that the equipment will be upgraded to 5G in the future. This is a very controversial technology utilising a targeted beam of short wavelengths impacting on biological systems and very intense local radiation bursts. A leaflet produced by Ryedale Community 5G Monitoring Group, which I have attached to my covering email as a pdf, spells out the issues for communities surrounding 5G in a very easy to digest format, in a better way than I can express, so I would like it to be read as part of this submission. 5. Conclusion This application for an unsightly antenna installation in a sensitive location should be rejected. The information provided is insufficient especially for a controversial wireless technology moving toward 5G. The potential health impacts drawing on the latest research has not been considered. Consultation with local residents and bodies representing preservation of the natural world has been completely inadequate. Broadband connectivity can be achieved much more effectively and safely by direct fibre connection to the residents of such a sparsely populated area. Stuart Leach 12 January 2021 THREAT OF 5G COMING TO RURAL NORTH YORKSHIRE SOON WHAT COULD THIS MEAN FOR YOUR COMMUNITY?

What is 5G and how does it differ from what we have now? 5G (5th Generation) is being promoted as the latest upgrade to the 3G and 4G cellular mobile phone/internet service. In the long term the plan is to link together a huge range of devices to form the Internet of Things (IOT).

5G will initially use frequencies that overlap with existing technology but as it evolves, it will use more and more high frequency microwaves which cannot travel very far or pass through objects like trees. To transfer the vast amounts of data necessary for the IOT the air will have to carry a greatly increased level of electromagnetic radiation via a network of closely spaced antennas, base stations and satellites. The antennas will sometimes use beam-forming technology that focus radiation onto a specific target.

The antennas and the associated radiation will need to be near to their users i.e. on homes, schools and businesses.

So why is this a threat? 5G will bring radiation to new areas and intensify the levels in those areas where radiation is already present. Sources of existing radiation include 2G, 3G, 4G cellular networks, wifi and smart meters in homes, businesses and schools.

5G will greatly increase radiation exposure to people, animals, insects and the natural world. Could this impact my health?

In short, yes. The sheer number of peer reviewed scientific papers linking electromagnetic radiation to harmful effects on people and other living things should set alarm bells ringing. Examples can be found on the Environmental Health Trust website, ehtrust.org and bioinitiative.org.

Incidents of cancer, reduced fertility, DNA damage, blood coagulation and suppressed immune response are amongst the many adverse effects attributed to electromagnetic radiation.

Surely we are protected by stringent regulations? You would think so, but current regulations have not kept up with rapid advances in wireless technology. The basis for exposure limits goes back decades and is restricted to the heating effect on bodily tissues. The International Committee for Non Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) is the main regulator. Whilst they have recently revised exposure limits these remain well above levels where biological impacts have been observed. The regulations do not prevent harmful exposure. So which areas of North Yorkshire are being considered for 5G?

A Government funded consortium supported by North Yorkshire County Council (NYCC) are looking for rural communities willing to trial 5G technology. Though difficult to access, a report produced by NYCC has outlined the proposals.

The report highlights 5 areas which vary in size and character from mainly open countryside to those containing many villages. The areas are centred on Appletreewick, North Coverdale, Swaledale, Rosedale / Farndale and Hovingham / Castle Howard. But many rural areas have been complaining for a long time about slow broadband and poor mobile signal – isn’t 5G the answer? Those promoting the technology would no doubt say “yes”, but there are alternatives which don’t have the same drawbacks. Homes and businesses can be connected directly by fibre optic cables which are safer, more secure and offer much greater speeds than wireless links. Search the internet for ”Clapham community broadband” to find out about such a scheme here in North Yorkshire.

A mobile voice phone service could be provided by simpler existing technology such as 2G which may provide coverage more suitable to hilly and sparsely populated landscapes.

Also consider the advantages you already have without 5G. Many people will come to North Yorkshire to live or spend a holiday here attracted by its natural beauty and absence of pollution of all kinds. Promoting your area as “5G free” could have many commercial benefits bringing visitors from urban areas keen to get away from the “electrosmog” of their towns and cities. With all this evidence against 5G, is any action being taken? Yes, there are currently two legal challenges in the UK. The renowned barrister Michael Mansfield QC (Grenfell Tower and many other well-known cases) is heading up a legal challenge to The Government over its failure to take notice of the health risks and public concern related to 5G.

