Another great video. Professional and seem less. Without knowing it your making a record of the areas for everyone to see now and in the future. On another note have you ever considered doing a Friday or an evening read from a good novel with the log fire lit and crackling. Thanks Rich for what you do it’s a joy and for being you. A decent fun natured gent.
Thanks for the video Richard. Somewhere to park! Thanks for exploring another interesting place. The OS map shows that the path would take you into Fittleworth Wood - please would you put that on your "to do later" list.
As you first entered the church gate their was a beautiful yellow tree 🤔. The yew was magnificent. Woodland walk was great. I must learn my tree names. Yes so sad about farm land no longer being worked. We need them. Thank you again for delightful early morning stroll.
I understand your pain about the loss of farmland. What makes me sad locally is the dissolution of working farms. They are split up into LOTS, the farmhouse and maybe a couple of fields goes to rich Londoners who totally revamp it beyond recognition. The large barns ditto, becoming desirable country homes. Woodland and what's left of the farmland sold separately. A once vital, productive, and sustainable farm reduced to bits & bobs too small to farm, they are bought up by horse owners and it is no longer part of our countries Food Production system. The craziness of letting this happen is emphasized by our recent changing situation. The country now going it alone, and after the period of pandemic isolation our need to be more self sufficient is obvious. I find it very sad that our vital food producing working landscape is turning into a posh weekenders playground full of Polo ponies. RANT OVER ! Thanks for another well filmed video Richard 👍☺️
Very enjoyable walk! Nice to see the beautiful Stopham church again. I really enjoyed & appreciated the the walk & talk the area's history. Btw....I believe the crop you asked about was oats. Their seed pods dangle like.
Not only is it morally wrong to sell farmland to developers, but where are we going to grow crops for an ever increasing population, once we have covered everything with houses and tarmac ? Where is the logic behind that ? Anyway, congratulations on 20k Richard, very well deserved 👍👍
Locally, I have seen perfectly good farmland covered with large areas of photoelectric array panels to generate electricity. Some of them originally had sheep below them eating the grass, but now I believe that practice has been discontinued perhaps by regulation. That land is as dead as if you build a house on it, and produces nothing food wise for our large and growing population. To my mind, these should never be allowed on fertile land. I know they might look a bit ugly, but if we must have them, why not have them on south facing slopes that are too steep for arable land as a minimum. Currently we have sheep and cows on some steep ground, it's really what is the best used for it isn't it. Maybe we should be putting more on roofs and buildings rather than on fields, but it needs to be looked at and debated. We are supposedly an intelligent species and all to be able to create the most with the least disruption and loss.
@@wattck I am fan of wind farms at sea. The one off Shoreham on the south coast is of particular interest to me as it is built on where the Kelp forests used to be, before they were destroyed by trawlers. The Kelp is now starting to come back due to a fishing exclusion zone around the turbines. There is talk of extending the wind farm along the coast which I welcome if it will help rejuvenate the Kelp. The forests are as rich in life and biodiversity as as any land based forests. They are a breeding ground and nursery for a huge variety of species from sponges, Crustaceans, seahorses, Molluscs, fish, Cephalopods,and, they also produce oxygen. We can't keep covering the land and exterminating other species for our own needs. Someone one once said (possibly Darwin) that a species will only adapt/change when it is on the brink. The time for change has never been greater than now.
@@barryrice157 The Best way to tackle over fishing is having areas of no fishing set aside for fish and other species to thrive and grow. Offshore wind farms do just that almost as a by-product.
What a lovely walk, the countryside is a picture there. This is very enjoyable to watch. Thanks for making and posting it. Well done, it's brightened my day (which was already pretty bright apart from the dullness and the rain we have today ^-) ).
Richard, I had to look up Stopham as didn't recognise the name. I can now see why, whenever I've driven through Pulborough, I've gone on the A29 towards Bognor. I'd like to see Stopham bridge if nothing else and the river. Thanks for another interesting video, lovely old tree and walks in the tranquility of the countryside
Great video Richard. Funny I thought to myself at the beginning you were missing Timmy the dog. Haha. I sooooo agree with you about farmland. One of the things I hate most about BBC Countryfile is the condescending way Adam Henson often goes on about farmers being custodians of the countryside. Currently they are not, they are responsible for its destruction. Not all I know! We are watching field after field around Hailsham be built on and it breaks my heart 💜 and I do blame our local council planners, a bunch of complete (insert rude word)! Congratulations on 20k by the way, very well deserved!
The value of farm land, when you calculate the produce that it creates over the centuries, far surpasses the immediate value of the land for housing. Fertile land is limited and should be regarded as national treasure.
