I WAS pleased to read on the Salisbury Journal website that the wildlife expert, Chris Packham, is prepared to add his voice to the ‘discussions’ about the proposed development of Old Sarum Airfield.

Chris Packham believes that such a site should remain natural and undeveloped whereas Grenville Hodge, director of Old Sarum Airfield Ltd, seems to suggest that adding a manmade landscaped area and some trees to the 470 homes his company proposes to build, is a reasonable substitute for the loss of this natural land.

I have lived in Ford for over 20 years and have witnessed the gradual erosion of the surrounding countryside.

This countryside is home to an abundance of wildlife.

Deer have always lived in the fields to the rear of our home and can often be seen in the early morning roaming near the airfield. I regularly see foxes, barn owls, buzzards, kestrels, sparrow hawks, herons and hares when walking my dog. I have also seen a kingfisher dart into the river and weasels disappear into the hedge.

Quite apart from the loss of amenity for wildlife any development of the airfield would destroy its perimeter, one of the reasons it was deemed worthy of conservation in the first place.

This historic airfield needs to be conserved, not destroyed.

Ford has been obliged to accept an enormous amount of development in recent years and this proposed development site is not, I believe, a ‘strategic site’ and therefore does not need to be developed.

Julie Yiangou

Ford