Rural voices
Sir: The Duke of Westminster's report on the countryside deserves better than your sneering editorial (12 September).. The report is not exhaustive, but it is the only present attempt to define a problem which has the potential of a social, environmental and cultural catastrophe. Neither the Department of the Environment nor the Ministry of Agriculture seems to have looked as thoroughly at the erosion of country life and the consequent threat to the landscape.
Through involvement in the campaign to preserve country sports, I have learned that that issue is inextricably bound up with the ultimately far more important question of the future shape of the English countryside. I say English rather than British advisedly: while parts of Wales and Scotland are und- er threat, the urgent danger is to the centre and south of England, where economic and political power are concentrated. The devastation in America of the New England landscape between New York and Boston in the 1960s, laid waste by unbri- dled speculation, has produced a vista of 250 miles of tacky-town, punctuated by golf courses and the occasional huge estate. This is a chilling portent for the heartland of this country between Southampton and Leeds. But in our case the spectre is of a vast Disneyland.
The irony is that in the 21st century a hugely preponderant urban population will need more than ever before the escape that a vigorous and healthy countryside pro- vides. It is preposterous to equate this her- itage with the motor industry, as you do, and epitomises the failure of your piece to contribute constructively to the matter. Perhaps you, sir, would now like to 'con- front sensibly' the great issue which you properly air.
Michael Sissons
Peters Fraser & Dunlop, 503/4 The Chambers, Chelsea Harbour, London SW10
Previous page