That was a great walk. The yew was considered to be c2000 years old but recent evidence says'only'c1000. In full agreement re the selling off and building on farmland but the big picture is the increase in population pushing that forward. Not sure of the answer, I understand the government is going to make it even easier for developers to build anywhere with even more disregard of the views of the locals 😔. I do think developers ought to be made to use more brown field sites and not give the excuse that it means less profit for tgem
Totally agree about farmlamd being sold for a quick buck. It's genuinely depressing seeing areas I remember as a kid being a housing estate. Its not even "affordable housing". Also the habitat for wildlife is being lost which makes me angry
Understand your stance on farmers selling up. Yes we do also need housing, many that's where we're going wrong. We are over populating our country. The ditch you were drawarfed by the huge trunk, I was thinking perhaps it was an old waterway. It wasn't until I saw you at the junction with the gate i changed my mind and settled for a droveway. I could almost see a horse drawn carriage going by. Happy walks.
Thanks Richard for another lovely walk and video. I agree with your concerns regarding the selling off of agricultural land to developers, especially since Brexit and the UK's departure from the EU, when we must become more self sufficient as a nation.
As a descendant of the de Barttelot/de Stopham families I'm grateful to get a view of the lands of my ancestors and even a remote sense of what they may have experienced on a walk of their estate. Unfortunately wealth hasnt traveled down my branch of the family tree and for the time being a trip to England is a goal not yet realized.
@@kingdomoftheenglish5738 Hey thanks for asking. I've tried doing a lot of basic internet research and it's widely agreed that Adam de Barttelot, who arrived with William the Conqueror and fought at Hastings in 1066 was the founder of the family in England. It's believed he may have been heavily wounded in the battle as he was young but awarded heavily with land and apparently not expected to continue military service. Before Adam the history gets a bit foggy and may in my personal opinion be more an invention to connect the family to an even grander heritage. Some sources I've found connect the Barttelots to a possibly fictional nephew of Charlemagne simply named "Barttelot" who, as the story goes, had his head cleaved down the middle by a knight who was angry at repeated losses in games of chess. Charlemagne was so angry apparently that he took off a glove and threw it on the ground (or at the knight? Memory is foggy) which apparently is the origin of using a glove to declare a duel (according to the story anyways). If this is true, is means the line is descended from all of Charlemagne's ancestors which include a whole lots of kings, queens, and barbarian chieftains. I'm doubtful of this (but still hopeful) simply because the family tree is linked to Charlemagne by at least 5 generations of men all with basic names like "Barttelot of Reims" and "Barttelot of Soissons" rather than actual given names. Nor are any of their wives recorded. Then suddenly they connect to the first Barttelot whoes mother's name isn't widely recorded as a sister of Charlemagne at all ("Bertha"). Who knows though? Anyways, probably more info than you wanted but there you go! :)
I understand about the loss of farmland and I agree with the comments below. Farmers are struggling to survive but then there is the compulsory purchase side. The builders are very cavalier in their attitude and if they don’t get what they want locally they go to central government who give the builders permission to take the land.. a farm near me has had a third of their land taken by the government and it stressed the landowner so much she died. It’s that that makes me mad, the fact that apparently human life doesn’t matter. There’s certainly a lack of understanding from the government about what’s happening to our countryside and also farming. They just don’t get it and their policies on farming clearly show they have a total lack of understanding .
Sadly,they do have a total understanding and it's all by design. Boris Johnson has signed us up to the Paris Climate Accord,and that green agenda will be the end of a lot of farms as land is deliberately left idle,or built on. The government will prove to be the biggest group of vandals we have ever seen.
Congratulations on achieving 20K! Many more to come as they discover your great channel. Oh and by the way, it must be because I have you as a favourite channel on MY channel page hahaha...joking of course. Keep on keeping on Richard!
Excellent video! I’m with you on the farmland. Once it’s gone, it’s gone. I also don’t think the farmers should be allowed to sell to developers. That’s always been my bugbear too. (I started my love of reading with Enid Blyton😁)
Lovely area, lovely video beautifully photographed. I wonder, if as the population density increases, if self sufficiency from productive land available on our island actually becomes a mathematical impossibility?
Lovely walk as ever, Richard. I’ve made my comments elsewhere about the constraints of the planning system (I’ll post it in reply to this one.) The “not allowing farmers to sell their land to developers” stance is an interesting one but I fear it is an idealistic position. Many farmers barely scrape by and it is a way out of this for some; I couldn’t blame them. Also, the council has to hit targets on house building and would be under pressure for land to be released etc. As for food sustainability, we’ve not been fully sustainable for 200 years - if we increase production it would mean more mono culture I fear :(
Councils are given a number of houses that they have to build handed down to them for the government. Councils then have to make very difficult decisions about where these houses go. If the council does not allow enough houses and does not have a “5 year land housing supply” then the planning inspectorate will then allow houses to be built virtually anywhere in that borough / district. Until there’s a reform in government legislation, this won’t change. Sadly, the latest planning white paper suggests that the government will fall much further on the side of the developers and takes power further away from the councils and residents.
