YOUR articles stating “sand dune removal” have been unnecessarily inflammatory (Gazette January 14).
The proposals are not to remove the sand dunes completely, but to re-site them further on to the beach, with a grassed area in front, as is the case with every other part of St Annes, all the way up to Fairhaven and also from the Sand Yacht Club down to the New Thursby home.
It appears Dr Newman is expected to not only organise all the work himself, but to maintain it ever after.
What does Fylde Council expect that they themselves should do with regard to beach maintenance? Would that be nothing at all?
That would not surprise me, as for as long as I’ve lived here, all they’ve done is create a massive problem by dumping wind-blown sand off the pavements and roads along North Promenade and the North Beach car park, and then done nothing at all to remedy it.
While this is hotly denied by the council, the residents here have watched it happening.
Why should a private individual have to do what the council has never done?
The statement from the council that “there’s a possibility the dune could start spreading again ... etc” caused me much amusement.
In fact, the only reason there would be a problem in the future is if they started dumping sand there again.
If you look at the dunes opposite King Edward School, they don’t have anything like the problems that North Promenade and Clifton Drive North have after the gales.
You expect some wind-blown sand living near a beach, but not the excessive tonnage we have to cope with.
All the people who would disagree with Dr Newman’s proposals do not live along this stretch, and have no idea of the problem or any concept of what we have to cope with.
I paid workmen for two days last week to remove five tons of sand from my front and back gardens, at a cost of £300, due to the dumped sand at the back of the North Beach car park.
The council have buried the car park wall with a 30-foot high heap of sand, planted grass on it, and called it a natural dune.
Those of us who saw them do it, know that it is no such thing, however much it is denied.
MRS B A CORCORAN,
Clifton Drive North,
LAST year, America saw 350,000 breast implants, the UK 70,000.
In both countries, more than 75 per cent were done for cosmetic reasons. The average cost of the latter was £3,000 to £4,000.
In short, we have been witnessing a cosmetic arms race, a race that sadly is involving girls as young as 10 years.
The Government has announced those women who wish to have their sub-standard PIP implants removed can have the operation on the NHS if the private company that carried out the original operation refuses to do so.
Given the ever-growing demand on the scarce resources of the NHS, I regard this as wrong.
To allocate public money to repair an operation done for purely cosmetic reasons, and funded privately, thereby diminishing that available for life-saving operations and drugs that can extend life is outrageous.
If women are unable to have their implants removed by the private company concerned, then they should be made responsible for funding the operation themselves.
DR BARRY CLAYTON,
WITH reference to recent articles about treatment at Blackpool Victoria Hospital, my experience was vastly different.
Aged 86, I was treated with dignity, respect and with a very professional attitude by all staff.
From an initial operation with the excellent Mr Dunkow and his team, right through to discharge, I was kept informed of everything that appertained to my treatment.
I also spent two nights in a private room with en-suite facilities, and given every assistance from physiotherapy staff to aid my recovery. There is no criticism from me.
L PRESTON Fairway, Fleetwood