I read the report on 25 per cent of the land in the South Downs now being farmed in an environmentally-sensitive way.

The tone of the article implied this was good news.

I may not be a brilliant mathematician but doesn't this mean 75 per cent of the land is therefore not farmed in an environmentally-sensitive way?

The article went on to extol the virtues of these farming practices that are beneficial to the landscape, wildlife and historic character.

This is only happening on a small section of the land, while the vast majority of the landscape, wildlife and our historic relics on the Downs are clearly continuing to be damaged and destroyed.

-Wendy Lees, Surrenden Road, Brighton