The councils ought to protest to the government about these targets then, rather than meekly agreeing. We need backbone, not submission. I am not sure that we haven't been sustainable for 200 years - people's wants are too unrealistic - strawberries out of season, etc. However, it would be difficult now to return to mix farming, supplying local towns and villages with fresh produce, (though better for the environment and people's health) because so much of the prime farm land has been built on! We can't bank on importing our food all the time. That way is disaster when the next crisis comes along - which of course it will.
All of the issue's you raise Matt are true, but also artificial. Farmers don't make a living because of the artificial constraints of big business driving down the prices below the cost of production. The 'housing crisis' is also artificial, as there are more than enough empty properties that could be used, loads of brownfield sites for any extra, and a likely less mobile and slowly diminishing population...
@@RichardVobes - the councils do protest, quite vociferously - the response to the latest consultations were over 50 pages from the council I work for. They are sadly, ignored.
It’s happening all the time round this area. Just up the road from Stopham and Pulborough at Adversane there is a very real threat of thousands of houses being built on what is at the moment farmland. As you probably know Adversane is just a small hamlet, only a few houses around a crossroad on the A29, it would be a travesty for it to be developed out of all proportion. The problem is a lot of townspeople want to move out to the quiet countryside, but in doing so they’re destroying what they want to move to!
I agree about the loss of farmland and the resulting desecration of rural England. A farmer sells his land to a developer who then must obtain planning permission. A large part of the blame must be levelled at bureaucrats who approve planning applications on productive ancient farmland. Local political pressure must be increased to ensure the preservation of the heritage. I don’t care about a housing shortage. That is a direct consequence of uncontrolled population increases on an island already stressed. Jonathan Porritt stated the ideal population size is 30 million. Why not a campaign to chase that target?
Look at it another way...the farmer's spent his life working at his land...maybe his ancestor's have too...if there's nobody left capable of or interested in taking it over, then rather than live out his retirement on land worked by his family, his only recourse in retirement may be to sell it on on to buy his pension...at that stage isn't he entitled to seek out the best price he can get? The same as if you sell your house, or business... The real issues, as I see them (and I wouldn't know how to even begin to resolve it all) are the zoning of land use, and the hugely differing values we as a society attach to land with or without permission to develop...it's a bit unfair to lump all the responsibility onto the farmer, when it's our system of development which is actually largely responsible. Two things I wouldn't want to see are (a) government at any level provided with confiscatory powers greater than they already have (vide some of the examples of compulsory purchase and the blight it can cause) and (b) any extension of the advantages to second, third or fourth homers - Let's be clear, I'm not talking people retiring to the country (although this is part of the same phenomenon), but those folk who artificially ornament our countryside on alternate weekends, and who succeed in doing little except raising property prices so high that ordinary working people are driven away...and yes it's already far too late in many areas.
@@cogidubnus1953 You are right. the issues are two fold ( in my view). the first is the relentless drive to overpopulate a small island for mostly political ends. the second is the importance of food supply security. Woven in there is the pressure to build on productive land because of the first issue. Developers are responding to a demand driven by overpopulation and to a large degree "white flight" and , as we transition into a new work protocol, the ability to not be close to the workplace. We must preserve the rural landscape and its productive benefit at all costs. Do we really need 60 million people? With technology becoming an integral part of our work environment perhaps we could achieve the 30 million population level and still have a thriving society?
@@jonnyboy2128 IMHO, unless we're careful this thread could easily become a focus for discussions on eugenics, and I don't think this is what Richard had in mind, so I'll give that one a bit of a miss if I may...cheers!
Our planning laws are behind much of the problem that turns agricultural land into building land and increases its value like winning the lottery. The way our planning laws are enforced, is incredibly inconsistent if you look at what gets passed and where. I agree with you that it's wrong and something needs to be done. To my mind all planning in an area should be subject to those living in it, who can best decide what sort of housing is needed and where to build it. To my mind it's better to tuck houses in the spaces within a village can build a massive estate or new town on its edge that swallows the village. As populations grow more housing is needed, but we see housing built in villages and young families moving away because they can't afford them. That is wrong. There is a village in Wales on the news today with only two permanent residents, the rest the holiday lets with the original population now having moved away. Of course, there is no longer a village pub or similar because such businesses are now unsustainable. We have got planning wrong and it needs putting right.
A couple of years ago Neighbourhood plans were put in place ,taking hours of work, to allow local village , parish councils and locals to agree what and where houses should be built and what the supporting infrastructure would be required. These were all just ignored !!
@@lindakane4717 Our Planning Laws are responsible for so much that is wrong with building and development. There are plans to build a new town locally and local roads have been narrowed and have traffic calming added. How you can bolt on a new town with several schools and all a town needs to creaking roads that you restrict further has to be a disaster designed to happen. The only people (apart from developers and estate agents) who want the new town seem to be the District Council, who have bought land and property in order to make make money from it. Huge development planned or in progress right across the District. Same old infrastructure and not enough of it.
