Princess Kate's royal milliner locked in neighbour row over 'orchestrated campaign'

The dispute centres on Ms Sheriff's bid to extend the campsite's operating period from 28 to 52 days annually. Local residents have lodged objections to the planning application, prompting Ms Sheriff to brand their complaints as "nimbyism."

The Sheriff family has operated the camping ground for 12 years, marketing it as a peaceful retreat for couples, families and individuals seeking outdoor recreation amid quiet country lanes and wildlife-rich hedgerows.

Those opposing the expansion have raised a litany of grievances about camper behaviour. They claim visitors have placed children on the backs of donkeys and fed the animals doughnuts and biscuits, despite it being illegal to feed or pet New Forest livestock.

Complaints also cite screaming youngsters disturbing the tranquillity, adults shouting, and guests allegedly urinating on neighbours' hedges.

One objector told the Mail: "There have been many cases of inappropriate interaction with livestock. I have asked campers to not put their children on the donkeys' backs or feed the animals, and in one instance, to stop feeding them packets of biscuits."

Stephen Havelock, another resident, described how the campsite has brought "misery, noise and nuisance to this quiet village."

Helen Taylor, a veterinarian whose property borders the field, said she had been "plagued by problems" stemming from the camping operation.

In her formal objection, Ms Taylor detailed persistent disturbances: "Whilst we expect normal conversational levels of noise, screaming children, shouting adults, whistles and music are a feature from before 7am until after 11.30pm at night."

She added: "It is not possible for us to enjoy our garden with this level of disturbance in what is otherwise, a very tranquil setting."

The vet further alleged that campers had repeatedly entered her property without permission and subjected her to verbal abuse. Ms Taylor also accused guests of harassing animals on her land.

Mr Havelock raised additional safety concerns, highlighting the proximity of fire pits to open forest and gorse, which he described as a "tinderbox in summer."

Ms Sheriff has firmly rejected the allegations, characterising them as a coordinated effort by a small group of neighbours rather than legitimate concerns. In her appeal statement, she declared: "Many of the claims made in objection are simply not true, and some of the depictions are not recognisable."

The hatmaker pointed out that numerous objectors reside in properties either too distant from the site or situated in different parishes altogether to experience any genuine impact.

She highlighted what she considers evidence of an organised opposition, noting that one complainant, Mr King, had submitted a virtually identical objection regarding Harry's Meadow, a separate campsite located more than five miles away.

"This demonstrates that the current objections are not site-specific," Ms Sheriff argued, "but form part of an organised and orchestrated campaign against camping and outdoor recreation."

Ms Sheriff emphasised the measures in place to minimise disruption to the surrounding area, including a round-the-clock warden team, a strict 10.30pm curfew, a ban on amplified music, and a policy of refusing group bookings.

The campsite permits communal fires but tightly restricts individual fire pits, using only kiln-dried logs to reduce smoke. She explained: "We rely on repeat custom, so it is entirely against our interests to tolerate nuisance or disturbance."

Ms Sheriff noted that her family has resided in the area for over five decades and maintains positive relationships with the vast majority of neighbours. Beyond the camping business, Ms Sheriff has operated her millinery company for two decades, crafting luxury headwear worn by Princess Kate at her first royal engagement in 2011 and by Pippa Middleton.