I AGREE with the writer who talks about the destruction of the green belt that is going on all around Lancaster.

There is no need for half the houses that are being built on green field sites, particularly as these houses are invariably large and spacious with big gardens, and obviously intended for the moneyed classes, while the government goes on about houses being needed for the poor and homeless, etc.

How can these houses possibly fulfil that need? It's just an excuse to let the greedy developers loose without regard to the consequences, namely that we are losing wilderness and countryside and wildlife, bird life, etc.

to an alarming degree.

And, yes! It does matter!

A world without wildlife, and only insects, (because, yes, they would survive) would be a pretty terrifying and desolate place for most of us.

Whinney Carr should be left as it is.

If you must have more houses, why not use the inner city sites and disused buildings?

Some very attractive housing has been made from old factories in Lancaster.

Can't the council use a bit of common sense instead of mindlessly jumping on the latest bandwagon, development, development? When we've got rid of all the green fields in the country, and killed all the wildlife, what will we do then, where escape from the towns and cities?

On another matter, I also agree with the writer who asks that people who put up notices about people's birthdays, usually in places where car drivers are distracted by them, should also take them down.

I suppose it's too much to ask that the police could do something about it.

In my opinion this craze is just another manifestation of the adolescent, self-indulgent society we have become.

Details supplied.