Went hiking on Dartmoor last year, I had shorts on and picked up about half a dozen ticks. My mate had long trousers and ended up with about 30 or 40. Seems they cling to material better than human skin...
@@RichardVobes well don’t go walking in the New Forest say clad like that or you will have an issue. Besides, by putting up a video presumably to encourage other people to follow your example you should set an example and dress appropriately. That includes your health and safety.
@@mk1aquatic739 Indeed they do. It's how plague got spread: human lice in clothing rather than on skin or by rats as previously thought. Modern hygene where even the poor can afford to clean clothes daily has pretty much eliminated them though.
It's all to do with the local planning regulations. Large maps are put on the council tables, and the Planners, wield their RED pens and circle various areas, as Village development land, and the value of that land has just escalated incredibly. Meanwhile the Farmer seeing the prices for his crops dropping, or the Gov. banning certain field dressings, says enough is enough, "Who wants my land?", and the vicious cycle continues ! OR, the A27 blights some farmland by cutting across it, and the farmer, can't now produce crops viably on the remaining parts of land, so ends up selling it at farm (agricultural), values, and the buyer then seeks Local Gov. permission to build on it. More land carved away ! The factory builder is doing the village a favour by providing employment for the displaced farm workers ! (?). The factory, will probably be canning Spanish Mackeral, caught off the English coast ! ! Stay safe ........... Stu xx
Planner here: it’s nothing like that. Councils are given a number of houses that they have to build handed down to them for the government. Councils then have to make very difficult decisions about where these houses go. If the council does not allow enough houses and does not have a “5 year land housing supply” then the planning inspectorate will then allow houses to be built virtually anywhere in that borough / district. Until there’s a reform in government legislation, this won’t change. Sadly, the latest planning white paper suggests that the government will fall much further on the side of the developers and takes power further away from the councils and residents.
I think Matt MrGreatPlum is right - we shouldn't blame the planners, regardless of the decisions they make - it is like blaming police for carrying out stupid laws (arresting couples sitting on a park bench during lockdown) - they are simply doing their job (which they probably don't want to do) - it is the governments that need to change their thinking and hear the clamour of descent.
If England keeps selling off it's farmland, the country will soon have to import all of it's basic foodstuffs. This was emphasized during both world wars, when England found itself facing starvation and initiated a program to build small gardens everywhere, and plow every acre of land they could find including substandard plots that were too wet or nutritionally poor. Now, that same land is being converted over to housing estates that cater to the rich; city-slicker farmsteads with a horse or two and vast lawns. Not only do they not contribute to food security, but the removal of carbon sequestering plants and wildlife disappear as well. And it's not just England; the whole world needs to wake up and start conserving our farmlands!
Sorry Richard. But if Land is not provided by land owners then where will future housing stock be built. Housing has to be provided where services are reasonably located, clearly there is a need to prioritise where development takes place but you cannot blaim land owners for selling land if an offer is forthcoming and planning approved. Surely if you were a land owner and a lucrative offer made what would your stance be?
As a farmer, I am devastated to see the loss of our farmland to concrete, we need some long term thinking on this. Excellent walk thanks Richard.
I don't go out much and love your videos
Another great video. Professional and seem less. Without knowing it your making a record of the areas for everyone to see now and in the future. On another note have you ever considered doing a Friday or an evening read from a good novel with the log fire lit and crackling. Thanks Rich for what you do it’s a joy and for being you. A decent fun natured gent.
You should check out the Listen with Vobes Channel: ua-cam.com/channels/Ah8Bm4Z-E7jqelH-1WNKzA.html Back in the autumn
I enjoy your videos very much. Seeing the "wild growth" along the lanes and pathways with the " wild" flowers.
Lovely, thank you.
Thanks for the video Richard. Somewhere to park! Thanks for exploring another interesting place. The OS map shows that the path would take you into Fittleworth Wood - please would you put that on your "to do later" list.
I certainly will
Beautiful walk Richard. Thankyou 👍👍👍👍👍👍
Glad you enjoyed it
Great video Richard. I love Stopham church and was interesting to see the surrounding area.
As you first entered the church gate their was a beautiful yellow tree 🤔. The yew was magnificent. Woodland walk was great. I must learn my tree names. Yes so sad about farm land no longer being worked. We need them. Thank you again for delightful early morning stroll.
Another Fantastic
of Walking Around the Stopham Estate!.❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
Always look fwd to your next episode. As always very well put together until next time 🌹🦔
Thank you so much 😊
Or Rupert the bear novel lol thanks for another lovely ramble
Very nice.
Very interesting video about u walk from church and see different places round good weather out ther now
Excellent film Richard. Well done. I enjoy your videos as they are always 100% quality. 😀🌞🌸
So nice of you
A lovely video, stopham looks like a lovely place, full of lovely countryside woodland and good farm land, great video this one Richard.
