September 3rd, 2019 by ie-admin
Given the overwhelming public support for action the new Programme for Government falls short of expectations. A recent survey undertaken by Survation on behalf of Scottish Environment LINK, a coalition of Scotland’s leading environmental charities has found that as many as 84% of Scots want the same or higher levels of environmental standards in the event of Brexit.
The Scottish Government’s 2019-2020 Programme for Government, launched today (3 September), has a strong climate emergency theme – with the need to act centre stage. A Circular Economy Bill, a Good Food Nation Bill, a strategic, climate friendly approach to land use and the inclusion of environmental principles in the Continuity Bill are all welcome.
However, it has failed to detail concrete steps that will give Scotland’s environment adequate protection from Brexit, if and when, we leave the EU. The proposals for effective and proportional governance do not detail what is intended and if this will include an independent watchdog. It is not proposed to underpin the Environment Strategy in statute or set legally binding objectives or targets for nature recovery. We cannot fully meet the climate emergency without tackling the nature crisis too. This is a missed opportunity, which is disappointing in an otherwise very welcome Programme.
At present, as much as 80 per cent of Scotland’s environmental protections stem from EU membership. This is why environmental charities in Scotland have launched an urgent bid under the campaign Fight for Scotland’s Nature for Scotland to have its own Environment Act. This will help to ensure that Brexit does not unravel crucial environment protections at a time when 1 in 11 species in Scotland is at risk of extinction.
Together, the charities are pushing for the needs of Scotland’s world-renowned nature not to be lost in the chaos around Brexit and for the Scottish Government to commit to protecting Scotland’s environment better, now and in the future. They want to see vital EU environmental principles embedded in Scots law; it is welcome that this is now to be included in the proposed Continuity Bill. For this to be meaningful they are also calling for the creation of an independent environmental watchdog and legally binding targets for the recovery and protection of Scotland’s nature. While governance measures are mentioned, these are not detailed.
The First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, has said her government intends to legislate for environmental principles for Scotland and set out new arrangements for enforcing environmental protections. However, today’s Programme for Government does not state when such measures might be introduced, or whether there will be a watchdog with the power to hold Ministers to account on environmental performance.
Charles Dundas, Chair of Scottish Environment LINK, said today:
“I am pleased to see the grand swell of public opinion that more should be done to protect Scotland’s precious environment from the major threats it is facing. The climate and nature emergencies are intrinsically linked and must be tackled together, which is something the First Minister has also recognised. As such, we’d have liked to see a strong Environment Act for Scotland and an ambitious and consistent approach to nature recovery. With Brexit potentially a matter of weeks away, it is now beyond urgent that the government sets out detailed plans. Although we’d have liked to see more detail on governance and a legally binding strategy, it is very welcome to see the emphasis placed on addressing climate change, a Circular Economy and a Good Food Nation Bill.”
EU environmental protections are among the strongest in the world and year on year Scotland’s nature has hugely benefitted from these. However, Brexit and a rapid decline in the health of our environment here and across the world mean that urgent action is now required.
He added: “We welcome the First Minister’s reiteration of the commitment to maintain standards, but this needs to be supported by strong governance. The most glaring gap is the lack of proposals for a watchdog. Unless we can create a well-resourced and genuinely independent body to monitor and scrutinise environmental laws, policies and practice, with the ability to impose penalties, these protections will have little worth.”
On the circular economy, Matthew Crighton, Convenor of LINK’s Economics Group, said:
“It’s positive that there will be a Circular Economy Bill brought to Parliament. Creating a circular economy is an essential part of reducing greenhouse gas emissions as well as one of the best ways to reduce the damage which we are doing to nature. However, to ‘embed an innovative approach to reducing, reusing and recycling materials’ it will have to do more than increase recycling rates or reduce the flow of waste to landfill – the entire system needs to be transformed, starting with designing out waste and designing in re-use and the right to repair. The Programme for Government doesn’t mention setting targets for reducing our resource footprints but we are still hoping to see ambitious targets in this Bill.
