EXCLUSIVE Outrage as travellers 'destroy' tranquil New Forest village with 'illegal' land grab - as ex-minister rages 'civil rights' of those shamelessly flouting planning laws should be 'forfeited'

Daily Mail​

17-06-2025

Fury has exploded over an 'illegal' traveller camp which threatens to 'destroy' the tranquillity of a tiny village in the heart of one of the UK's prized national parks.
Residents living in the quintessentially British community of Burley, in the New Forest, have lashed out over the unauthorised development on the outskirts of the village.
Those behind the project have been accused of shamelessly flouting planning rules by paving over part of a field and installing a number of caravans and mobile homes.
It's led to a months-long row, with a judgement on whether a retrospective planning application to allow it to stay or not, set to be made in a matter of weeks.
However, it has sparked a fierce backlash, with one ex-minister raging those behind the scheme should have their 'civil rights... forfeited' over the flagrant rule break.
One villager fumed: 'The travellers have shown complete disregard for the community... It's a level of disrespect. They have come in and destroyed protected lands without permission.'
The woodland idyll, nestled between Southampton and Bournemouth, is home to about 1,350 people and is heavily reliant on tourism in the summer. It has no railway station, one primary school, a village shop and a sporadic bus service.
Those living there are fiercely protective of their historic home's unspoilt, natural surroundings and have been left outraged by the gypsy development.
The site, on a former pony field off Ringwood Road, was converted without permission several weeks ago. It's a stone's throw away from the luxury Burley Manor hotel, which is a medieval Grade II-listed building.
Those on the camp have since submitted a retrospective planning bid for two static caravans, two touring caravans, parking, bin and cycle stores, e-bike charging points, boundary fencing, and an extension of existing hardstanding.
MailOnline understands the site is home to two families.
The proposals - which are yet to be decided by the New Forest National Park Authority - triggered a furious response, with dozens of objections lodged.
Local Tory MP Sir Desmond Swayne is also among those attacking the development, which he says had 'alarmed' his constituents.
'It's not been helped by the rather aggressive sign put up, that strikes fear into the community,' he added. 'What sort of people are these, who are putting up this intimidatory sign telling people to "keep out" or the dogs will get you'?'
A deadline for a decision on the application is July 2 - however, officials at the NFNPA hope to have made a judgement before this date.
However, former minister Sir Desmond feared the controversial scheme could be approved on the basis of 'human rights', allowing travellers to remain on the land instead of dismantling all the work that has already been undertaken there.
Hitting out, the New Forest West MP told MailOnline: 'When you break the law you should forfeit your civil rights. Breaches in the law – even in planning regulations - should not be whipped through on the basis of human rights.'
One 43-year-old villager accused the group of 'steamrolling' their way into the tranquil rural community by 'running roughshod' over planning laws.
She added: 'Burley is like a little, sleepy, lost village in winter months. It's a beautiful, quaint and it's historic.
'There has been no attempt [by the travellers] to join the community or to be part of it. They have steamrolled their way in.
'The damage has now been done. You can't put back all the species in the hedges that were residing in there that were torn up for the fencing.
'This is a very passionate village. We're passionate about protecting it and preserving it... It's hugely disappointing that you have people who have not adhered to planning policy.'
The development comes amid a 'land grab' blitz blighting Britain, which has seen travellers across the UK building camps in rural beauty spots without permission.
A probe by the MailOnline has already revealed how the blight has rocked villages and towns in Buckinghamshire, West Sussex, Nottinghamshire, Bedfordshire, Gloucester, Worcestershire and Cheshire.
This week, the rural north Devon hamlet of Charles became the latest community to be hit.
Diggers bulldozed through a large grass bank to gain access to the secluded field in the picturesque north Devon hamlet - which is home to just a few dozen homes.
The work, which is believed to be part of an unauthorised project to build a new traveller site, started at about 5pm on Monday evening, locals said.
Within 24 hours, the tranquil patch of grassland had been transformed into a grey eyesore, standing out against the rolling green hills of the surrounding countryside.
Elsewhere, travellers have been accused of carrying out brazen bank holiday 'land seizures' to rapidly build camps under the noses of council chiefs while their offices are closed.
Allegedly weaponising the national breaks, industrial diggers, excavators and lorries carrying gravel, are mobilised to rip up and pave over fields in protected green belts during 'deliberate and meticulously planned' operations.
Cynically, the 'illegal' conversions are done without any planning permission, flouting development rules - with 'retrospective' applications later submitted to councils to allow the newly-constructed sites to remain.
Sir Desmond added he was worried about the number of unauthorised traveller sites, which he warned is now happening 'more and more often'.
'This is an established pattern. This isn't ignorance. This is gaming the system,' the veteran Conservative MP said.
The exact date of when work started at the New Forest pony field in Ringwood Road is not known. However, officials believe it could have begun as early as March.
A retrospective application was submitted shortly after, which prompted more than 80 letters of opposition.
Andrew and Rachel Holloway, whose home overlooks the site, are among those calling for the scheme to be refused.
In their written objection, they said: 'Until the site was developed six weeks ago, we looked out onto fields and hedgerows teeming with wildlife. The landscape had completely changed since the site has been developed.'
Criteria for approving gypsy and traveller sites is set out in the New Forest Local Plan.
It states: 'The New Forest has a long history of travelling communities and their needs are recognised in national planning policy.
'Planning policy [has] the overarching aim to ensure the fair and equal treatment of gypsies and travellers in a way that facilitated their traditional way of life, while respecting the interests of the settled community.'
'It requires proposals to demonstrate a proven need for accommodation, minimise harm to the landscape, and ensure developments do not negatively impact nearby residents or overload local infrastructure.
'The policy also states that occupancy should be limited to people with a local connection to the New Forest and emphasises the importance of conserving the area's natural beauty and tranquillity'
The application has been submitted by Michael Chalk and Tom Butler.
Planning consultant Tony White, who is representing the pairs' development bid, told MailOnline: 'Nationally councils have persistently failed to meet the statutory obligations to provide sites and pitches to meet the identified needs of gypsies and travellers.
'Faced with tougher policing powers to prevent roadside stopping, many gypsies and travellers feel they have no choice but to move on to their own privately-owned land before obtaining planning permission and are often forced to do so because of prejudice they encounter when roadside.
'The site prior to the two young families moving on, consisted of a brick built stable bock, large area of hardstanding and paddocks, they have carried out very little work to facilitate the occupation of the site, all of which can and will be removed should they be unsuccessful in the planning process.
'It is recognised that some residents will have concerns about the change or by travellers moving in nearby, but Mr Chalk and Mr Butler have in large part been made to feel very welcome in the village and are looking forward to their children attending the local schools and the families integrating with the settled community.
'Mr Buttler would like to add that they wish to reassure those residents who have expressed to the Mail they have fears or concerns, that it is only Mr Chalk's family and my family, that intend to live here and we want to make a home where we can raise our children, giving them access to education and medical facilities that we never had growing up, we just want to improve our children's futures and our families living standards.'
Mr White added the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (Amended) contains provisions to 'regularise unauthorised works, through retrospective applications and lawful development certificates'.
'These are utilised for many reasons and by all sectors of communities, but I can assure you, that any decision on the planning application, will not be swayed or influenced by the applicants having moved on to their property ahead of the decision,' he said.
The deadline for a decision on the site is July 2.