I understand your pain about the loss of farmland. What makes me sad locally is the dissolution of working farms. They are split up into LOTS, the farmhouse and maybe a couple of fields goes to rich Londoners who totally revamp it beyond recognition. The large barns ditto, becoming desirable country homes. Woodland and what's left of the farmland sold separately. A once vital, productive, and sustainable farm reduced to bits & bobs too small to farm, they are bought up by horse owners and it is no longer part of our countries Food Production system. The craziness of letting this happen is emphasized by our recent changing situation. The country now going it alone, and after the period of pandemic isolation our need to be more self sufficient is obvious. I find it very sad that our vital food producing working landscape is turning into a posh weekenders playground full of Polo ponies. RANT OVER !
Thanks for another well filmed video Richard 👍☺️
I totally agree
Very enjoyable walk! Nice to see the beautiful Stopham church again. I really enjoyed & appreciated the the walk & talk the area's history.
Btw....I believe the crop you asked about was oats. Their seed pods dangle like.
Ah, oats - thanks, Lisa.
Not only is it morally wrong to sell farmland to developers, but where are we going to grow crops for an ever increasing population, once we have covered everything with houses and tarmac ? Where is the logic behind that ? Anyway, congratulations on 20k Richard, very well deserved 👍👍
I think the government assumes we shall simply import everything. How wrong that is.
Locally, I have seen perfectly good farmland covered with large areas of photoelectric array panels to generate electricity. Some of them originally had sheep below them eating the grass, but now I believe that practice has been discontinued perhaps by regulation. That land is as dead as if you build a house on it, and produces nothing food wise for our large and growing population. To my mind, these should never be allowed on fertile land. I know they might look a bit ugly, but if we must have them, why not have them on south facing slopes that are too steep for arable land as a minimum. Currently we have sheep and cows on some steep ground, it's really what is the best used for it isn't it. Maybe we should be putting more on roofs and buildings rather than on fields, but it needs to be looked at and debated. We are supposedly an intelligent species and all to be able to create the most with the least disruption and loss.
@@wattck I am fan of wind farms at sea. The one off Shoreham on the south coast is of particular interest to me as it is built on where the Kelp forests used to be, before they were destroyed by trawlers. The Kelp is now starting to come back due to a fishing exclusion zone around the turbines. There is talk of extending the wind farm along the coast which I welcome if it will help rejuvenate the Kelp. The forests are as rich in life and biodiversity as as any land based forests. They are a breeding ground and nursery for a huge variety of species from sponges, Crustaceans, seahorses, Molluscs, fish, Cephalopods,and, they also produce oxygen. We can't keep covering the land and exterminating other species for our own needs. Someone one once said (possibly Darwin) that a species will only adapt/change when it is on the brink. The time for change has never been greater than now.
@@barryrice157 The Best way to tackle over fishing is having areas of no fishing set aside for fish and other species to thrive and grow. Offshore wind farms do just that almost as a by-product.
What a lovely walk, the countryside is a picture there. This is very enjoyable to watch. Thanks for making and posting it. Well done, it's brightened my day (which was already pretty bright apart from the dullness and the rain we have today ^-) ).
100% with you Richard on the farmland topic 👌
Richard, I had to look up Stopham as didn't recognise the name. I can now see why, whenever I've driven through Pulborough, I've gone on the A29 towards Bognor.
I'd like to see Stopham bridge if nothing else and the river. Thanks for another interesting video, lovely old tree and walks in the tranquility of the countryside
Stopham bridge is a lovely sight to behold and the White Hart at it's eastern end is a fantastic pub to dine in.
Julia thank you.
When I feel like driving out of my comfort zone, I want to explore Sussex as it's obvious I don't know half of our county!!
Just been discovering your wonderful videos. Nice part of the country
Glad you like them!
Great video Richard. Funny I thought to myself at the beginning you were missing Timmy the dog. Haha. I sooooo agree with you about farmland. One of the things I hate most about BBC Countryfile is the condescending way Adam Henson often goes on about farmers being custodians of the countryside. Currently they are not, they are responsible for its destruction. Not all I know! We are watching field after field around Hailsham be built on and it breaks my heart 💜 and I do blame our local council planners, a bunch of complete (insert rude word)! Congratulations on 20k by the way, very well deserved!
Thanks, Kerry. I hate the way the land is being gobbled up.
Brilliant thank you B.E
You're very welcome
A very uplifting vlog. Thanks.
Thanks so much
The value of farm land, when you calculate the produce that it creates over the centuries, far surpasses the immediate value of the land for housing. Fertile land is limited and should be regarded as national treasure.
That is a brilliant point!