Editors Notes
(1) Scottish Environment LINK is the forum for Scotland’s voluntary environment community, with over 35 member bodies representing a broad spectrum of environmental interests with the common goal of contributing to a more environmentally sustainable society.
LINK is a Scottish Charity (SC000296) and a Scottish Company Limited by guarantee (SC250899). LINK is core funded by Membership Subscriptions and by grants from Scottish Natural Heritage, Scottish Government and Charitable Trusts
2) People aged 16+ and living in Scotland were interviewed via online panel. Data was weighted to the profile of all Scottish people aged 16+. Data was weighted by age, sex, region and 2016 Scottish Parliamentary constituency vote.
Targets for the weighted data were derived from Office of National Statistics data and the results of the 2016 Scottish Parliamentary election.
(3) More information about the Fight For Scotland’s Nature campaign can be found at www.fightforscotlandsnature.scot
August 29th, 2019 by ie-admin
Scottish Environment LINK has joined more than 85 civil society organisations in signing an open letter to the Prime Minister expressing grave concerns about the impact of a no-deal Brexit.
You can read the letter here. For more information, visit the Brexit Civil Society Alliance.
Read our blog, ‘A No Deal Brexit is No Good for Scotland’s Environment‘, published back in March.
August 26th, 2019 by ie-admin
By Deborah Long, chief officer of Scottish Environment LINK
In June, LINK brought together 97 organisations to write to the First Minister to ask her to take action to protect, enhance and restore our environment – as the best insurance against climate change and to provide subsequent generations with a sustainable future. You can read our letter here. This was in the context of her declaration of a climate emergency and the need to act.
You can read the First Minister’s reply here.
Today’s climate and ecological emergencies are inextricably linked, and working to tackle one contributes to tackling the other. And it is clear that time to act is running out: the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) gives us 10 years to cut carbon emissions, while a major UN report on biodiversity estimates that 1 million species are at risk of extinction.
Species and habitat diversity, within fully functioning ecosystems, are essential for our future resilience, offering us protection against dramatic climate events such as flooding, and against major epidemics amongst humans and the crops we rely on.
We all know what’s at stake: younger generations are pointing the finger at politicians and other adults in positions to do something about these emergencies. It is time for the talking to lead to effective action.
Scotland trades on its image as a country with a clean and vibrant natural environment. But that environment, although green on the outside, is not as healthy as it could be: species are declining at sea and on land, habitats are fragmenting, soils are degrading. We need to reverse all of this if we are to face and survive climate change.
Scotland could lead the world, but we need political leadership and the will to make some tough choices in favour of the natural environment now. That means within the next 10 years.
This is actually possible in Scotland. The First Minister’s reply to our letter underlines her government’s commitment to introduce new legislation for Scotland’s environment. It reiterates her, and the Scottish Government’s, recognition of the importance of the natural environment and their responsibility to it. The recognition that the challenges facing biodiversity are as important as the challenge of climate change is also very welcome, as is the ambition for Scotland to lead the way.
Scotland has made a positive start with the target to reach net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2045. We look forward to the government’s own analysis of Scotland’s action towards the Global Biodiversity Targets, and to the State of Nature partnership’s analysis of trends leading up to 2020. These reports will inform us on how much progress we have made, and what we must do before the targets are revised in 2020 as part of the next meeting on the Convention of Biodiversity in China in 2020.
And Scotland has made progress in relation to proposed legislation to ban plastic cotton buds and introduce a deposit return scheme, along with woodland planting and peatland restoration. However, within the time scale we have and against the challenges that remain, we are still not doing enough, nor are we doing it quickly enough.
Brexit and whatever follows cannot derail our ambition and focus on the emergency of climate change and the ecological crisis.
LINK believes that the most efficient way of enabling and supporting this non-negotiably vital work is through a Scottish Environment Act. Such an act needs to include a truly independent, well-resourced and empowered watchdog, and must require the delivery of a strategy and the setting of targets against which progress can be judged.