The 5G industry has not produced a single study that shows 5G is safe or has undertaken any risk assessment for effects on humans, wildlife and the environment. Please see the Actionagainst5g.org website for more information on this.

Wherever 5G technology has been rolled out in some of the world’s towns and cities, often secretly, it has been met with fierce opposition. People have begun to find out about the downside of the technology and don’t want it in their community.

The level of concern has resulted in moratoria (temporary halting of a process) being declared in Switzerland, Slovenia and some other countries. Glastonbury Town Council and here in North Yorkshire, Helmsley Town Council, have looked at the evidence and decided to adopt the” precautionary principle”.

What can I do? • Get as informed as you can from sources such as those given above and see what others think about what you’ve found out. • Voice your concerns to your parish, district and county councillors and your MP. • Scrutinise and challenge the Government and industry narrative.

• Join or support a campaign group like 5GAwarenessYork.co.uk or start one in your area.

Produced by Ryedale Community 5G Monitoring Group, Station Road, Helmsley July 2020 REDACTED BY YDNPA The Saddle Room Restaurant Tupgill Park, Coverdale. Leyburn. North Yorkshire DL8 4TJ REDACTED BY YDNPA

25th January 2021

Dear Andrew Bishop, Planning

Letter in support of the Planning Application R/85/51A/GDO– telecommunications mast I am writing in support of the planning application ref: R/85/51A/GDO for a telecommunications mast to be constructed at High Lane, West Scrafton, Leyburn.

I am a resident of the Coverdale who would significantly benefit from improved mobile and broadband connections. We struggle and feel disadvantaged by not having any mobile reception. People in urban areas and other parts of the Dales have had coverage for many years now and if you have this connectivity people tend to take it for granted – connectivity is not going to go away, this year highlights this.

The MANY project offers us an opportunity to do something about it. Some parts of Coverdale are lucky enough to Fibre to the premises but unfortunately this cannot be relied on to provide total coverage and there are many properties that will not get any increase in speeds or new infrastructure for a long time. Like most parts of the UK, communication needs to be a mixture of both good broadband and mobile coverage.

The MANY project has carried out significant community engagement. This project gives us an opportunity to change Coverdale for the better, whilst influencing future Government policy. We need to bring Coverdale and similar areas in line with the rest of the UK so we can ensure the sustainability of the area.

I publicly back the project and their request for planning and have highlighted the benefits and the need for mobile communication following on from this cover letter.

Yours Faithfully

Leo Morris

The Saddle Room Restaurant Tupgill Park, Coverdale. Leyburn. North Yorkshire DL8 4TJ REDACTED BY YDNPA

Supporting Better Coverage For the Future

Tupgill park estate welcomes over 145,000 visitors to the area from all over the UK as well as maintaining 400 acres of land. We have 13 accommodation units for social housing that has residents living here. We have 7 visitor residential cottages and 9 bed and breakfast rooms which brings our total stayover visitors to 54 people. We also have The Saddle Room Restaurant and wedding venue which welcomes over 60 weddings per year into the area. The Forbidden Corner (tourist attraction) is a large part of the estate and has won numerous awards as well as attracting 120,000 people. As an estate, we would estimate that we employ approximately 60 people. We welcome many people from Coverdale through our doors and have a thriving local trade. We feel disadvantaged by not having communication with Broadband and also mobile communication which is taken for granted in many other parts of the UK.

We have struggled and feel disadvantaged by not having any mobile reception here for many years. People in larger conurbations or other areas of the UK have had 2g, 3g, and 4g for many years now and if you have this connectivity people tend to take it for granted. We now have the opportunity to do something about this as previously the argument has always been from the network operators that Coverdale is not commercially viable to put the infrastructure in. I totally appreciate Local feelings are mixed and feel we need to be helpful and proactive as well as being able to freely put our right of speech forward with no fear. Some parts of Coverdale will be lucky enough to get FTTP (Fibre to the Premises) and this will make a huge difference to the way we work and live but unfortunately, this can’t be relied on to provide total coverage and there are many properties that will not get any increase in speeds or new infrastructure for a long time. Like most parts of the UK communications need to be a mixture of both 1) Good Broadband and 2) Mobile Coverage.

