The presence of mining remains on the proposed site does not in itself give grounds for objection, you have to consider what impact the proposal has on them in the light of how important they are (heritage significance). I had a quick look at the archaeological assessment on the application last night and the consultants had graded them as locally significant (the lowest ranking), but not knowing the remains around Furness myself I can't say whether that is a fair assessment or not - in my experience, most professional archaeologists have little or no experience of mining archaeology and all too often parrot things they've read without the understanding and context to be properly critical of them. There's a CATMHS survey of the mining remains referenced, that would provide a starting point but really it needs someone with a good knowledge of the area remains and an idea of how the Furness iron mining industry fits into the wider UK picture to say whether or not there are good grounds to object based on impacts to the mining remains.
Having said that, if there's a significant population of natterjack toads on the site, then that's a far stronger pillar to build a case against on, which I presume is CWT's starting point.
www.thewestmorlandgazette.co.uk