While the environment strategy being developed by the Scottish Government is welcome, unless it is underpinned by effective legislation it will be unable on its own to bring about the changes we need to see. We already have strategies that if enacted effectively could have been reversing some of the negative trends. The Biodiversity Strategy launched in 2004 and the Land Use Strategy launched in 2011 are both forward-looking in their approach, but neither are being implemented or enforced in a way that makes any significant change happen.
We cannot afford to wait any longer. Now is the time to act, with a strong and comprehensive Environment Bill developed this autumn and winter for introduction to Parliament by Easter 2020. That would enable Scotland to be world leading, at the time when Scotland’s people need it and when the world focuses on biodiversity conservation as the 2020 targets are renewed, and when significant progress towards net zero needs to be underway.
We look forward to working with Ministers and the Scottish Government to achieve our shared ambitions for the environment. We’ll be looking at the Government’s plans for the next 12 months to see how far we can get together in the fight against climate change and for nature.
August 26th, 2019 by ie-admin
A blog by Deborah Long, LINK chief officer
In June, LINK brought together 97 organisations to write to the First Minister to ask her to take action to protect, enhance and restore our environment – as the best insurance against climate change and to provide subsequent generations with a sustainable future. You can read our letter here. This was in the context of her declaration of a climate emergency and the need to act.
You can read the First Minister’s reply here.
Today’s climate and ecological emergencies are inextricably linked, and working to tackle one contributes to tackling the other. And it is clear that time to act is running out: the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) gives us 10 years to cut carbon emissions, while a major UN report on biodiversity estimates that 1 million species are at risk of extinction.
Species and habitat diversity, within fully functioning ecosystems, are essential for our future resilience, offering us protection against dramatic climate events such as flooding, and against major epidemics amongst humans and the crops we rely on.
We all know what’s at stake: younger generations are pointing the finger at politicians and other adults in positions to do something about these emergencies. It is time for the talking to lead to effective action.
Scotland trades on its image as a country with a clean and vibrant natural environment. But that environment, although green on the outside, is not as healthy as it could be: species are declining at sea and on land, habitats are fragmenting, soils are degrading. We need to reverse all of this if we are to face and survive climate change.
Scotland could lead the world, but we need political leadership and the will to make some tough choices in favour of the natural environment now. That means within the next 10 years.
This is actually possible in Scotland. The First Minister’s reply to our letter underlines her government’s commitment to introduce new legislation for Scotland’s environment. It reiterates her, and the Scottish Government’s, recognition of the importance of the natural environment and their responsibility to it. The recognition that the challenges facing biodiversity are as important as the challenge of climate change is also very welcome, as is the ambition for Scotland to lead the way.
Scotland has made a positive start with the target to reach net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2045. We look forward to the government’s own analysis of Scotland’s action towards the Global Biodiversity Targets, and to the State of Nature partnership’s analysis of trends leading up to 2020. These reports will inform us on how much progress we have made, and what we must do before the targets are revised in 2020 as part of the next meeting on the Convention of Biodiversity in China in 2020.
And Scotland has made progress in relation to proposed legislation to ban plastic cotton buds and introduce a deposit return scheme, along with woodland planting and peatland restoration. However, within the time scale we have and against the challenges that remain, we are still not doing enough, nor are we doing it quickly enough.
Brexit and whatever follows cannot derail our ambition and focus on the emergency of climate change and the ecological crisis.
LINK believes that the most efficient way of enabling and supporting this non-negotiably vital work is through a Scottish Environment Act. Such an act needs to include a truly independent, well-resourced and empowered watchdog, and must require the delivery of a strategy and the setting of targets against which progress can be judged.
While the environment strategy being developed by the Scottish Government is welcome, unless it is underpinned by effective legislation it will be unable on its own to bring about the changes we need to see. We already have strategies that if enacted effectively could have been reversing some of the negative trends. The Biodiversity Strategy launched in 2004 and the Land Use Strategy launched in 2011 are both forward-looking in their approach, but neither are being implemented or enforced in a way that makes any significant change happen.