We find in this day and age that you can actually drive 40 mins or more from Pinkers Pond to Kettlewell with NO signal available and this needs addressing. This is a busy route for tourists/locals and people coming to enjoy the area of outstanding natural beauty.

I first heard of the project in 2019 via the Darlington and Stockton Times since then I have been following information via Middleham Council, Leyburn Council, Richmondshire today, Northern Echo, Dales Radio. In addition, attended the four local Zoom meetings with the local parish. We have spoken with NYCC, MANY and our Councillors to get more information or ask a specific question. We have always found them to be available and helpful. As residents and having grown up in Coverdale as well as being successful business operators in the area. I have attended 4 parish zoom call meetings and looked into the allegations of mobile communication; we would like to state the following publicly in response to the latest Zoom. We have listened to what has been said and have spoken to NYCC as well as MANY and researched as to the best of our ability using external sources and would like to put our feelings forward.

The Saddle Room Restaurant Tupgill Park, Coverdale. Leyburn. North Yorkshire DL8 4TJ REDACTED BY YDNPA

Benefits Social and Business

Staff and Social Wellbeing

· Young staff who can’t drive and rely on transport need to be able to phone parents · We have had situations where employees working around the estate have had the need for emergency contact due to an accident and can’t get hold of people. · We want to attract quality people who live and work in Coverdale and contribute to the local economy. Not being able to speak to people or use mobile communication like a lot of other places is a disadvantage and looked at in a bad light. · We want our hardworking staff to have the best quality of life and mobile communication is important to this wellbeing. · Getting hold of staff on a large country estate is a challenge and being able to phone them is a major benefit. · In emergency situations on the estate particularly with elderly people it is crucial to have this for safety. Utilizing mobile technology and GPRS · On a wedding day myself and the team will regularly work 16 hours and our main priority are wedding guests and the bride and groom’s big day. We have very limited opportunity (say while speeches are on) to phone our kids and loved ones. Connectivity would mean we can do this.

Business and Services

· Banking and other websites/ Businesses more and more are relying on 2-factor authentications i.e. BT, Amazon, which require you to receive a text message. Having to constantly drive onto the moor to get a signal is not acceptable. · Weddings are a big part of the estate and providers such as DJs or photo booths can’t connect to social media when around the estate or on-site. · Contractors on the estate need to be able to communicate with suppliers locally and time is wasted driving to a communication-enabled area to be able to order basic materials. · Any conferences we have had have always complained about mobile communication and this is restricting us as a business moving forward. · More and more people are wanting virtual show around which is impossible with no full coverage. · Criminal activity in rural areas is an issue and to be able to have the ability to erect a security camera in a suspect area really makes a difference. · Social media is a big part of the business and according to public information Facebook, YouTube and WhatsApp are the big three platforms. Not being able to up load remote content or respond to customer questions can lose our business and reputation. · We have many oil tanks and LPG tanks on the estate, not being able to get accurate telemetry is hard and we have had instances where we have run out. · SMART meters are being rolled out and again having to read meters all the time is tiresome when the technology is already there. · We host shooting parties that use live ammunition and firearms there is an obvious safety issue. These are well organized days but there needs to be a provision in place regards accidents. In addition, organizing beaters and communication between drives is really important and relies on walkie talkies at the moment. The Saddle Room Restaurant Tupgill Park, Coverdale. Leyburn. North Yorkshire DL8 4TJ REDACTED BY YDNPA

· False fire alarms and intruder alarms can mean local residents or the monitoring company trying to find me physically rather than simply phoning me. Benefits Customers and Farmers

Customers

· Guests staying not being able to make calls and my staff fielding a huge number of complaints. · Emergency situations with guests where paramedics need to speak directly to the person or need to get hold of myself for assistance and end up wandering around looking for help. · The public image of Coverdale not being connected and in the 21st Century with technology. · Doctors giving a consultation via mobile phones. · Imagine your big wedding day looking over the stunning Coverdale landscape but not able to share this with friends and family. · Due to its rural location and post code size coverage, we have many customers who get lost and are arriving stressed because they can’t contact us for directions. · Timing of tables is critical in a hospitality situation if people are traveling especially from the top of Coverdale and are running late, they have no way of getting in contact with us. · As a responsible personal license holder, it is essential that people can phone for lifts and taxis and when taxis arrive, they can announce their presence for pick up. · Guests often walk or cycle around the area and being able to have access to communication is essential

