The National Trust has prompted a farming family to leave Wembury and antagonized the locals
Red Ruby cattle could cope with extreme weather and were butchered locally.
Dear Editor,
New Barton Farm was a productive mixed produce farm with a farmer who had been a tenant for about 20 years. The tenant had hoped to continue farming here and pass the tenancy on to his son. However, about four years ago the National Trust made the family aware that a large proportion of the land they farmed would be given over to 're-wilding’, something that the government were offering large grants for. The family decided it was no longer viable to keep farming here and so left.
Before the tenants left we contacted the National Trust to express our concerns regarding their plans for the farm. We asked for clarification and consultation, as any plans for this farm would directly affect the community of Wembury parish and neighbours to the farm itself.
Right from the start it became clear that the individuals running the project were not interested in what the community felt or the impact their decisions would have on neighbours.
We asked time and time again for meetings and consultation regarding plans. After many months of emails, letters and phone calls, they finally offered a drop-in presentation in the village hall. This consisted of a very amateurish flip chart and post-it note session where we were invited to put ideas down on a inch square post-it note! This was extremely condescending to a community which is passionate about its environment. It was clear that they had their own agenda and were not at all interested in the views of the people who live here.
The tenant farmer left and within a few months one of the barns was rented out to a tree surgeon, supposedly to store equipment. It was soon was clear that this was a 24/7 operation which involved a large workforce and processing logs on site which caused an unacceptable amount of noise and quadrupled the amount of traffic travelling at speed along a single track lane used by walkers, children and horse riders.
There was no planning permission for this activity to take place, nor had the rental for the barn been advertised for any local businesses or farmers to apply for. There seemed to be a reluctance to have anyone from the local community involved.
Then the converted barn at the farmstead was advertised for business rental. This barn had limited planning permission for 15 weddings a year only. A group called Poles Apart were given the rental of the barn. They are an educational group for children excluded from mainstream education. This was supposed to be a short-term contract and the barn would only be used on a limited basis, Monday to Friday during term times. Within weeks of the new term starting this proved to be a false statement as they started having parties at weekends with open invitations advertised on Facebook. Again, this was a clear breach of planning permission. Then there was talk about having an area for this group to use as a forest school. This is an area of outstanding natural beauty where people come to walk in a peaceful environment to bird-watch and enjoy nature.
Finally, after receiving numerous complaints, the Trust applied for retrospective planning asking for flexible commercial planning consent. No one was sure what this actually meant, but needless to say there was a tidal wave of objections, including from Devon Highways due to the now extreme increase in traffic on this tiny lane.
The Trust withdrew the application, but to date both commercial concerns have continued to practice on their premises despite no legal planning in place. The Trust stated the application was withdrawn due to technical issues, but we believe that they completely underestimated how the community would react to their plans.
During this time the Trust also let part of the land to two of their tenant farmers from outside the area, one of whom has to travel about 15 miles to get to this land. When harvesting he caused considerable disturbance through the lanes with his combine harvester to get to this land. Although many local farmers within Wembury parish were interested in renting this land, they were not considered and rentals were given to people not connected to the parish. Could this be because they don’t want anyone in the village knowing what they’re up to? Their dishonest approach towards the community so far does not inspire trust.
Finally the community was told we would have a meeting. However, it soon became clear that this would not be a meeting but a glossy presentation where they would control the narrative. Again there were the dreaded flip charts and post-it notes for people to write ideas on. Really, we are not children, and while this approach may be acceptable in some London tech-start up with bean bags, it is not appropriate for us. It was a classic case of underestimating the audience and backfired when hundreds of residents attended and it became clear that the community did not support the National Trust at all.
The presentation began with talk of enhancing nature and the environment, all of which sounded wonderful. Then they started talking about the policy of open access to all by widening the existing coastal footpath and making new paths across the farm land to enable disabled access. Mobility scooters and wheelchairs require a surface not compatible with nature and is not conducive to encouraging wildlife to an area. Disabled access requires car parking near to where the paths are. More paths mean more dog walkers, which in turn means more dog waste in dog poo bags left hanging on branches and left on paths, because people don’t take it home and the Trust refuses to put dog poo bins at its sites.
This brings us once again back to the traffic on a single track country lane, which passes a block of almshouses where the residents are frightened to walk down the lane because of the increased traffic, has children walking to school and other road users such as walkers, residents, cyclist and horse riders.
It was very noticeable that none of their presentations received any applause. However when questions were asked about car park sites, whether or not the farm would be rented back to a tenant farmer and the farmstead and farmhouse not be split up to be used as holiday accommodation, and about the apparent total contempt shown by the trust for planning laws, the audience applauded. The Trust were unable or unwilling to answer any of these questions to the point that their evasiveness would have done a politician proud. The speakers’ complete inability to answer any of these questions was actually comical.
They compared New Barton to other farms where they have carried out similar projects, but failed to mention that any comparison with these sites was pointless as they were both miles from any city or town, had B-class roads able to take increased traffic, and their remote locations meant that they rarely received the visitor numbers that Wembury already has. It is worth noting the Wembury lies three miles outside of the city boundary of Plymouth and four miles from the huge new town of Sherford.
In short, they have their plans which are, in their words, ‘for the greater good’. These plans will destroy and ruin a thriving, beautiful environment for the benefit of people who don’t live here. Their plan will make the area into a country park similar to Saltram House, where there is limited remote farming at a time when we as a nation need our farmers more than ever. Young farmers are unable to get farm tenancies because bigger farm concerns can pay more. Farmsteads command higher rents as holiday rentals than a farming family can pay. It seems that communities no longer matter. Chasing government grants for trees and rewilding has become more important than growing food.
There are already trees, wild flower meadows and wild life thriving in this area, but according to their one-sided narrative it’s almost a desert of nothing. This is an insult to generations of custodians of this landscape.
On the positive side, they did plant wild flowers on some of the field margins, which were wonderful. But the rest of the land was left fallow so it was covered in docks and ragwort, which was allowed to go to seed and has now spread far and wide across other people’s land.
The Trust are very clever at making their case sound wonderful for the environment, ecology, and wildlife. Yet they contradict themselves at every turn by wanting to increase human access which will cause more environmental damage to this beautiful area.
To date no new planning application has been submitted, despite them telling everyone at the meeting that they intend to continue with the project throughout the winter.
Many regards
Wembury Future Planning Group