In 2016 I sent some questions to Professor Mark Wilson, Wooster, Ohio, on Wicklesham Quarry. He carried out research at Wicklesham in the mid-1980s, and discovered a new genus and three new species of fossils. I asked him about the depth and extent of the Faringdon Sponge Gravels, and the uniqueness of the fossils for which Wicklesham Quarry is internationally famous. These are crucial questions in relation to the conservation needs of Wicklesham Quarry. Is it really the case that these extraordinary fossils are found nowhere else on earth?! You can read his answers below.
For a long time Faringdon Council has claimed that “only the sides” of the 29 acre SSSI have any geological significance. This was supported by Oxfordshire Geology Trust* whose report - on behalf of the landowner – wrongly claimed there was “minimal geological interest” in the base itself. However, geologists Professors Keith Jeffery and Mark Wilson, and the late Norman Snelling** of Faringdon, the Geological Society, as well as the 2008 British Geological survey, contradict that view. The British Geological Survey records that the Faringdon Sponge Gravels are 50 metres deep! You can read our earlier criticisms of the report of Oxfordshire Geology Trust here: https://www.change.org/p/the-vale-of-white-horse-district-council-and-secretary-of-state-michael-gove-protect-wicklesham-quarry-from-development/u/32660850
Mark Wilson described “fond memories of weeks spent in the Wicklesham Pit, often crouched under an umbrella, studying the encrusted and bored cobbles of the Faringdon Sponge Gravels”. He wrote “I am very much in favor of the highest level of protection for this site that is possible.”
Here are my questions plus Professor Wilson’s answers from 2016:
1) Me: "The British Geological Survey description (record attached) states that the 'Faringdon sand formation' is sub-divided, distinguishing 'Faringdon Sponge Gravels' from other related formations nearby. I have not seen a map that shows the full location and extent of the Faringdon Sponge Gravels, and I wonder if you could help me with that? If there is no map, could you offer any view based on your knowledge?"
Prof. Wilson: “In my day the extent of the exposed Faringdon Sponge Gravels was essentially confined to the gravel pits themselves. There was no other place for me to go to study the unit. This is not geologically surprising because of the way the gravels were deposited in limited tidal channels. The only maps I’ve seen show the gravels only in the pits.”
2) Me: "I have read that particular fossils found at the Wicklesham and Coxwell Pits Site of Special Scientific Interest are not found at nearby Badbury Clump or Folly Hill- is that correct as far as you are aware? What is your view on how localised the materials found at the SSSI are, at least as far as current knowledge exists?"
Prof. Wilson: “The fossils I worked with were indeed confined to the Wicklesham and Cowell Pits. They are (or at least were) highly localized. This is, of course, a large part of their value and significance.”
3) Me: "My other question concerns the depth of the material of scientific interest at Wicklesham Quarry. I was surprised to read in the British Geological Survey that the thickness of the Faringdon Sponge Gravel could be up to 50 metres. Do you have specific knowledge on this, or know how this was assessed?"
Prof. Wilson: “In my day the thickness of the gravels was determined by boreholes in the region. The pit owners at the time showed me charts measuring the vertical extent of the gravels. Again, geologically this is not a surprise given the depositional conditions.”
4) Me: "The JNCC monitoring guidelines*** suggest that no alterations of a permanent character should be permitted to a SSSI of this class. I am interested to know whether the base of the quarry has the potential to be of further scientific interest, either now or in the future.
The existing scheme for the quarry is for its restoration and return to agricultural use, retaining exposed 'conservation faces' and spoil heaps. Since agricultural restoration involves only soil and soft materials, it would not permanently close off the base of the quarry, or as I understand it, damage the SSSI."
Prof. Wilson: “Yes, this is my understanding.”
5) Me: "However a new proposal is to use the quarry for industrial warehousing. This would involve changes of a permanent nature, involving buildings and roads etc. I am trying to understand what these might mean for the scientific value of the quarry, in particular the base. I should add that the quarrying operations finished some years ago, and the depth of the quarry floor is now around 10 metres from the surrounding ground level."
Prof. Wilson: “Industrial build-up of any kind on the base of the quarry will make future access to the thick extent of gravels beneath the quarry floor very difficult, if not impossible. It will also restrict access to the remaining quarry faces. I’ve been to many geological SSSIs in England and by far the best neighbor for these sites is agriculture, not industry.”
Mark A. Wilson, Lewis M. and Marian Senter Nixon Professor of Natural Sciences and Geology,
The College of Wooster, Wooster, OH 44691
You can read Professor Mark Wilson’s research paper on Wicklesham Quarry here: https://www.palass.org/sites/default/files/media/publications/palaeontology/volume_29/vol29_part4_pp691-703.pdf
Professor Wilson’s answers to my questions in 2016 will be submitted to Oxfordshire County Council as an OBJECTION to the current planning application, on the grounds of "harm to the SSSI" contrary to Local Plan policies.
The Geological Society has already written to Oxfordshire County Council to say:
"this development could damage, obscure or destroy a number of significant geological features in the area" and "the loss of this special site of scientific interest would also mean a loss of access for researchers, students and interested public to a unique environment containing an internationally unique fossilised faunal assemblage and palaeogeomorphological environment."
Eminent geologists are in agreement that:
Wicklesham Quarry is a “FINITE SITE”. There is no other location known where its extraordinary resources can be found: they reflect a set of environmental conditions which, as far as we know, has never occurred anywhere else on earth! Its conservation objectives MUST take into account the importance of the 50 metre deep Faringdon Sponge Gravels for future scientific research, and the need to retain unimpeded access (including 3 dimensional visual access) to the quarry walls.
Remember- you can submit a response to the current consultation on any issue you wish – it does not have to be limited to the applicants' recent submissions.
We will post more information throughout the consultation period on the new submissions, as well as links to earlier updates (which can all be found at the bottom of the petition page).
Email: protectwicklesham@gmail.com
Special thanks to Peter for your recent email.
*Oxfordshire Geology Trust, formed in 2000, should not be mistaken for Oxford Geology Group, founded in 1957, which has close ties to Oxford University.
Oxfordshire Geology Trust’s website states its mission is to ‘protect locally important sites by surveying them, and if necessary designating them as Local Geology Sites (formerly known as RIGS).’
**Norman Snelling’s excellent essays on the geology of the Faringdon Sponge Gravels used to be on Faringdon Community Website – but the link appears to have been removed. I have sent an inquiry. One of them is here: www.faringdon.org/uploads/1/4/7/6/14765418/faringdon_rocks_norman_snelling.pdf
*** The 2004 Joint Nature Conservation Committee’s (JNCC) Common Standards Monitoring Guidance for Earth Science Sites can be accessed here: https://hub.jncc.gov.uk/assets/25d8bdb4-a2ad-4ae9-b341-eb21daf0bc09