Regarding Farming and dealing with livestock in rural parts of the community these people are often alone and without the ability to communicate to family, friends or other help i.e., veterinary. Farmers often operate in a sole environment and use dangerous machinery for example tractors, straw choppers, the dangers of PTO shafts, trailers and equipment, and slurry pits not only general communication is essential but emergency situations could be covered by having cellular technology.

Initially, we were told locally through the leaflet drop many allegations of what this project would mean for us and all this was very concerning and worrying however after research and speaking with MANY and NYCC here are my findings. “Visually intrusive communications network” and that “repeater stations would be placed every 300 meters to work”. From the meeting and speaking with the project organizers we learned that there would only be 3 masts situated around Coverdale for the technology to work. The masts which conjure up visions of huge lattice metal structures are actually just a telegraph pole and the technology attached is not huge. So “masts all over the place” is not going to happen.

The Saddle Room Restaurant Tupgill Park, Coverdale. Leyburn. North Yorkshire DL8 4TJ REDACTED BY YDNPA

My personal belief in relation to safety and EMR is that we must base my decision upon the information that has been given to me by Government and associate bodies at this time and I must also have the belief that Government and councils would not deploy technology that is going to intentionally harm its population. Furthermore, I have to make the assumption that NYCC is acting in our best interest. We have been informed that the level of EMR is NOT 5g strength and is much lower and is more at the 4g level which was launched in 2012 so more than 8 years ago which if there were issues surely, we would have been informed by now.

In Summary

I really think we have a golden opportunity to change Coverdale for the better and for the benefit of our generation and the next generation. This is happening NOW and Personally, I can’t see the need or desire for mobile communication diminishing and don’t want Coverdale to be ostracized because of it. Please support. If the aim is to get mobile communication in a safe way then I urge people to work with the project to get their desired outcome.

Comment

Planetary electromagnetic pollution: it is time to assess its impact

As the Planetary Health Alliance moves forward after a anthropogenic environmental exposure since the mid- productive second annual meeting, a discussion on the 20th century, and levels will surge considerably again, rapid global proliferation of artificial electromagnetic as technologies like the Internet of Things and 5G add fields would now be apt. The most notable is the millions more radiofrequency transmitters around us. blanket of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation, Unprecedented human exposure to radiofrequency largely microwave radiation generated for wireless electromagnetic radiation from conception until death communication and surveillance technologies, as has been occurring in the past two decades. Evidence mounting scientific evidence suggests that prolonged of its effects on the CNS, including altered neuro­ exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation development14 and increased risk of some neuro­ has serious biological and health effects. However, degenerative diseases,15 is a major concern considering public exposure regulations in most countries con­ the steady increase in their incidence. Evidence exists tinue to be based on the guidelines of the International for an association between neuro­develop­mental or Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection1 and 2 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, which 109 ICNIRP (occupational peak) 2010s, typical were established in the 1990s on the belief that only ICNIRP (occupational) 1980s, typical ICNIRP (public peak) 1950s, typical ICNIRP (public) Natural background acute thermal effects are hazardous. Prevention of tissue 106 heating by radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation is now proven to be ineffective in preventing biochemical 103 and physiological interference. For example, acute non-thermal exposure has been shown to alter human 1 brain metabolism by NIH scientists,3 electrical activity in the brain,4 and systemic immune responses.5 Chronic ) –3 2 10 exposure has been associated with increased oxidative stress and DNA damage6,7 and cancer risk.8 Laboratory 10–6 studies, including large rodent studies by the US National Toxicology Program9 and Ramazzini Institute of Italy,10 10–9 GHz end of ICNIRP radiofrequency guidance 300 confirm these biological and health effects in vivo. As we Power flux density ( W/m 2010s address the threats to human health from the changing 10–12 environmental conditions due to human activity,11 g the increasing exposure to artificial electromagnetic 1980s –15 radiation needs to be included in this discussion. 10 Due to the exponential increase in the use of wireless –18 1950s personal communication devices (eg, mobile or cordless 10 levision Medium-wave broadcastin phones and WiFi or Bluetooth-enabled devices) and broadcasting Short-wave VHF radio FM Te Mobile phones WiFi, etc Mobile phones, the infrastructure facilitating them, levels of exposure 0 106 109 1012 to radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation around 1 MHz 1 GHz 1 THz Frequency (Hz) the 1 GHz frequency band, which is mostly used for modern wireless communications, have increased from Figure: Typical maximum daily exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation from man-made and natural power flux densities in comparison with International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation extremely low natural levels by about 10¹⁸ times (figure). Protection safety guidelines1 Radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation is also used Anthropogenic radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation levels are illustrated for different periods in the evolution of wireless communication technologies. These exposure levels are frequently experienced daily by for radar, security scanners, smart meters, and medical people using various wireless devices. The levels are instantaneous and not time-averaged over 6 minutes as equipment (MRI, diathermy, and radiofrequency specified by International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection for thermal reasons. Figure modified from Philips and Lamburn12 with permission. Natural levels of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation were ablation). It is plausibly the most rapidly increasing based on the NASA review report CR-166661.13