We cannot afford to wait any longer. Now is the time to act, with a strong and comprehensive Environment Bill developed this autumn and winter for introduction to Parliament by Easter 2020. That would enable Scotland to be world leading, at the time when Scotland’s people need it and when the world focuses on biodiversity conservation as the 2020 targets are renewed, and when significant progress towards net zero needs to be underway.
We look forward to working with Ministers and the Scottish Government to achieve our shared ambitions for the environment. We’ll be looking at the Government’s plans for the next 12 months to see how far we can get together in the fight against climate change and for nature.
August 14th, 2019 by ie-admin
A blog by Deborah Long, LINK Chief Officer.
The challenges that we face as a planet are significant right now: natural challenges of climate change and biodiversity, and human made challenges of democracy, including Brexit and the aftermath of the American presidential election. If there is ever a time for sophisticated and methodical thinking, that time is now. With the complexity of natural systems, feedback loops and tipping points, the potential opportunities of a systems approach to these challenges become clear.
A systems thinking approach is not a new concept: it’s not even a human concept. Ecosystems operate in a systems approach. Systems thinking has become a vital tool for business and brings a more robust approach to decision making and action delivery.
However, a systems thinking approach is not yet being used effectively in national policy making. A systems approach to land management for example, would see stakeholder engagement being used to produce a national strategic plan, implemented by key stakeholders according to agreed and specific principles, supported by government and relevant legislation to deliver an overall clear and measurable objective with feedback loops and regular analysis to correct direction if needed. This should be how Scotland’s Land Use Strategy works: its issue is that it lacks specific principles and spatial tools that are consistently applied to land use decisions. The net result is that planning and development decisions are not being made strategically, and this is making the fragmentation of habitats, cost of national infrastructures and efficiency of spend even worse.
If we were to use systems thinking to address Scotland’s planning and land use dilemmas, it may look something like this:
What are our priorities to achieve from Scotland’s land?
- Increased renewable energy
- Healthy food accessible by all communities
- Efficient infrastructures including IT, transport and energy transmission
- Intelligently planned communities with full access to a healthy environment and the services they require, including schools, doctors, access to shops
What is the context of that?
- A country of just over 80,000 km2 of land
- A climate emergency that requires us to increase carbon sequestration and decrease the amount of energy we use
- A biodiversity emergency that is losing species through pressures of land use practices and climate change
- A country that is home to nearly 5 million people who all require a safe and healthy environment, access to healthy food, a living income and access to key services
- A country with the potential to be world leading in terms of environment, civic society and planetary responsibility.
How do we reconcile these needs?
Mapping: what resource do we have, where is it, where are the suppliers and where are the consumers?
Identifying and managing needs: how much of each do we need to function? How can we manage that level of need? How do we meet that need given the constraints identified in 1?
Who meets these needs? Who has these needs?
How do we make decisions?
Agreeing that these priorities must come first: every decision needs to be cross checked against each priority and scored: a negative impact on one of the priorities is marked down and a positive impact is marked up. For any decision to be carried, a significant contribution to at least one priority must be made and no negative impacts can be made. Conflicts will inevitably arise in this system: which is why communities need to be engaged – and independent experts need to be engaged. Both groups of stakeholders would be required to offer evidence of the impact of each decision and offer mitigation solutions.
Could we adopt system approach in Scottish policy making?
In theory we could. It requires the maturity of approach to involve a diversity of stakeholders: from local to national levels. We can only achieve this if stakeholders can engage and want to engage. They need access to decision making processes and accessible processes in terms of language and finances. Above all, however, this approach requires buy in and support from government and politicians. That level of support is not clear: is Scotland’s policy making process mature enough to be able to put this in place and achieve our priorities? The languishing status of the Land Use Strategy suggests not.
