The view from windy Ward Hill on Northumberland’s Rothbury Estate offers an expanse of green fields scattered liberally with grazing sheep, interspersed with sparse hedgerows. 

But the sheep’s days dominating this landscape are numbered. 

Since Rothbury’s landowner Lord Max Percy, son of the Duke of Northumberland, sold 3,500 acres to the Wildlife Trusts charities last year, the estate’s chief occupations — sheep farming and grouse shooting — will be usurped by a mammoth conservation effort. 

“This is exactly what we need to do if we’re going to turn the tide on nature decline,” Natural England chair Tony Juniper said, as he looked out past the fields to the distinctive ridge of the Simonside Hills. “It’s quite a step.”

Natural England, a public body that advises the government on nature protection, is under attack on two fronts: from farmers and landowners for interfering with food production, and from ministers who blame it for holding up infrastructure projects. 

Rothbury exemplifies Natural England’s mission to preserve habitats and protected species. Where sheep now graze, beavers and other endangered animals in time might roam. Rare plants suppressed by decades of overgrazing could sprout once more.  

But the project also illustrates the cost of achieving the country’s ambitious nature recovery and biodiversity targets, not least to the farmers who must help to deliver them. 

Natural England is leading delivery of the UK’s goal to protect 30 per cent of land and sea for nature and halt species decline by 2030. 

In Northumberland, the Wildlife Trusts has promised to work with the tenants to integrate restoration and farming, saying that engagement had so far been constructive. But as farmers point out, fewer sheep still means less food. 

“Our major concern is we have targets for biodiversity and net zero, but none for food production,” said Tom Bradshaw, president of the National Farmers Union. “We all have to accept there are multiple demands on our land, but we don’t have a level playing field.” 

Juniper, a former environmental activist, who was recently reappointed to a third term heading up the agency, insists the narrative has become centred on “false choices”.

“The public debate very often is driven by stark choices, either its food or its nature.” This takes place “in an environment where very often conversations become quite polarised,” he said, adding that the two could exist together as long as farmers were rewarded for the non-food benefits of farming such as flood resilience, nature recovery and carbon capture.

The debate over land use comes as the government is reviewing the function of hundreds of arms-length bodies or quangos, quasi-autonomous non-governmental organisations.

Environment minister Steve Reed earlier this month told the Financial Times that Natural England and the Environment Agency would be set new objectives to ensure they do not block development and prioritise growth.

Juniper said he thought the “anti-quango theme” was “sometimes overstated . . . as a factor that is holding back development or which is costing the country a fortune”.

“I invite everyone to think about what the quangos do. In the case of Natural England, we’re providing a vital public service to restore the nation’s green infrastructure.”

Despite the tough talk, Natural England was recently granted new powers under the planning and infrastructure bill.

The move has piqued farmers, who fear their land will be seized for nature restoration under new compulsory purchase powers that allow Natural England to identify land for a “nature restoration fund”. The fund will allow developers to pay to discharge their environmental obligations.

However, Juniper said the compulsory purchase measure would only be used as a “backstop”. “I would expect that in most circumstances, we wouldn’t even need to consider that.”

Since the UK left the EU, English farming has been in the grip of a major transition.

Direct payments under the bloc’s Common Agricultural Policy have been replaced by incentive schemes that reward farmers for green activities such as tree planting and less intensive farming.

But farmers, particularly those working in livestock in upland areas such as Rothbury, say this has put them at a disadvantage. 

“Defra sadly risks no longer being considered a reliable business partner to farmers. We won’t get to less sheep and more nature unless the schemes work and you pay farmers to do it,” said farmer and Cumbria university professor Julia Aglionby, a former Natural England board member.

Aglionby’s research shows that upland farm income is set to plummet by a third by 2027 to around £20,000 a year.

Farmers are already furious with the government for changing levies for agricultural businesses. From next April landowners will be subject to a 20 per cent inheritance tax from which they were previously exempt on assets above £1mn.

The sector is also facing a sharp drop in support payments and the suspension of the government’s key green farming scheme, the Sustainable Farming Incentive.

The NFU argues these pressures will lead to farm closures, in time compromising the country’s food self-sufficiency. 

Juniper believes the country does not need to sacrifice home grown food in order to achieve large-scale nature restoration. “We need to be thinking beyond food as the only thing we can get out of our landscapes.”