www.thelancet.com/planetary-health Vol 2 December 2018 e512 Comment

behavioural disorders in children and exposure to natural electromagnetic fields, such as the Schumann wireless devices,14 and experimental evidence, such as Resonance that controls the weather and climate, the Yale finding, shows that prenatal exposure could have not been properly studied. Similarly, we do not cause structural and functional changes in the brain adequately understand the effects of anthropogenic associated with ADHD-like behaviour.16 These findings radio­frequency electromagnetic radiation on other deserve urgent attention. natural and man-made atmospheric components For the Oceania Radiofrequency At the Oceania Radiofrequency Scientific Advisory or the ionosphere. It has been widely claimed that Scientific Advisory Association see www.orsaa.org Association, an independent scientific organisation, radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation, being non- volunteering scientists have constructed the world’s ionising radiation, does not possess enough photon largest categorised online data­base of peer-reviewed energy to cause DNA damage. This has now been studies on radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation proven wrong experimentally.18,19 Radiofrequency and other man-made electromagnetic fields of lower electromagnetic radiation causes DNA damage frequencies. A recent evaluation of 2266 studies apparently through oxidative stress,7 similar to near-UV (including in-vitro and in-vivo studies in human, radiation, which was also long thought to be harmless. animal, and plant experimental systems and population At a time when environmental health scientists studies) found that most studies (n=1546, 68∙2%) tackle serious global issues such as climate change and have demonstrated significant biological or health chemical toxicants in public health, there is an urgent effects associated with exposure to anthropogenic need to address so-called electrosmog. A genuine electromagnetic fields. We have published our evidence-based approach to the risk assessment and preliminary data on radiofrequency electromagnetic regulation of anthropogenic electromagnetic fields radiation, which shows that 89% (216 of 242) of will help the health of us all, as well as that of our experimental studies that investigated oxidative stress planetary home. Some government health authorities endpoints showed significant effects.7 This weight of have recently taken steps to reduce public exposure to scientific evidence refutes the prominent claim that radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation by regulating the deployment of wireless technologies poses no use of wireless devices by children and recommending health risks at the currently permitted non-thermal preferential use of wired communication devices in radiofrequency exposure levels. Instead, the evidence general, but this ought to be a coordinated international For the International EMF supports the International EMF Scientist Appeal by effort. Scientist Appeal see www. emfscientist.org 244 scientists from 41 countries who have published on the subject in peer-reviewed literature and collectively *Priyanka Bandara, David O Carpenter petitioned the WHO and the UN for immediate Oceania Radiofrequency Scientific Advisory Association, measures to reduce public exposure to artificial Scarborough, QLD 4020, Australia (PB); and Institute for Health and the Environment, University at Albany, Rensselaer, NY, USA electromagnetic fields and radiation. (DOC) Evidence also exists of the effects of radiofrequency [email protected] electromagnetic radiation on flora and fauna. For We declare no competing interests. We thank Alasdair Philips for assistance with example, the reported global reduction in bees and the figure and Victor Leach and Steve Weller for assistance with the ORSAA Database, which has enabled our overview of the scientific evidence in this area other insects is plausibly linked to the increased of research. radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation in the Copyright © The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access environment.17 Honeybees are among the species article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. 1 International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection. ICNIRP that use magnetoreception, which is sensitive to guidelines for limiting exposure to time-varying electric, magnetic, and anthropogenic electromagnetic fields, for navigation. electromagnetic fields (up to 300GHz). Health Phys 1998; 74: 494–522. 2 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. IEEE C95.7-2014—IEEE Man-made electromagnetic fields range from recommended practice for radio frequency safety programs, 3 kHz to extremely low frequency (associated with electricity 300 GHz. IEEE Standards Association, 2014. https://standards.ieee.org/ standard/C95_7-2014.html (accessed Nov 6, 2018). supplies and electrical appliances) to low, medium, 3 Volkow ND, Tomasi D, Wang GJ, et al. Effects of cell phone radiofrequency high, and extremely high frequency (mostly associated signal exposure on brain glucose metabolism. JAMA 2011; 305: 808–13. 4 Schmid MR, Loughran SP, Regel SJ, et al. Sleep EEG alterations: effects of with wireless communication). The potential effects different pulse-modulated radio frequency electromagnetic of these anthropogenic electromagnetic fields on fields. J Sleep Res 2012; 21: 50–58.