July 26th, 2019 by ie-admin
Stand up for the nature you love! Is it bumblebees in your local park? Puffins in the Firth of Forth? Oak trees on the banks of Loch Lomond?
Join the Fight for Scotland’s Nature by tweeting your nature pictures or videos to Nicola Sturgeon.
1/ Take a photo or video of what you love. Maybe you’re in the picture too.
2/ Tweet your picture or video to Nicola Sturgeon on @ScotGovFM using the hashtag #FightForScotlandsNature.
https://twitter.com/CalumLangdale/status/1153327406763008000?s=20
https://twitter.com/PeteHaskell/status/1153961960372916224?s=20
Don’t have a picture? Write the name of what you’re standing up for on a piece of paper and take a selfie of yourself with it.
Search for #FightForScotlandsNature on Twitter to see what others are standing up for!
July 25th, 2019 by ie-admin
© Charlie Phillips
Published in the Scotsman on 24 July
If our natural environment is being harmed, and our government fails in its duty to protect it, who can we turn to?
In 2012, conservation group WWF complained to the European Commission that the UK government hadn’t set up any protected areas for the harbour porpoise.
With its chunky body, triangular fin and slow rolling motion, the harbour porpoise is found throughout Scotland’s coastal waters. But chemical and noise pollution both pose significant threats to our smallest cetacean. In British seas as a whole, more than 1,500 porpoises are estimated to die each year through entanglement in fishing gear.The harbour porpoise is protected under the EU Habitats Directive, which means the UK is legally obliged to set aside areas of sea where it will be allowed to thrive. Following the WWF complaint, the UK and Scottish governments have together proposed six new special areas for the porpoise, including one in Scotland, in the Inner Hebrides and Minches.
Environmental protections are only as strong as the institutions that uphold them. On leaving the EU, Scotland and the rest of the UK will lose the oversight and enforcement roles of the European Commission, European Court of Justice and other EU bodies.
These institutions have played an invaluable role in giving the public a voice and holding governments to account on environmental matters. As well as monitoring and reporting on the state of the environment and investigating potential breaches of environmental laws, together they can ensure enforcement and apply sanctions on governments that don’t comply. Their power stems from the fact that they are independent of national governments.
The Scottish Government has acknowledged that losing the oversight of these EU bodies will create a large hole in the defences with which we can protect Scotland’s environment. But so far it has said little about how that hole might be filled.
A campaign led by a coalition of environmental charities is calling for a Scottish Environment Act to ensure that any exit from the EU does not unravel these protections.
One of the key things we want an Act to do is establish a new watchdog to monitor Scotland’s natural environment and hold government to account in looking after it. Crucially, a watchdog must have what no existing body in Scotland has: the power, resources and independence to effectively police the government on environmental matters.
The Fight for Scotland’s Nature campaign also wants an Environment Act to embed EU environmental principles in Scots law, and to set clear, legally-binding targets for the protection and recovery of Scotland’s nature, as well as making funds available to ensure targets can be met.
A Scottish Environment Act would help underpin the transformative action required to tackle the joint emergencies of biodiversity loss and climate breakdown.
Scotland’s people, as well as wildlife like the harbour porpoise, need strong, effective environmental protections. The quality of the air we breathe is one of the most obvious examples of a standard we need governments to uphold. But levels of nitrogen dioxide, mostly from diesel vehicles, have been illegally high in many UK cities and towns for almost a decade. Edinburgh, Glasgow and Dundee all have streets that break legal limits. It’s estimated that air pollution causes 2,500 early deaths in Scotland every year.
Last year, following action by environmental lawyers Client Earth, Friends of the Earth Scotland and other organisations, the UK government was referred to the European Court of Justice for repeatedly failing to tackle air pollution. It could face substantial fines if it fails to comply.
At present, our air quality laws come from the EU. But after Brexit, in line with devolution, setting and implementing air quality laws would be the responsibility of the Scottish Government – making an environmental watchdog that is specific to Scotland all the more necessary.
