Rural worker’s house in Yorkshire Dales approved despite claims owners have no animals

Members of the Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority this week (Nov 26) approved an application for a three-bedroom property at Kidstones Gill Bridge, in Bishopdale.

The planning committee took the decision after being told an independent planning consultant employed by the authority had confirmed there was a need for a rural worker at the remote site, which already features an agricultural building.

The occupant of the new property would have gamekeeping duties as well as looking after livestock, members were told.

The application stated that the applicants, Manchester landowners Robert and Helen Brown, had 200 sheep, 20 suckler cows and 40 turkeys, with the turkeys seen by planners on a site visit.

However, Alastair Dinsdale, a Dales farmer and chair of campaign group Association of Rural Communities, spoke at the meeting to question the accuracy of this claim and call for members to reject the application.

He said: “The independent report contains a disclaimer that land and livestock numbers are the applicants’ figures and have not been verified.

“Yesterday, I went to check the building myself — I found the building contained young dairy heifers not suckler cows.”

Last month, the applicants had an application approved for another rural workers’ dwelling at nearby Howesyke, which they also own and which includes an eight-bedroom luxury holiday home.

That application was granted after members were told that if it was refused, the applicants could ‘fall back’ to an earlier application for two rural workers dwellings which was approved in 2017.

It was also revealed at this week’s meeting that the applicants had recently bought another farm in Bishopdale which also included a house.

Mr Dinsdale said without evidence of the livestock, the latest application was a “sham”.

“If the committee is minded to give approval without evidence of the suckler cows and lambing sheep farming enterprise, then they are granting permission for two luxury houses in open countryside for 40 Christmas turkeys.

“If that is the precedent they wish to set, then they cannot expect the local community to take their planning policy seriously.”

Several members of the committee also questioned the need for the new house.

Councillor Robert Heseltine said: “The need for someone to actually have a new house there with that poor quality land that’s there, and the estate looking for its main income from commercialised tourism and shooting local wildlife, it just doesn’t stack up to me.”

Councillor Yvonne Peacock also spoke against the application, saying: “I’m sorry it’s just not right.”

However, applicant Mrs Brown told the meeting that the dwelling was needed to house an employee and his partner who had been living in a temporary chalet on the site for the last six years.

She said her and her husband were “hands on owners, farmers and employers” who ran the business using their skills obtained studying agricultural at university.

“We’ve already planted almost 100 hectares of our land with over 100,000 native trees and restored nearly 400 hectares of degraded peat moorland to benefit wildlife and water quality.

“Our extensive and careful management of our farmland supports many of the threatened waders such as curlew, lapwing, redshank, snipe, as well as barn owls, kestrel, merlin, and many more which are now abundant in the valley.”

The application was approved by ten votes to six.