That was a great walk. The yew was considered to be c2000 years old but recent evidence says'only'c1000. In full agreement re the selling off and building on farmland but the big picture is the increase in population pushing that forward. Not sure of the answer, I understand the government is going to make it even easier for developers to build anywhere with even more disregard of the views of the locals 😔. I do think developers ought to be made to use more brown field sites and not give the excuse that it means less profit for tgem
We are doomed to live in a concrete desert.
Lovely walk. 👌
Yes it was
Totally agree about farmlamd being sold for a quick buck. It's genuinely depressing seeing areas I remember as a kid being a housing estate. Its not even "affordable housing". Also the habitat for wildlife is being lost which makes me angry
Absolutely agree re the selling off of farmland....let’s start a petition?!
Understand your stance on farmers selling up. Yes we do also need housing, many that's where we're going wrong. We are over populating our country.
The ditch you were drawarfed by the huge trunk, I was thinking perhaps it was an old waterway. It wasn't until I saw you at the junction with the gate i changed my mind and settled for a droveway. I could almost see a horse drawn carriage going by.
Happy walks.
Thanks Richard for another lovely walk and video. I agree with your concerns regarding the selling off of agricultural land to developers, especially since Brexit and the UK's departure from the EU, when we must become more self sufficient as a nation.
Absolutely
Wow you are doing a fantastic job congrats on 20000 subscribers
Thank you so much!
As a descendant of the de Barttelot/de Stopham families I'm grateful to get a view of the lands of my ancestors and even a remote sense of what they may have experienced on a walk of their estate. Unfortunately wealth hasnt traveled down my branch of the family tree and for the time being a trip to England is a goal not yet realized.
Who does the de barttelot family descend from do you know ?
@@kingdomoftheenglish5738 Hey thanks for asking. I've tried doing a lot of basic internet research and it's widely agreed that Adam de Barttelot, who arrived with William the Conqueror and fought at Hastings in 1066 was the founder of the family in England. It's believed he may have been heavily wounded in the battle as he was young but awarded heavily with land and apparently not expected to continue military service. Before Adam the history gets a bit foggy and may in my personal opinion be more an invention to connect the family to an even grander heritage. Some sources I've found connect the Barttelots to a possibly fictional nephew of Charlemagne simply named "Barttelot" who, as the story goes, had his head cleaved down the middle by a knight who was angry at repeated losses in games of chess. Charlemagne was so angry apparently that he took off a glove and threw it on the ground (or at the knight? Memory is foggy) which apparently is the origin of using a glove to declare a duel (according to the story anyways). If this is true, is means the line is descended from all of Charlemagne's ancestors which include a whole lots of kings, queens, and barbarian chieftains. I'm doubtful of this (but still hopeful) simply because the family tree is linked to Charlemagne by at least 5 generations of men all with basic names like "Barttelot of Reims" and "Barttelot of Soissons" rather than actual given names. Nor are any of their wives recorded. Then suddenly they connect to the first Barttelot whoes mother's name isn't widely recorded as a sister of Charlemagne at all ("Bertha"). Who knows though? Anyways, probably more info than you wanted but there you go! :)
I understand about the loss of farmland and I agree with the comments below. Farmers are struggling to survive but then there is the compulsory purchase side. The builders are very cavalier in their attitude and if they don’t get what they want locally they go to central government who give the builders permission to take the land.. a farm near me has had a third of their land taken by the government and it stressed the landowner so much she died. It’s that that makes me mad, the fact that apparently human life doesn’t matter. There’s certainly a lack of understanding from the government about what’s happening to our countryside and also farming. They just don’t get it and their policies on farming clearly show they have a total lack of understanding .
Totally agree
Sadly,they do have a total understanding and it's all by design.
Boris Johnson has signed us up to the Paris Climate Accord,and that green agenda will be the end of a lot of farms as land is deliberately left idle,or built on.
The government will prove to be the biggest group of vandals we have ever seen.
Congratulations on achieving 20K! Many more to come as they discover your great channel. Oh and by the way, it must be because I have you as a favourite channel on MY channel page hahaha...joking of course. Keep on keeping on Richard!
Thank you very much!
I can’t understand why we build on green belt land when we have so many brownfield sites.
I believe the crop was oats.
Excellent video! I’m with you on the farmland. Once it’s gone, it’s gone. I also don’t think the farmers should be allowed to sell to developers. That’s always been my bugbear too.
(I started my love of reading with Enid Blyton😁)
Absolutely!!
Lovely area, lovely video beautifully photographed. I wonder, if as the population density increases, if self sufficiency from productive land available on our island actually becomes a mathematical impossibility?
Good question!
The country has not been self sufficient in food production since the napoleonic wars!
If farmers sell, they should sell to canal restoration and or at least to conservationists who can keep the land free of development
I wonder what the developers feel should a plot of land close by their residence be under planning to be built on (by a rival)!
Lovely walk as ever, Richard.
I’ve made my comments elsewhere about the constraints of the planning system (I’ll post it in reply to this one.)
