The National Trust said it has terminated the volunteering agreements of 13 elderly gardeners at Mottistone Manor on the Isle of Wight, saying they were not the right fit for its ongoing drive to broaden inclusivity. The forceful move came by email, with the trust asserting that the volunteers had failed to attend health and safety briefings, refused to accept sustainability changes, and helped foster a culture in which individuals felt free to act or speak without regard for others. The decision, disclosed late Wednesday night, has prompted a pushback from the gardeners and renewed scrutiny of the charity’s approach to volunteer governance.
The 13 gardeners have decades of cumulative experience tending the estate’s award-winning grounds. They include Graham Field, 76, who spent 12 years at Mottistone, and others whose combined years of service exceed a century. The volunteers say they carry site-specific knowledge about the gardens that dates back to the era when the estate was first opened to public visitation. The gardens themselves are a familiar feature of the Isle of Wight landscape and are mentioned in the Domesday Book for their long history. Disclosures show the gardeners were told via email that their volunteering agreement had been terminated, a step the group characterizes as abrupt and disproportionate to any alleged missteps.
The volunteers say the charges are inaccurate and allege they were denied access to an impartial complaints process. In a statement to the press, Field said the group has felt swept up in a politicized agenda centered on change, not service. “With a cold and dismissive click of a send button, over 100 years of gardening skill, site-specific knowledge and hard work were lost,” he said. He contends that some of the long-serving volunteers were excluded while a small number of newer, less experienced staff or volunteers were allowed to work during what the trust described as a temporary pause while new management practices were developed.
Field and others argue that their removal was part of a broader attempt to reset the garden’s staffing and culture toward a more intensive, policy-driven model. They say the allegations—ranging from non-attendance at briefings to resistance to evolving sustainability practices—are being used to justify a decision already made on political grounds rather than performance-based concerns. The volunteers have called for an independent review by National Trust Director-General Hilary McGrady to assess whether the process was fair and whether appropriate channels were used to address any concerns.
The National Trust has not publicly commented on the specifics of the case beyond a note the charity previously provided to a horticultural trade publication. That statement said some volunteers chose not to continue volunteering following a pause while the organization developed a new approach for the garden’s future. It emphasized that change can be challenging and that the new ways of working and expectations were not right for everyone, but it asserted a commitment to fostering an inclusive and rewarding volunteering culture at Mottistone. The charity did not respond to multiple requests for comment on the latest developments.
The controversy at Mottistone occurs as the National Trust has faced broader criticism over its inclusivity policies in recent years. The charity has historically relied on volunteers to maintain its historic properties, but critics say some policy shifts have strained those relationships. In 2021, the trust drew attention for excluding Christian holidays from its inclusivity and wellbeing calendar, a move that drew backlash from church groups and some supporters. The organization also faced attention last year after undertaking what it described as a vegan overhaul of its café menus, which drew debate about how the Trust balances tradition with contemporary values across its sites.
Cornelia van der Poll, representing Restore Trust—a group that advocates for the National Trust to preserve its traditional values—said volunteers at other National Trust properties reported similar experiences. “Pity the National Trust doesn’t seem to value the amazing resource it has in volunteers,” she said, suggesting that the organization risked eroding local knowledge and community trust by pursuing policy-driven staffing changes. Critics of the current approach argue that a strong volunteer base is essential to safeguarding historic sites and their stories, and they warn that sidelining long-standing participants could harm the credibility and continuity of interpretation offered to visitors.
The National Trust’s leadership has repeatedly highlighted a commitment to inclusivity and safety as core principles guiding its properties. In statements made to press and trade outlets, officials have argued that modernizing volunteering terms is necessary to reflect evolving safety standards, environmental goals, and community expectations. They stress that the aim is not to punish or exclude long-time contributors but to ensure that the volunteer program can endure and remain meaningful for future generations of supporters. Nevertheless, the decision to terminate the agreements of a large group of long-serving gardeners has intensified scrutiny of how the Trust handles dissent, grievance procedures, and the balance between tradition and reform.
As the story unfolds, observers note that Mottistone’s gardens—long a point of pride for the National Trust on the Isle of Wight—will continue to be curated by the staff and volunteers who remain, as well as by new participants brought in under the organization’s revised guidelines. The estate’s history, its place in local culture, and its role as a site of education about horticulture and preservation will continue to be shaped by those who work there. The sequence of events also raises broader questions about how legacy organizations manage transitions, respond to calls for greater inclusivity, and maintain open, fair processes for volunteers who have given years or decades of service to public cultural heritage.