First, SAS strongly supports the principle of having a map that identifies areas of wild land. The arguments for having a map of this kind are set down in the original SNH policy paper, and supportive research by the John Muir Trust and SNH itself have reinforced the case for the need to care for wildness. This work provided evidence showing strong public support for the concept and highlighting the economic links with tourism. The wild character of Scotland’s mountainous and remote countryside is an important element of our landscapes, and thereby part of the image of Scotland, and a major attraction to our visitors. In recent years, pressure from wind power development has become a serious threat to the extent and quality of Scotland’s wild landscapes. So we welcome the current initiative.
Turning from principle to practice, we acknowledge that there has for long been a general statement of governmental policy support, currently set our in general at para 99 of NPF2, and given force in the current Scottish Planning Policy at para 131. We don’t take a view on whether these areas should be given a statutory designated status: in practice, what matters is that:
• there is a continued strong statement at governmental level to give unambiguous policy support;
• that the map is given clear status as underpinning a policy to protect a resource of national value; and that
• this is backed by guidance to planning authorities and all other national agencies concerned with land use issues, on both the principle and the practice of best care for these areas. Guidance of this kind will not be easy to write: conventionally, protected areas have not had buffer zones, on the basis that the boundary of these areas delimits what is of value, and protection of that value will call for different approaches according to different pressures for change. While many forms of smaller-scale development could be accommodated close to a wild land area, the reality is that the visual footprint of large turbines is such that their effects are extensive far beyond a development. Guidance of this kind will need to be carefully crafted to ensure that obtrusive development on this scale is not acceptable at or close to the edge of such areas.
Read the full response: SAS Response to SNH Wild Land (PDF)
0 Comments