e513 www.thelancet.com/planetary-health Vol 2 December 2018 Comment

5 Kimata H. Microwave radiation from cellular phones increases 13 Raines JK. NASA-CR-166661. Electromagnetic field interactions with the allergen-specific IgE production. Allergy 2005; 60: 838–39. human body: observed effects and theories. NASA Technical Reports 6 Zothansiama, Zosangzuali M, Lalramdinpuii M, Jagetia GC. Impact of Server, 1981. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa. radiofrequency radiation on DNA damage and antioxidants in peripheral gov/19810017132.pdf (accessed Oct 10, 2018). blood lymphocytes of humans residing in the vicinity of mobile phone base 14 Divan HA, Kheifets L, Obel C, Olsen J. Prenatal and postnatal exposure to stations. Electromagn Biol Med 2017;36: 295–305. cell phone use and behavioral problems in children. Epidemiology 2008; 7 Bandara P, Weller S. Biological effects of low-intensity radiofrequency 19: 523–29. electromagnetic radiation—time for a paradigm shift in regulation of 15 Zhang X, Huang WJ, Chen WW. Microwaves and Alzheimer’s disease. public exposure. Radiat Protect Australas 2017; 34: 2–6. Exp Ther Med 2016; 12: 1969–72. 8 Carlberg M, Hardell L. Evaluation of mobile phone and cordless phone use 16 Aldad TS, Gan G, Gao XB, Taylor HS. Fetal radiofrequency radiation and glioma risk using the bradford hill viewpoints from 1965 on exposure from 800–1900 mhz-rated cellular telephones affects association or causation. Biomed Res Int 2017; 2017: 9218486. neurodevelopment and behavior in mice. Sci Rep 2012; 2: 312. 9 Cell phone radio frequency radiation. National Toxicology Program, 17 Taye RR, Deka MK, Rahman A, Bathari M. Effectof electromagnetic US Department of Health and Human Services, 2018. https://ntp.niehs.nih. radiation of cell phone tower on foraging behaviour of Asiatic honey bee, gov/results/areas/cellphones/index.html (accessed Nov 8, 2018). Apis cerana F. (Hymenoptera: Apidae). J Entomol Zool Stud 2017; 5: 1527–29. 10 Falcioni L, Bua L, Tibaldi E, et al. Report of final results regarding brain and 18 Smith-Roe SL, Wyde ME, Stout MD, et al. Evaluation of the genotoxicity of heart tumors in Sprague-Dawley rats exposed from prenatal life until cell phone radiofrequency radiation in male and female rats and mice natural death to mobile phone radiofrequency field representative of a following subchronic exposure. Environmental Mutagenesis and Genomics 1.8GHz GSM base station environmental emission. Environ Res 2018; Society Annual Conference; Raleigh, NC, USA; Sept 9–13, 2017. 165: 496–503. 19 Ruediger HW. Genotoxic effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. 11 Myers SS. Planetary health: protecting human health on a rapidly changing Pathophysiology 2009; 16: 89–102. planet. Lancet 2018; 390: 2860–68. 12 Philips A, Lamburn G. Natural and human-activity-generated electromagnetic fields on Earth.Childhood Cancer 2012; London; April 24–26, 2012.

