Survey shows majority want Cannop Ponds to stay the same

The ponds were created in the 19th century to power former iron works

The majority of people want a natural beauty spot to stay the same, according to a survey conducted on its future.

Forestry England is deciding on the future of Cannop Ponds in The Forest of Dean after declaring its dams are no longer safe at holding back the water and present a flood risk.

More than 61% of the public said they wanted the spillway and dam upgraded.

This would see the the dams raised and strengthened to allow the popular ponds to remain as they are now.

Forestry England has said the status quo is "not an option".

In total, 736 responses were collected from its public engagement sessions, which were held face-to-face and online in the spring.

A Forestry England inspection earlier this year found issues with the 200-year-old dams at Cannop Ponds

The public were given four options:

• A spillway and dam upgrade to allow the ponds to remain as they are now.

• A storm water storage option, which would see the upper pond become and series of smaller ponds and the lower pond retained but dropped by one to two metres.

• A cascade of smaller ponds, which involves the removal of the spillways and the construction of "leaky, woody" structures to hold water.

• The removal of both spillways to create a mix of grassland and woodland habitats, resulting in the loss of both ponds.

Of those responses, 61% said they would prefer option one, and only 11% of responses ranked option one as being their second, third or fourth preference, with 28% recording no first preference.

Whilst this option was the most supported, there were also many observations on how it could be improved, and concerns about how it might be implemented.

Kevin Stannard said the deterioration of the dams is a serious concern

Kevin Stannard, deputy surveyor for Forestry England, explained: "We have seen a strong passion for Cannop Ponds and people have given us their concerns and ideas for the site's future.

"We have made the analysis available to everyone on our website.

"We still have more information to collect on flood modelling, ecology and the recent ground investigations before making a choice, so we won't be debating these specific results in public at the moment."