Much of what Adam Trimingham said about the South Downs and the National Park is perfectly true ("The Sage of Sussex", The Argus, November 22) and we would wholeheartedly agree with most.
However, we cannot agree with his suggestion that the bypass should be taken as the boundary.
This would condemn parts of Southwick Hill, Foredown Hill and Tower, Mile Oak, Hangleton Bottom, Benfield Valley and Toads Hole Valley to being developed.
Any areas left out of the National Park will lose their Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty status.
Once this happens, there will be little local people can do to stop them disappearing under concrete.
As they stand, many of them are important gateways to, and are integrated with, the Downs to the north.
Including them would create the most logical boundary, that of the urban fringe.
If anyone is concerned about the future of these areas, they need to ensure they are involved in the Countryside Agency's public consultation on the National Park, which starts today.
-Chris Todd, Campaign Officer, South Downs Campaign
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article