www.thelancet.com/planetary-health Vol 2 December 2018 e514 CAAV Statement

Beware dangers of telecoms masts

21 January 2020

Landowners are being warned of the hidden risks and responsibilities associated with having telecommunications masts on their land.

The Central Association of Agricultural Valuers (CAAV) is urging landowners to request information on radiation exclusion zones from operators of telecoms masts located on their land.

Though non-ionising, significant levels of exposure to the radio waves emitted by base stations on telecoms masts can affect health, requiring exclusion zones to protect people, says Jeremy Moody, secretary and adviser to the CAAV. With the roll out of 5G, these exclusion zones will be expanded significantly as the range of potentially dangerous radio waves is far greater than for 4G.

Although guidelines for these exclusion zones; set by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation (ICNIRP), are mandatory in the UK, mast operators are only required to self-certificate compliance when they make a planning application. The government does not require operators to give details of zones to those they affect.

The guidelines state that exclusion zones for workers and the public should be mapped by the operator. Exclusion zones are typically governed by the direction of the mast and the power being used, and are usually above ground level, with height exclusion depending on the height of the antennae. However, there is no requirement for operators to notify owners, site neighbours or the public of these areas.

“Usually, that means that nobody but the operator knows the areas in which people might be at risk and so cannot manage liabilities,” says Mr Moody. Ofcom, the industry regulator, has no duties related to exposure to electromagnetic field emissions.

When applying for planning permission for a larger mast, operators are only required to confirm the mast will comply with ICNIRP guidelines and do not have to disclose the exclusion boundaries; meaning that neither the owner nor the planning authority is able to assess the effect of the mast on buildings, land or other activities.

Furthermore, not even this declaration is required where the mast is within permitted development rights. Similarly, where a mast is upgraded from 4G to 5G, the operator does not have to make this declaration or even highlight the increased size of exclusion zones.

For landowners, this means there can be unforeseen issues with buildings, which could be within the exclusion zone unbeknown to the site owner, potentially putting workers or visitors at risk.

It can limit the construction of new buildings both on the site owner’s land and on neighbouring sites, as an exclusion zone can extend beyond a site’s boundaries. However, the landowner and the planning office are unlikely to be aware of the extent of the exclusion zone.

“Landowners may also find themselves in a difficult situation whereby existing buildings are made redundant by exclusion zones,” says Mr Moody. “As landowners are not permitted to request the removal of apparatus from their land on these grounds, this could potentially cause costly issues whether sterilising the use of land or carrying liability.”

“In addition, providing a safe working environment for employees is a legal requirement of any employer, so any landowner with employees needs to take account of potential hazards for those working,” he adds. It’s therefore important to obtain full ICNIRP drawings and site-specific radio frequency plans so that the exclusion zone can be understood and to comply with legal obligations.

“It’s also important to ask for information on any upgrades to the mast, such as from 4G to 5G,” advises Mr Moody. “Should an operator refuse to supply this information to the site provider, this should be cause for concern.”

Many older agreements passed responsibilities to the landowner, often without their knowledge, so it’s vital if negotiating a new agreement that landowners are aware of the issues. Terms should hold the operator fully liable for losses and claims arising from the mast, he explains.

Additionally, site owners may wish to stipulate contractual terms restricting the expansion of exclusion zones, require the site to be switched off for the landowner or others to carry out work within the exclusion zone and make operators liable for any necessary staff training.

“Landowners may be entirely unaware of the situations they are in, which could lead to all sorts of issues down the line,” warns Mr Moody. “It may be a shocking revelation to a lot of people and I would suggest getting advice and taking action if you are affected.”