The “not allowing farmers to sell their land to developers” stance is an interesting one but I fear it is an idealistic position. Many farmers barely scrape by and it is a way out of this for some; I couldn’t blame them. Also, the council has to hit targets on house building and would be under pressure for land to be released etc.
As for food sustainability, we’ve not been fully sustainable for 200 years - if we increase production it would mean more mono culture I fear :(
Councils are given a number of houses that they have to build handed down to them for the government. Councils then have to make very difficult decisions about where these houses go. If the council does not allow enough houses and does not have a “5 year land housing supply” then the planning inspectorate will then allow houses to be built virtually anywhere in that borough / district.
Until there’s a reform in government legislation, this won’t change. Sadly, the latest planning white paper suggests that the government will fall much further on the side of the developers and takes power further away from the councils and residents.
The councils ought to protest to the government about these targets then, rather than meekly agreeing. We need backbone, not submission.
I am not sure that we haven't been sustainable for 200 years - people's wants are too unrealistic - strawberries out of season, etc. However, it would be difficult now to return to mix farming, supplying local towns and villages with fresh produce, (though better for the environment and people's health) because so much of the prime farm land has been built on! We can't bank on importing our food all the time. That way is disaster when the next crisis comes along - which of course it will.
All of the issue's you raise Matt are true, but also artificial. Farmers don't make a living because of the artificial constraints of big business driving down the prices below the cost of production. The 'housing crisis' is also artificial, as there are more than enough empty properties that could be used, loads of brownfield sites for any extra, and a likely less mobile and slowly diminishing population...
@@RichardVobes - the councils do protest, quite vociferously - the response to the latest consultations were over 50 pages from the council I work for. They are sadly, ignored.
It’s happening all the time round this area. Just up the road from Stopham and Pulborough at Adversane there is a very real threat of thousands of houses being built on what is at the moment farmland. As you probably know Adversane is just a small hamlet, only a few houses around a crossroad on the A29, it would be a travesty for it to be developed out of all proportion. The problem is a lot of townspeople want to move out to the quiet countryside, but in doing so they’re destroying what they want to move to!
It won't be quiet countryside for long then.
I agree about the loss of farmland and the resulting desecration of rural England. A farmer sells his land to a developer who then must obtain planning permission. A large part of the blame must be levelled at bureaucrats who approve planning applications on productive ancient farmland. Local political pressure must be increased to ensure the preservation of the heritage. I don’t care about a housing shortage. That is a direct consequence of uncontrolled population increases on an island already stressed. Jonathan Porritt stated the ideal population size is 30 million. Why not a campaign to chase that target?
Makes sense.
Look at it another way...the farmer's spent his life working at his land...maybe his ancestor's have too...if there's nobody left capable of or interested in taking it over, then rather than live out his retirement on land worked by his family, his only recourse in retirement may be to sell it on on to buy his pension...at that stage isn't he entitled to seek out the best price he can get? The same as if you sell your house, or business...
The real issues, as I see them (and I wouldn't know how to even begin to resolve it all) are the zoning of land use, and the hugely differing values we as a society attach to land with or without permission to develop...it's a bit unfair to lump all the responsibility onto the farmer, when it's our system of development which is actually largely responsible.
Two things I wouldn't want to see are (a) government at any level provided with confiscatory powers greater than they already have (vide some of the examples of compulsory purchase and the blight it can cause) and (b) any extension of the advantages to second, third or fourth homers - Let's be clear, I'm not talking people retiring to the country (although this is part of the same phenomenon), but those folk who artificially ornament our countryside on alternate weekends, and who succeed in doing little except raising property prices so high that ordinary working people are driven away...and yes it's already far too late in many areas.
@@cogidubnus1953 You are right. the issues are two fold ( in my view). the first is the relentless drive to overpopulate a small island for mostly political ends. the second is the importance of food supply security.
Woven in there is the pressure to build on productive land because of the first issue. Developers are responding to a demand driven by overpopulation and to a large degree "white flight" and , as we transition into a new work protocol, the ability to not be close to the workplace. We must preserve the rural landscape and its productive benefit at all costs.
Do we really need 60 million people? With technology becoming an integral part of our work environment perhaps we could achieve the 30 million population level and still have a thriving society?
@@jonnyboy2128 IMHO, unless we're careful this thread could easily become a focus for discussions on eugenics, and I don't think this is what Richard had in mind, so I'll give that one a bit of a miss if I may...cheers!
@@cogidubnus1953 Agreed I'm not going there!
You are not as tall as Julian, so you must be Dick, which is more fitting! What a lovely walk, so beautifully filmed, as always.
?
@@RichardVobes Dick, as in Julian, Dick, Ann, George and Timmy from the Famous Five!
