Telecoms masts on farmland: an update for landowners and farmers

24th Apr 2026

Author: Michael Bracegirdle

Many farmers and landowners have been affected by telecoms masts being installed on their land, or by older mast agreements now coming up for renewal. If that applies to you, the position may feel increasingly one-sided. Rent can be under pressure, control over the site may be reduced and it can be difficult to know how much room there is to negotiate.

That is because the rules in this area have changed over time in a way that generally makes it easier for operators to maintain and roll out digital infrastructure. More recently, further changes under the Product Security and Telecommunications Infrastructure Act 2022 have continued that trend, including new provisions that came into force on 7 April 2026 for certain renewals of older agreements.

For landowners and farmers, the result is not always straightforward. A telecoms mast can raise questions about income, control, access, development potential and the wider use of the land. It is rarely just a matter of signing a document and collecting a payment. Mike Bracegirdle explains more.

What has changed?

One of the biggest concerns is rent. Under the current approach, the assessment of what is payable for telecoms rights is based on a valuation model that strips out the special value of the site for telecoms use. Government guidance has been clear that the reforms were expected to lead to significant reductions in the amounts paid for rights to install and maintain digital communications infrastructure. In practice, that means many landowners renewing older agreements are seeing figures that look very different from the arrangements they may have entered into years ago.

That does not mean every case will produce the same outcome. The terms of the agreement still matter, as do the specific characteristics of the site and any actual loss or disruption caused. Even so, the starting point for negotiations is often less favourable to landowners than it once was.

There can also be less control over what happens on the site. The code gives operators rights, in some circumstances, to upgrade apparatus or share it with another operator without needing a fresh agreement from the landowner, provided certain conditions are met. Those conditions include there being no more than minimal adverse impact on appearance and no additional burden on the other party. The code also limits contractual terms that try to prevent assignment of an agreement to another operator.

For many landowners, that is where the frustration lies. The mast may have started as a single arrangement with one operator on agreed terms. Over time, the practical reality can feel quite different, especially if equipment changes, use of the site increases or a renewal is being sought on less favourable terms.

Why this matters in practice

For farmers and rural landowners, the annual payment is only part of the picture.

A telecoms mast can affect access across working land, the use of tracks, the location of cables and equipment and the way a site fits into the wider holding. It may also affect future plans, whether that is development, diversification, refinancing or a sale. Even where the mast itself occupies a small area, the rights granted around it can have a much wider effect.

This can become more complicated where land is already occupied by a tenant, for example under a farm business tenancy. In that situation, there may be questions about who has authority to agree terms and whether a proposed arrangement could create difficulties under the existing tenancy.

That is why the detail matters. Access rights, repair obligations, reinstatement, insurance, compensation, the extent of the land affected and the wording around upgrading and sharing can all make a real difference over the life of the agreement.

Renewals and notices need careful attention

Another issue raised more often now is renewal. Landowners sometimes assume that if an agreement has expired, the operator will simply have to leave or agree new terms on a more balanced basis. In practice, that is often not how it works.

The recent 2026 changes mean that some renewals of older agreements are now brought more closely into line with the code valuation approach. That is important because it can affect the rent payable on renewal and the overall direction of negotiations.

It is also important not to ignore notices. These agreements sit within a statutory framework and, where terms cannot be agreed, operators may be able to ask the tribunal or court to impose rights. Doing nothing rarely improves the position and can mean valuable time is lost at the point when decisions need to be made.

What should landowners and farmers be thinking about now?

If you already have a telecoms mast on your land, it is worth checking what type of agreement is in place, whether it is nearing renewal and what rights the operator may already have. If you have been approached about a new mast, it is sensible to look beyond the headline payment and consider how the arrangement could affect the land over time.

If you are approached about a new agreement, consider the practical issues first.  The right questions are often these: what rights are actually being requested, how much control will remain with the landowner, how will access work in practice and could the agreement affect future plans for the land?

Where we can help

We can help landowners and farmers review existing mast agreements, advise on proposed new terms, explain notices and look at the wider effect of telecoms equipment on the use of the land.

Where needed, we can also work alongside a land agent so that the legal and practical issues are considered together.

If you have been approached about a telecoms mast, or an existing agreement is due for renewal, taking advice early can help you get a clearer picture of the current position and the options available.

Contact our Agricultural & Rural Affairs team on 01606 334309 or email agriculture@butcher-barlow.co.uk

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The information in this article was correct at the time of publication. The information is for general guidance only. Laws and regulations may change, and the applicability of legal principles can vary based on individual circumstances. Therefore, this content should not be construed as legal advice. We recommend that you consult with a qualified legal professional to obtain advice tailored to your specific situation. For personalised guidance, please contact us directly.