Martin Williams
CAMPAIGNERS are lobbying for better conservation of Scotland’s
internationally acclaimed countryside while it emerged an area the size of
Aberdeenshire and Kincardineshire has been lost to development over five
years.
Conservationists are putting fresh pressure on Holyrood ministers to agree
to more national parks to help protect the environment after a campaign
faltered following concerns over cost.
They are now lobbying all five parties to include a commitment to more
national parks in their 2016 Scottish Parliament election manifestos.
The Scottish Campaign for National Parks and the Association for the
Protection of Rural Scotland are concerned that there continues to be no
specific action from the government, despite a 2011 SNP manifesto promise
to work with charities “to explore the creation of new national parks”.
Research by Scottish Natural Heritage shows that the developed area of
Scotland has risen from 65 per cent (19,890 square miles) in 2008 to 73 per
cent (22,204 square miles) in 2013. It shows that the rise in wind farms
has been to blame, with now nearly half the nation visually impacted by
wind turbines.
The study showed that the largest change in visual influence comes from
wind turbines increasing from 19.9 per cent in 2008 to 45.9 per cent in 2013.
They argue that seven proposed additional national parks extend into only
one or two council areas and could each cost from between £1.5 million to
£3m per year to run. They would also require no more than 10 to 30 staff
and eight to 13 board members.
They say Scotland ranks near the bottom of the world league in terms of its
number of national parks.
Only a small percentage of the country’s spectacular countryside and
landscapes has been given the international recognition of national park
designation, at 7.2 per cent of Scotland’s land area, compared to 9.3 per
cent of England and 19.9 per cent of Wales.
They are leading internationally-recognised designation for places of the
highest national importance for natural or cultural heritage, including
landscape, wildlife and recreation.
SCNP and APRS say Scotland has been relatively slow to realise the
potential of National Park designation. The nation currently has two;
Cairngorm and Loch Lomond and The Trossachs.
The charities argue Ben Nevis, Glen Coe and the Black Mount range in Argyll
and Bute should become a national park along with a coastal and marine
national park, centred around Mull.
A report published last year suggested Galloway, Glen Affric, the island of
Harris and Wester Ross should also join them.
They also claim the Cheviots, straddling the Scotland-England border,
should become an extension to the Northumberland National Park.
They have called for a ministerial-led national parks strategy group and a
plan of action.
Aileen McLeod, the environment, climate change and land reform minister
told the campaigners that cost was an issue, adding: “Substantial cuts to
the Scottish Government’s budget mean that ministers must consider how any
new designation may impact on our ability to support existing parks where
resources have been focused to ensure that they continue to deliver a first
class visitor experience.”
Ms McLeod said they also had to fulfil the aims set out in the National
Parks (Scotland) Act.
Simon Skinner, chief executive of the National Trust for Scotland has
called for more positivity towards the plans.
“The Trust believes that National Park status has brought many benefits to
the areas already designated,” he said.
“We therefore urge the government to take the lead and to prepare and
implement a strategy that empowers further communities to to take this
step, creating more sustainable communities and places for the future
whilst also protecting areas of Scotland’s most outstanding landscapes and
heritage for all.”
Carol Evans, director of Woodland Trust Scotland has told ministers that
they ” do not consider it unreasonable for the Scottish Government to have
a strategy for the creation of new National Parks” in the light of the
“unfulfilled SNP manifesto pledge”.
A government spokesman said while it was committed to working with
communities over new national parks, this would only be appropriate “where
there was strong support from communities and evidence to justify the case.”
2 Comments