Sir,

With reference to the comments made by members of Tenby Town Council regarding our application to the county council for the path from Upper Hill Park and Seascape to Slippery Back through the cemetery be recognised as an official public pathway. This path has been used for the last 35 years and longer by members of the public, not only from surrounding residential area, but also from the town etc., especially when visiting the cemetery. Since this path has been used for so many years without any objection from any authority, it therefore, under the Public Rights of Way Act, should now be made an official footpath.

We were informed that the county council is now the authority for public rights of way, hence our application. This application was necessary because Tenby Town Council, or an individual councillor, decided to block the entrance at Upper Hill Park and Seascape end with a mound of earth etc., to prevent entry into the cemetery last year.

Needless to say, incensed members of the public soon trampled this mound of earth down, thereby re-opening the path, and not the town council, as they said they did. In fact, we wrote to the council on January 5, 2001, complaining about the action they had taken and also requested that the recently painted notice added to the cemetery notice stating, 'It is not a public right of way' be erased.

Copies of this letter were sent to Pembrokeshire County Council, the National Park Authority and Clr. Michael Williams, with the only reply being received from the National Park.

With regards to the dumping of rubbish, practically all of it has been put there by Tenby Town Council, and includes garden refuse from council gardens, rusty old iron town seats and rubble.

A letter from our association complaining about this rubbish dump in the cemetery and accompanied by photographic evidence was first sent to the town council in June 1999.

For the council to say that it is 'morally wrong' and a 'travesty' for people to walk through a cemetery beggars belief, in view if the rubbish they have dumped there. The view from the cemetery is one to be appreciated and many people enjoy the peace and beauty of the area.

With regard to the dog fouling in the cemetery, it is minimal compared to that on the pavements of the town. Perhaps the council should direct their energies in that direction.

We would take this opportunity to remind the council that some years ago, without consultation, they decided to appoint a councillor to sit in on our committee meetings as an observer for a period of two or three years. The then Clr. Day regularly attended our meetings, which was beneficial to both parties.

On the retirement of Clr. Day, Tenby Town Council decided to appoint two councillors to sit on our committee, i.e. Clr. Edge and Clr. Fecci. These councillors attended only one meeting, although we regularly informed the town clerk well in advance of our meetings, as we had been doing for the previous years.

The councillors concerned failed to make any further appearances. We therefore naturally assumed that the Tenby Town Council were no longer interested, so we ceased to continue informing them.

Regarding a site meeting, we would be happy to meet the county council if they thought it necessary, although we also feel the parameters needed to establish this right of way have been met.

The Chairman

and Committee,

North Tenby Residents Association.