Air quality is not alone. Most of our domestic environmental protections stem from EU laws, meaning that there is broad scope for citizens and charities to submit complaints to the European Commission where they see a failure to meet environmental standards. Unlike a UK court case, this complaints process is affordable. Another major advantage is that it allows cases to be judged on merit, whereas an appeal in UK courts can only look at procedural errors.
The EU has played an overwhelmingly positive role in safeguarding Scotland’s natural environment. But whatever our future relationship with the EU, Scotland can retain and build upon current protections through a Scottish Environment Act that sets us on a clear path to a sustainable future. An independent watchdog that holds government to account and gives citizens recourse to justice must be a central component.
Miriam Ross is coordinator of the Fight for Scotland’s Nature campaign at Scottish Environment LINK.
July 24th, 2019 by ie-admin
If our natural environment is being harmed, and our government fails in its duty to protect it, who can we turn to?
In 2012, conservation group WWF complained to the European Commission that the UK government hadn’t set up any protected areas for the harbour porpoise. With its chunky body, triangular fin and slow rolling motion through the water, the harbour porpoise is found throughout Scotland’s coastal waters. But chemical and noise pollution both pose significant threats to our smallest cetacean. And in British seas as a whole, more than 1,500 porpoises are estimated to die each year through entanglement in fishing gear.
The harbour porpoise is protected under the EU Habitats Directive, which means the UK is legally obliged to set aside areas of sea where it will be allowed to thrive. Following the WWF complaint, the UK and Scottish governments have together proposed six new special areas for the porpoise, including one in Scotland, in the Inner Hebrides and Minches.
Environmental protections are only as strong as the institutions that uphold them. On leaving the EU, Scotland and the rest of the UK will lose the oversight and enforcement roles of the European Commission, European Court of Justice and other EU bodies. These institutions have played an invaluable role in giving the public a voice and holding governments to account on environmental matters. As well as monitoring and reporting on the state of the environment and investigating potential breaches of environmental laws, together they can ensure enforcement and apply sanctions on governments that don’t comply. Their power stems from the fact that they are independent of national governments.
The Scottish Government has acknowledged that losing the oversight of these EU bodies will create a large hole in the defences with which we can protect Scotland’s environment. But so far it has said little about how that hole might be filled.
A growing campaign led by a coalition of environmental charities is calling for a Scottish Environment Act to ensure that any exit from the EU does not unravel the protections we rely on. One of the key things we want an Act to do is establish a new watchdog to monitor Scotland’s natural environment and hold government to account in looking after it. Crucially, a watchdog must have what no existing body in Scotland has: the power, resources and independence to effectively police the government on environmental matters.
The Fight for Scotland’s Nature campaign also wants an Environment Act to embed internationally renowned EU environmental principles in Scots law, and to set clear, legally binding targets for the protection and recovery of Scotland’s nature – as well as making the funds available to ensure targets can be met. A Scottish Environment Act would help underpin the transformative action required to tackle the joint emergencies of biodiversity loss and climate breakdown.
Scotland’s people, as well as wildlife like the harbour porpoise, need strong, effective environmental protections. The quality of the air we breathe is one of the most obvious examples of a standard we need governments to uphold. But levels of nitrogen dioxide, mostly from diesel vehicles, have been illegally high in many UK cities and towns for almost a decade. Edinburgh, Glasgow and Dundee all have streets that break legal limits. It’s estimated that air pollution causes 2,500 early deaths in the Scotland every year.
Last year, following action by environmental lawyers Client Earth, Friends of the Earth Scotland and other organisations, the UK government was referred to the European Court of Justice for repeatedly failing to tackle air pollution. It could face substantial fines if it fails to comply.
At present, our air quality laws come from the EU. But after Brexit, in line with devolution, setting and implementing air quality laws would be the responsibility of the Scottish Government – making an environmental watchdog that is specific to Scotland all the more necessary.
