David Lort-Philips writes to the Spectator about the pitfalls inherent the National Trust’s maximalist approach towards the countryside.

Sir: Charles Moore asks ‘Will the National Trust see sense?’ after receiving a circular from the National Trust enthusing about its recently announced ten-year farming and rural strategy (Notes, 18 January). As a farmer with a small area of woodland leased from the Trust, and with other joint activities ongoing with them over the past 50 years, I share his doubts.

Moore writes that ‘the Trust intends “to subtly move into territory beyond its remit”’. No doubt it will hotly deny such criticism. But this ignores a fundamental point. Firstly, the space is already occupied and farmed by landowners and their tenants working under manifold existing constraints. It is also overrun by a host of other agencies and interests enforcing their own rules and regulations. Above are regional and national government bodies applying policies of their choice to support the farming and rural sector. Below flourish a plethora of conservation bodies, statutory local and regional authorities, rural communities, civic bodies and special interests such as ramblers and anglers and those seeking improved access.

Does the Trust have the wit and ability to extend its remit, collaborate with these many interests and help – rather than hamper – their efforts? Given existing Trust structures and readiness to adapt to suggestion from countryside interests, experience suggests that it does not.

David Lort-Phillips

Lawrenny, Pembrokeshire