MALCOLM STOTT: Through the eyes of a naturalist
Register for free to read more of the latest local news. It's easy and will only take a moment.
Much has changed since the Cairngorms National Park was established in 2003.
The balance between landscape, conservation and the needs of local people has suggestively tilted more in favour of new tourism and promoting a gigantic adventure playground.
The drive to attract new investment and stimulate economic growth by means of housing developments, encouraging resettlement, doesn’t necessarily benefit local people.
While the concept of ‘affordable housing’ is welcomed, ambiguous planning consent on the pretence of ‘affordable housing’ in rural locations is not acceptable and probably transcends the national park’s own guidelines.
The notion of a national park in the Cairngorms was never envisaged to be an institute to preserve a working landscape and maintain the integrity of biodiversity for in perpetuity.
Change is an ever-constant fact of life, identifying how best to manage the pace of change is a responsibility imperative to retaining some essence of our wild and natural beauty for present and future generations to enjoy.
Human encroachment within the national park is far greater today, than ever before.
Prior to the pandemic, and the influences of social media, it could be argued most visitors arrived to enjoy its quiet solitude, inspirational landscapes and wildlife; an experience that is rapidly being lost to less passive activities that bring new challenges.
Evidence of the impact is unequivocal and visible everywhere for those who choose to open their eyes to see.
Today, mountain bikers crave more than a forest tract to seek an adrenalin rush, creating new rides by exploiting timeworn deer-walks, fragmenting previously quiet, undisturbed areas of forests much to the disadvantage of iconic species such as the capercaillie.
Very few lochs in the core area remain free from water-borne activities to the detriment of key aquatic species.
Even the remote high plateaus haven’t escaped unscathed; a labyrinth of new, irreparable footpaths damage our most pristine and fragile habitats, home for much of our rare biodiversity.
Even at night it is impossible escape the impact of prejudicial planning decisions in rural areas; increased light pollution neutralises the full splendour of the night skies.
However, the most catastrophic and destructive event is yet to happen.
Increasingly drier summers, over two million visitors, tinderbox-dry forests and an escalation of inappropriate open fires is a recipe to fuel wildfires of colossal scale.
This prospect is a frightening reality.
New housing developments insensitively sited, out-with traditional settlements, bring additional environmental concerns as the number of household pets also increase in rural localities.
Increased ‘off-lead’ dog walking activities in vulnerable woodlands leads to greater disturbance.
Without doubt, cats are one of the most popular pets, though few owners ever witness the distressing act of a free-roaming domestic cat killing other animals.
In a ranking of alien species threatening the largest numbers of vertebrates worldwide, non-native domestic cats came in third—only rats (Rattusspp.) and the chytrid fungus Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis; that is wiping out amphibians around the world, are ahead of them according to recent scientific research.
The scale of predation is alarming and data from a UK study underlines this; owned cats brought home 200 million prey items, implying they killed several times this number.
Similar studies elsewhere in Europe reiterate the negative impacts of cat predation on native species.
It is difficult to see why the harmful habit of allowing domestic cats to roam free should be treated differently from other pets under international wildlife law.
In particular, it is unclear on what grounds the private interests of those wishing to let domestic cats roam free outdoors should outweigh the core public interest of biodiversity; or indeed the private interests of those who wish to keep their properties and immediate surroundings free from digging, defecating, urinating and potentially dangerous pathogens, or quite simply do not wish to witness the stress, suffering and death caused to wildlife.
More enlightened domestic cat owners are beginning to accept the reality of owning cats and choose to keep their pets safe indoors.
Helping to inform people about these issues; that they may not personally experience, is crucial to effecting a change of attitudes.
In the same vein as climate warming, biodiversity loss is one of the most pressing contemporary global crises that needs urgent consideration.
We need a fundamental shift in mindsets to bring about change to fully protect biodiversity and our own wellbeing.
Conservation concerns raised at a recent planning committee meeting were infuriatingly disregarded by a throwaway line from one member, ‘they can go elsewhere’!
Surely this is not in the spirit of a national park planning board?
The challenge for CNPA, should they choose to fulfil their statutory and moral obligations, is to champion biodiversity and be the first national park authority to acknowledge the legal ‘blind spot’ in international wildlife law, and bring about change to allow native wildlife to survive and flourish in a region acclaimed for its unrivalled biodiversity in the UK.
• Malcolm Stott during the past 20 years has worked as an independent wildlife consultant as well as leading wildlife expeditions worldwide.