Air quality is not alone. Most of our domestic environmental protections stem from EU laws, meaning that currently there is broad scope for citizens and charities to submit complaints to the European Commission where they see a failure to meet environmental standards. And unlike a UK court case, this complaints process is affordable. Another major advantage is that it allows cases to be judged on merit, whereas an appeal in UK courts can only look at procedural errors.
The EU has played an overwhelmingly positive role in safeguarding Scotland’s natural environment. But whatever our future relationship with the EU, Scotland can retain and build upon current protections through a Scottish Environment Act that sets us on a clear path to a sustainable future. An independent watchdog that holds government to account and gives citizens recourse to justice must be a central component of such an Act.
by Miriam Ross, Fight for Scotland’s Nature campaign co-ordinator at Scottish Environment LINK.
This blog was published as a Scotsman article on 24 July 2019.
July 10th, 2019 by ie-admin
In June, the Scottish Government once again failed to take the opportunity to stop the unregulated construction of hilltracks, which is damaging some of Scotland’s most well-loved upland landscapes, when Ministers refused to support amendments to the Planning (Scotland) Bill which were put forward by Andy Wightman MSP of the Scottish Green Party.
There was immediate condemnation of the decision on social media, with outdoors writer and broadcaster Cameron McNeish branding it “absolutely bloody shameful”. Muriel Gray agreed the decision was “baffling”, with Chris Townsend commenting it was “disgraceful”. Snow specialist Iain Cameron asked, “Can someone explain to me why bringing hill tracks under proper planning regulations has been voted down in the Scottish Parliament? Can anyone give even one good reason why monstrosities like these are allowed to be constructed without any oversight or scrutiny? I’m speechless.” Climber Dave MacLeod commented it was “shortsighted and disappointing.”
So what is the issue with hilltracks?
Partly it’s because tracks are often one cause of the environmental and landscape damage found on intensively managed grouse moors, though many tracks are also built for deer stalking purposes. The other issue, however, is that they symbolise the abuse of privilege by many landowners. While ordinary people need to apply for planning permission to build modest extensions to their houses, tracks are being bulldozed up mountainsides causing permanent scars and yet have no requirement for planning permission. A full planning application would enable local communities and representative bodies to make comments or even object, and for the public interest to be properly represented.
The underlying issue is that tracks built for agricultural or forestry purposes benefit from permitted development rights (PDRs), a situation dating from the post-war period when the priority of the government at that time was to boost productivity after years of privation. Over the next decades, many landowners took advantage of this planning loophole to construct tracks, even though it’s clear that often their main purpose was not agricultural, but instead to enable shooting and stalking clients to get up a hill more easily. Given that tracks are used for many purposes, including recreation, landowners were able to claim agricultural use for the tracks as it was impossible for the planning authority to prove otherwise, even when the track led to a row of grouse butts. Without the public scrutiny that the planning system brings, too many tracks were poorly constructed leading to landscape scars and environmental damage, often in areas much valued for their beauty and as a setting for outdoor recreation.
Concerns were first raised in the 1960s when Lord Dulverton bulldozed a track from Glen Feshie right to the top of the Cairngorm plateau. The late Adam Watson documented the proliferation of tracks in the Cairngorms over the following years, and many outdoor and environmental bodies have attempted to get PDRs removed from tracks.
In 2012, a government review of PDRs stated that there was “compelling evidence” of the problem and therefore proposed to change the law. However, the then Planning Minister, Derek Mackay MSP, then announced that he had changed his mind. This turnaround led to the forming of the Scottish Environment LINK hilltracks campaign in 2013 which started to build evidence of the problem, with its Track Changes report illustrated by case studies based on photos submitted by hillgoers. Problem tracks were identified from the Borders to Sutherland, including particularly horrendous examples in the Pentland Hills and within the Cairngorms National Park.
This effort led to a legal requirement for landowners to give prior notification of their intention to build a track, but not the full planning application sought by campaigners. LINK set out to monitor the new system and a further report, Changing Tracks, in 2018 made it clear that the adjustment had not made any meaningful improvements in practice.
