Wiltshire farmer told they must stop living in caravan

On April 27, Wiltshire Council issued its decision on a retrospective planning application for a static caravan to be temporarily used in connection with agricultural operations for three years on a farm in Semington, between Melksham and Trowbridge.

The landowners applied for the permission in mid-January of this year, even though it was put on the site in October 2024.

The applicants justify the existence of the caravan by saying that it improves response time to emergencies, and acts as an extra protective measure from predators as well as burglars.

However, the council has said they must get rid of the caravan after they refused the application.

According to a planning justification submitted with the application, the land is used to rear sheep, goats, poultry, and several beehives, alongside a developing orchard producing apples and pears.

The long-term aim of the farm is to establish a viable small-scale farm producing meat, eggs, honey, and orchard products for local sale.

The statement elaborates: “Immediate on-site access is essential for animal welfare, security, and the effective day-to-day management of the land. The static caravan, which has been on-site since October 2024, provides the only practical means of ensuring a continuous on-site presence.”

The applicant explains that the property has been affected by trespassers and predators and having someone on-site acts as a deterrent.

It also allows them a swift response to emergencies.

Full access to all of our articles online and on the app, fewer adverts, a better reading experience, exclusive competitions and more - all for less than the price of a cup of coffee. ☕️Subscribe now! - https://t.co/t7A1ayW7mR pic.twitter.com/Dk1fvaFm1K

— Wiltshire Times (@wiltshiretimes) April 13, 2026

During the most recent lambing period, the statement offers as an example, the farmer stayed regularly in the caravan overnight to monitor the flock and assist when needed.

The statement continues: “This direct, on-site presence proved essential for ensuring animal welfare. On several occasions, he was able to intervene immediately during birthing complications and to deter foxes approaching the poultry area at night — situations that would not have been manageable from the main farmhouse given the travel time and lack of vehicle access.”

They also explained the farm has been the victim of multiple burglaries over the past few years, which has resulted in the loss of tools and farm equipment.

The caravan is a visible presence on the land that acts as a deterrent to trespassers, protecting livestock, feed, and equipment.

As the farmland is separated from the main farm by what amounts to a 10 to 15-minute journey, by living in the caravan, the farmer is able to respond without delay.

The applicants add that the caravan is far away from a highway and is finished in neutral tones.

They also say that the proposal is for temporary siting – and that the accommodation would be reviewed when the proposed three-year period is up.

In a report on the application however, a planning officer said Wiltshire Council is not satisfied there is a justified essential need for a farm worker to reside on site and the caravan is not considered to be a suitable sustainable form of development.

They add that the application is not supported by a robust agriculture business plan that points to the proposal being functionally or financially viable.

In addition, the Council is not satisfied that the agricultural operations could not be managed from either a residence located near the site or from the farmhouse itself.

The officer continues: “The benefits of allowing the occupation of the caravan when an essential test is not satisfied would run counter to established good planning practice and the delivery of sustainable forms of development.

“The occupation of the caravan would not make a significant impact on the Council’s housing land supply and whilst some weight should be afforded to the delivery of one temporary dwelling as part of the planning balance, the harm created by allowing an unjustified, unsustainable form of development as well as the intrusion within the countryside and associated residential paraphernalia at the site, outweighs any benefits.”