REPRESENTATIVES from groups opposed to the Compulsory Purchase Order being made for the shooting rights on the field of the new livestock market at Bryngwyn gave their views at last week's inquiry.

The shooting rights covenant details a ten metre strip within the County Council owned land along its southern edge, where currently up to eight guns can be stationed up to ten times per year. The licence holder, also argues that he has the right to retrieve dead or injured birds from the rest of the field.

Paul Brown QC said, "The acquisition of the Bryngwyn site appears to have been the result of an opportunistic purchase by the council without any consultation with either the public or even with the council's main partner in the enterprise.

"As far as the livestock market is concerned its not classed as 'agriculture' rather, it is sui genoris use. Therefore if the market is not for agriculture then by definition it can not be 'agricultural development'. The most that can be said about the proposed market is that it makes a contribution to agriculture by providing a means for local farmers to sell their livestock.

"The council expects to spend in excess of £5million developing the new market at Bryngwyn, but will lease the facility to Abergavenny and Newport Market Auctioneers Ltd at a basic rent of £35,000 per annum.

"Even with up-lift provisions this could take the rent to £50,000 if the business is good. This return of just one percent to the authority is well below what would normally be regarded as a commercially viable rate."

He additionally pointed out that even the authority's own planning permission limits the site's activities to diversify and added, "The conditions restrict the use of the new facility to the sale of livestock with a maximum of four farm machinery sales a year and the reason given for this is that livestock and farm machinery sales are appropriate in rural areas, other forms of retail may not be appropriate of sustainable in such a location.

"In other words the authority has promised to maintain the market for 50 years regardless of whether it is viable or not.

"If the market for whatever reason cannot be accommodated in Abergavenny, that does not make it right to leap to the site at Bryngwyn.

"The shooting rights have the value of a ransom strip because in any case than where the land is in the ownership of the acquiring authority it is not dissimilar to having the benefit of a restrictive covenant over the neighbouring property. The shooting rights are therefore not something which can be brushed aside as frivolous or lightweight. It is time that this runaway train was stopped in its tracks and recommend that the order should not be confirmed."

Arfon Hughes from Mango Planning and Development said, "The viability of the scheme in Bryngwyn is not certain. On the one hand there are funds available to build it, yet if the existing market site is not sold to Morrisons or the Abergavenny Improvement Acts are not repealed, then by the acquiring authority's own admission the permission will not be granted. The viability of the Bryngwyn site is uncertain at present it would be unreasonable to take away Mr Jack Hanbury-Tenison's shooting rights while the uncertainly of the subject site proposal is so unclear.

Mr Capel Hanbury-Tenison said, "I have permission to shoot on land at Bryngwyn since a license was issued in August 2003 and it has never withdrawn.

"I shoot over this area personally and as part of a syndicate and I only recently became aware of the restrictions of the deed of exchange for the need to give 24 hours notice when I intended to shoot. I have never asked for permission in all this time."

Philip Bowyer, a former trades union representative, gave evidence on behalf of the Keep Abergavenny Livestock market campaigners and said, "While taking away somebody's shooting rights is of concern our main issue however is the success of the livestock market in Abergavenny. And even though it is almost derelict it does very well, despite the county council not insisting that repairs are carried out to the site.

"It has taken the inquiry to prompt the publication of the Alder King report into the costings of renovating the current site, which I feel should be investigated further.

"We believe that the internal configuration could be redesigned to make the livestock market work on the site where it has been for over 150 years."

Jenny Long representing KALM added, "One would assume that the public would want to weigh the advantage and value for money for Abergavenny regeneration of running a £5 million project at Bryngwyn for the farmers when the farmers actually currently contribute to the in-town economy and life."

Anthony Porten QC pointed out to the objectors to the Bryngwyn scheme, "The land here being acquired is 'rights over land' only as the land in question is already in the ownership of the authority. No development is taking place on this land aside from that which has planning permission for a cattle market.

"Jack Hanbury-Tenison has not given any documentary evidence himself to the inquiry that he has exercised the shooting rights, or that he obtains any personal enjoyment or financial benefit from them or that he will suffer any adverse consequences as a result of the acquisition.

"He has not given evidence to that effect or allowed himself to be questioned at all on the merits of his case.

"The only evidence of any shooting on the land was given by Capel Hanbury-Tenison who was unable to support his evidence with any record of shooting he claimed to have done at the Bryngwyn field by way of production of game keeping records or otherwise.

"Mr Capel Hanbury-Tenison has never complied with the conditions in that he has never given notice of his intention to shoot and that any shooting by him, except for the 2003 season has been without authority.

"Mr Jack Hanbury-Tenison has not given evidence that he has given any further permission by his brother or any persons since that year."

"The county council intends to create a livestock market on the site but that intention depends on the acquisition of these shooting rights which benefit only on a limited area of the objector's vast land holding which can only be exercised at most ten occasions a year.

"No evidence has been produced by the holder of the rights showing that he will in any way be personally inconvenienced .

"The purpose for which the (rights over) land are being acquired is to cleanse the site to enable the livestock market to go ahead.

A good deal of inquiry time has been spent in discussing alternative locations. Two of these have been rejected because that are no longer available and Jack Hanbury-Tenison's application for a livestock market at Mamhilad has only just been submitted leaving no time for the Torfaen planning authority to give its views on it before this inquiry.

"Of the non-statutory objectors none of them has any interest in the shooting rights; none objects to the acquisition of those rights as such and none argues that the rights have any value in the public interest.

"The objectors' main interest is the granting of planning permission for the redevelopment of the current cattle market site in Abergavenny and as such they must be disregarded as they are repeating the objections that were made to the development of the Morrisons supermarket.

"The suggestions made by KALM for alternative proposals for the redevelopment of the site in Abergavenny have not been put to the authority or discussed with farmers or the users of the market.

"On the briefest examination the proposals can be seen to be impracticable and not well considered and unsurprising there is no indication of any developer or tenant interest in such proposals.

"The acquisition of these limited rights is clearly not disproportionate to the obviously public benefits. On the contrary to prevent the development purely in order to preserve those private rights would be to give them wholly disproportionate weight. The objector is not being deprived of his home, his livelihood or even of any 'land ' in the usual sense."

Inspector Clive Nield said, "I will be submitting my report to the Welsh Government in four to five weeks time. I don't know if the minister's decision on this compulsory purchase order will be tied to the decision being made on the repeal of the Abergavenny Acts.

In making my report I shall not be waiting for the decision of the repeal of the acts to be announced, but will make my recommendations as things stand today."