The Planning Bill going through the Scottish Parliament then became a target to get the necessary change in the law and Andy Wightman MSP made great efforts to explain the reason for his amendments, both at the Committee stage and then in the full parliamentary debate in June. In this he was supported by Green, Labour and Liberal Democrat colleagues. However, SNP and Conservative MSPs joined forces to vote against these amendments and their greater numbers ultimately won the day. It was particularly galling to those campaigning for change, and many SNP supporters, that the SNP seemed to be siding with landowners to let this damage to the countryside continue. Climber Ed Douglas tweeted that it was “Bizarre, given the immense reputation the Scottish landscape enjoys around the world, that you would trash it so a few people too lazy to walk can shoot birds.”
The LINK campaign will continue, as the Minister has committed to considering the issue again during a forthcoming review of permitted development rights. Of course we’ve been here before in 2012, but we’re confident that the strength of public concern over this issue has been made clear to MSPs. Let’s hope that this issue will finally be resolved by next year.
by Helen Todd, Campaigns and Policy Manager with Ramblers Scotland and co-convener of the LINK Hilltracks Subgroup.
A version of this blog appeared on UK Hillwalking: https://www.ukhillwalking.com/articles/opinions/when_will_politicians_get_a_grip_on_hill_tracks-12077
Members of the LINK Hilltracks Subgroup are: Association for the Protection of Rural Scotland, Badenoch & Strathspey Conservation Group, Cairngorms Campaign, John Muir Trust, National Trust for Scotland, North East Mountain Trust, Ramblers Scotland, RSPB Scotland, Scottish Campaign for National Parks and Scottish Wild Land Group. Mountaineering Scotland, while not a member of LINK, also supports this campaign.
June 27th, 2019 by ie-admin
EU environmental principles have helped us effectively address environmental issues in a systematic way. They have been fundamental to ensuring consistent decision-making, and therefore providing greater certainty for business and others, as well as ensuring that the way in which we protect our natural wealth and seek to rectify environmental harm is effective and targeted. Whether we are dealing with air pollution, water quality or the protection of our wildlife, EU environmental principles, often stemming from international conventions, have been integral to setting and enforcing environmental standards.
The potential of the UK exiting the EU means that we stand to lose the protection provided by those principles. Unless action is taken, we may find ourselves in the midst of what is now openly acknowledged as a twin climate and nature emergency without key tools that up until now have helped us relieve pressures on our environment.
One such key environmental principle is the principle of ‘rectification at source’. This principle provides us with the ‘how’ in terms of addressing environmental problems. It seeks to ensure that policies and laws regulate pollution at its source rather than remedy its effects.
This may sound obvious, but a simple example would be our approach to improving indoor air quality. One option for improving indoor air quality, if pollutants were found in high concentrations, would be to invest in air filters. But that only masks the problem and does not tackle the underlying issue – namely that the air is unhealthy. In other words, it does not address the root of the problem. If the principle of rectification at source was applied in this instance, the logical thing to do would be to identify the source (whether an object or activity) which pollutes the air and regulate that.
Simply put, this principle guides the regulation of pollution from its source rather than in the wider environment. It helps us prioritise how we should best address environmental harm, and what are the top actions which we should take to redress it.
The concept of rectifying pollution or environmental damage at source also helps us trace back damaging activities to the actual polluter too. This makes it easier for authorities to ensure that polluters pay for the environmental harm that they have caused.
If applied consistently, this principle can drive cleaner processes and products which are inherently good for the environment rather than approaches which treat the problem as or after it occurs.
The principle that environmental damage should be rectified at source is embedded in EU treaties and often reflected in domestic laws. However, to ensure that this principle, as well as all other EU environmental principles, have the same practical effect in Scotland even if Brexit materialises, we need those principles embedded in Scots law. This could be achieved through a dedicated Scottish Environment Act.
