Fracking sites should be separated by six mile “buffer zones” to prevent the industrialisation of the countryside, the Conservative MP for a crucial shale gas constituency has said.

Kevin Hollinrake is the newly-elected MP for Thirsk and Malton in North Yorkshire, where gas company Third Energy is applying for planning permission to carry out fracking.

The site has become increasingly significant to the Government’s hopes of developing a shale gas industry after last week’s decision by councillors in Lancashire to throw out plans by another firm, Cuadrilla.

If Third Energy gains permission to frack at the site in Kirby Misperton – where it has already drilled a well - it is now likely to be the first location that the controversial process takes place in the UK since 2011.

Mr Hollinrake this week vowed to fight “tooth and nail” to prevent any shale gas development happening “in a way that industrialises the landscape”.

Fracking companies have already said that if drilling is successful they would eventually want to develop hundreds of sites across shale-rich areas.

Speaking in a Westminster Hall debate this week, Mr Hollinrake said: “Traditionally, the fracking process involves a high number of lorry movements and unsightly infrastructure that could be a real blot on the landscape.

“The beauty of our countryside is North Yorkshire’s main asset and we must protect this at all costs.

“I propose clear planning guidance that there must be buffer zones, with a minimum distance between sites of, say, six miles. We do not want the images of a fracked industrial landscape from North Dakota to become a reality here.”

Mr Hollinrake said that “in principle” he wanted to see fracking in Britain and was “keeping an open mind” about the proposal in his constituency.

But he called for ministers to introduce the buffer zone and other new regulations to protect the environment and reassure residents, who were already worried.

At a recent meeting in Kirby Misperton, “of about 50 people in attendance, 44 were against fracking and six had an open mind; none was in favour”, he said.

“These people are not professional campaigners: they are decent local people, desperately worried that fracking will change their lives forever, and not for better.”

Other proposals included a change to regulations so that the Environment Agency, rather than the fracking company, would commission independent experts to monitor water and air quality.

Mr Hollinrake told the Telegraph that despite his concerns he believed shale gas was “a great opportunity”. “I think we have one chance of doing this and I would like to see it done right, with the proper protections in place,” he said.

A secret Government report published this week concluded that house prices near fracking sites were likely to fall.

Mr Hollinrake, a successful estate agent whose company this week floated on the AIM stock exchange, said he did not believe fracking itself would harm house prices but that “the fear of it” would.

But if proper protections were put in place and fracking carried out, people would then see that it did not impact their daily lives and “would be less concerned about buying in an area where fracking was taking place nearby” he said.

A spokesman for the Department of Energy and Climate Change said: “The Government does not believe there is a need to set a fixed ‘buffer zone’ between oil and gas developments. Each development will be determined by local planning authorities on a case-by-case basis, and any separation distance can be set through planning conditions.”

Ken Cronin, of fracking trade body UKOOG, said: “The industry looks at each site on its merits including geography, topography and geology, a rigorous evidence based approach is employed. There is no scientific evidence to support buffer zones.”