For more than ten years campaigners have fought for the South Downs to be made a national park.

Now it looks likely the final decision could be made next year but the fight is far from over.

Across the county there are towns, villages and pockets of land which have been unexpectedly moved inside the boundary or booted out.

Now they are scrabbling desperately to get back in - or be let out. But why should you care about the national park and how will it affect you? RACHEL PEGG reports.

A national park, the argument goes, would boost tourism, help Sussex's economy and provide a joined-up system to protect the spectacular countryside of Sussex and Hampshire.

It would also become the planning authority for land within its remit, which has led detractors to complain that it could hinder development and create divisions between communities.

But most people now accept that a national park is inevitable and it is crucial to get the final details right or it could open the floodgates for bad planning decisions and poor use of land.

The South Downs National Park inspector recently published a revised boundary map which moves in extra pieces of land around Brighton and Hove - Sheepcote, Hollingbury, Waterhall - and with an open boundary down to the sea near Rottingdean and Roedean.

But some areas have been shifted out, such as the whole of the western Weald, Lewes, Ditchling, Arundel and land at Seaford, Saltdean, Titnore Woods in Durrington, Worthing and Wilmington Green. There are campaigns in nearly all these ditched sites to get them back on to the map.

However, although the deadline for comments has been extended until September 24, the consultation invites only objection to areas that are inside the boundary, not outside - something many campaigners are unhappy with.

They have vowed to bombard Defra, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, with letters expressing their discontent.

The South Downs Campaign, a network of organisations which has battled since 1995 to have the Downs declared a national park, is most concerned about the exclusion of the western Weald in north-west Sussex, which includes Petersfield, Midhurst and Petworth and a number of villages.

The inspector said the western Weald was not chalk ridge and was of a very different nature. Campaigners dispute that this should be a consideration. A petition they have compiled to have the area put back in already has 1,000 signatures.

They are worried that if the western Weald is left outside the national park, part of it could lose its status as an area of outstanding natural beauty and it would be vulnerable to home building.

Robin Crane, chairman of the South Downs Campaign, said: "People are concerned and want the western Weald kept in the national park. They see it as the safest and quickest way of safeguarding the future of this special landscape.

"This is not just a local issue but a national one. It is about securing the best possible national park in the South East for the 21st century that protects all the finest countryside originally planned to be included."

In Lewes, many are unhappy they have not been made part of the proposed park. Robert Cheesman, chairman of the Friends of Lewes, said: "A national park authority first of all means more money, most of which comes from Government, for conservation, not just for the rural environment but for the built environment.

"Lewes will be surrounded by national park land and it will be a centre for people wishing to visit. It seems a little anomalous if it is not included.

Their views are not shared by East Sussex County Council.

Councillor Matthew Lock, cabinet member for the environment, said: "The exclusion of Lewes is a very important development and I wholeheartedly welcome it. One of the functions of national parks is to decide on planning applications within their borders but experience tells us their systems are much slower than those of local councils.

"The effect on Lewes of being included would be horrendous, with minor applications for modest home improvements taking many months or even years."

The county council is objecting to the inclusion of land at Wilmington Green and land between Newhaven Tide Mills to the A259, which has planning permission for the Newhaven Port Access Road and Newhaven Eastside Business Park.

Tom Dufty, chairman of The Ditchling Society, said the village was in keeping with the Downs and had many listed buildings made of local materials such as chalk and flint.

He said: "If Ditchling was included it would help to regenerate the village and improve the economy. It would help put a greater focus on some of the issues affecting us, for example our traffic problems."

In Saltdean, a 4.25-acre field off Falmer Avenue has been taken out of the boundary.

Residents of Falmer Avenue and Bishopstone Drive have complained that the land is in an area of outstanding natural beauty with archaeological interest.

One, who asked not to be named because of a dispute between residents and the landowner, said they could not believe it had been taken out of the park.

She said: "This is a piece of agricultural land that borders the South Downs Walk."

Martin Strange, of Headland Avenue, Seaford, is campaigning against the exclusion of land close to Chynington Way. He said: "It would be unfortunate to see that lost."

Chris Todd, spokesman for the South Downs Campaign, said he wanted to see places such as Lewes and Ditchling included because one of the functions of the national park would be to end the division between town and countryside.

He said: "Some of these settlements are very high quality. Lewes is so embedded in the Downs it is really hard to divorce it, even if it does have some modern development. We really don't feel the inspector has followed the rules or justified the exclusion."

Mr Todd said he hoped national park status would end the "schizophrenic"

nature of some planning decisions which has led to Lewes District Council - which supports the creation of a park - nevertheless granting planning permission for a 240ft wind turbine for Glyndebourne Opera House. The Government Office South East is considering whether to call in the decision.



  • What would a national park mean for the Downs? DESIGNATION of the South Downs under the National Parks Act 1949 would give the area the highest level of protection under the planning system.

There would be a permanent boundary around the park and public bodies and businesses would have to abide by rules governing national park land.

A South Downs National Park Authority would be directly funded by central Government to focus on conservation and visitor management to protect the Downs' natural beauty.

This authority would be responsible for planning and development control within the park area, taking control from local councils. Closing date for comments and objections is September 24. After that the Secretary of State may reopen the inquiry, with a final decision expected next year.

What do you think about the plans for a national park? Leave your comments below