Our planning laws are behind much of the problem that turns agricultural land into building land and increases its value like winning the lottery. The way our planning laws are enforced, is incredibly inconsistent if you look at what gets passed and where. I agree with you that it's wrong and something needs to be done. To my mind all planning in an area should be subject to those living in it, who can best decide what sort of housing is needed and where to build it. To my mind it's better to tuck houses in the spaces within a village can build a massive estate or new town on its edge that swallows the village. As populations grow more housing is needed, but we see housing built in villages and young families moving away because they can't afford them. That is wrong. There is a village in Wales on the news today with only two permanent residents, the rest the holiday lets with the original population now having moved away. Of course, there is no longer a village pub or similar because such businesses are now unsustainable. We have got planning wrong and it needs putting right.
A couple of years ago Neighbourhood plans were put in place ,taking hours of work, to allow local village , parish councils and locals to agree what and where houses should be built and what the supporting infrastructure would be required. These were all just ignored !!
@@lindakane4717 Our Planning Laws are responsible for so much that is wrong with building and development. There are plans to build a new town locally and local roads have been narrowed and have traffic calming added. How you can bolt on a new town with several schools and all a town needs to creaking roads that you restrict further has to be a disaster designed to happen. The only people (apart from developers and estate agents) who want the new town seem to be the District Council, who have bought land and property in order to make make money from it. Huge development planned or in progress right across the District. Same old infrastructure and not enough of it.
I wouldn’t walk anywhere in the countryside in shorts. Deer ticks and limes disease are a constant danger
Went hiking on Dartmoor last year, I had shorts on and picked up about half a dozen ticks. My mate had long trousers and ended up with about 30 or 40. Seems they cling to material better than human skin...
Never had an issue
@@RichardVobes well don’t go walking in the New Forest say clad like that or you will have an issue. Besides, by putting up a video presumably to encourage other people to follow your example you should set an example and dress appropriately. That includes your health and safety.
@@mk1aquatic739 you only need one tick to give you lymes disease.
@@mk1aquatic739 Indeed they do. It's how plague got spread: human lice in clothing rather than on skin or by rats as previously thought. Modern hygene where even the poor can afford to clean clothes daily has pretty much eliminated them though.
Well done Richard on getting over 20k subscribers. 😊
Thanks 👍
It's all to do with the local planning regulations.
Large maps are put on the council tables, and the Planners, wield their RED pens and circle various areas, as Village development land, and the value of that land has just escalated incredibly.
Meanwhile the Farmer seeing the prices for his crops dropping, or the Gov. banning certain field dressings, says enough is enough, "Who wants my land?", and the vicious cycle continues !
OR, the A27 blights some farmland by cutting across it, and the farmer, can't now produce crops viably on the remaining parts of land, so ends up selling it at farm (agricultural), values, and the buyer then seeks Local Gov. permission to build on it.
More land carved away !
The factory builder is doing the village a favour by providing employment for the displaced farm workers ! (?).
The factory, will probably be canning Spanish Mackeral, caught off the English coast ! !
Stay safe ...........
Stu xx
Planner here: it’s nothing like that. Councils are given a number of houses that they have to build handed down to them for the government. Councils then have to make very difficult decisions about where these houses go. If the council does not allow enough houses and does not have a “5 year land housing supply” then the planning inspectorate will then allow houses to be built virtually anywhere in that borough / district.
Until there’s a reform in government legislation, this won’t change. Sadly, the latest planning white paper suggests that the government will fall much further on the side of the developers and takes power further away from the councils and residents.
What a dire situation
I think Matt MrGreatPlum is right - we shouldn't blame the planners, regardless of the decisions they make - it is like blaming police for carrying out stupid laws (arresting couples sitting on a park bench during lockdown) - they are simply doing their job (which they probably don't want to do) - it is the governments that need to change their thinking and hear the clamour of descent.
@@RichardVobes I think we all need to remember that Government's first and foremost role is the preservation of Government...Cynical...moi?
If England keeps selling off it's farmland, the country will soon have to import all of it's basic foodstuffs. This was emphasized during both world wars, when England found itself facing starvation and initiated a program to build small gardens everywhere, and plow every acre of land they could find including substandard plots that were too wet or nutritionally poor. Now, that same land is being converted over to housing estates that cater to the rich; city-slicker farmsteads with a horse or two and vast lawns. Not only do they not contribute to food security, but the removal of carbon sequestering plants and wildlife disappear as well. And it's not just England; the whole world needs to wake up and start conserving our farmlands!
Exactly!
Sorry Richard. But if Land is not provided by land owners then where will future housing stock be built. Housing has to be provided where services are reasonably located, clearly there is a need to prioritise where development takes place but you cannot blaim land owners for selling land if an offer is forthcoming and planning approved. Surely if you were a land owner and a lucrative offer made what would your stance be?
Oh to be the be the landowner that would refuse to have the land developed.
Just been discovering your wonderful videos. Nice part of the country
Welcome aboard!