I have commented on this in the past and would not do so again were it not for your article about one of the protesters writing and publishing some verses on the subject (Chronicle, January 26). 

The poet recalls her participation in the protest which delayed construction of the M3 by a number of months at enormous cost to the economy. 

I have not read her verses but she is quoted as recounting a return to St Catherine’s  Hill 10 years ago that prompted the writing of one of them. She said she walked from the station through the city to St Catherine’s, a walk where the latter part was not possible before the Twyford Down section of the M3 was constructed and a walk now enjoyed by many city residents and visitors. 

She goes on to rhapsodise about “black tarmac replacing white chalk” and the cutting being a “gaping chasm”. All totally subjective , over-orchestrated views shared, I suspect, by very few, if any, of the many people who now enjoy recreational access to the Down. 

Are those the reasons she and her compatriots wasted so much public money 30 years ago?  I thought it was more about ecological issues, so why didn’t she note the desolate scene of ecological despoliation? Quite simply because the contrary is the case and the natural regeneration of the sides of the cutting are now home to many more species than existed 30 years ago when the down was closely grazed by sheep.

Has the “precious hill” been DESTROYED —NO. 

Is the Chalkhill Blue butterfly now extinct —NO. 

Has the motorway failed to address the then traffic congestion problems —NO. 

Has the Rock Rose been killed off— I don’t know for certain but very much doubt it and it has been joined by more other species than were there 30 years ago. 

So a lost and pointless “battle” and a cause only of wasted resources. 

 

Michael Campbell,

Shalden,

Alton