YOUR VIEWS: Radical move on land acquisitions would help solve housing shortage
Register for free to read more of the latest local news. It's easy and will only take a moment.
* * *
The local dimension has been sidelined in Cairngorms National Park
Local MSP Fergus Ewing is correct; residents of the Cairngorms National Park have frequently been consulted but there has been no referendum to determine if locals are in favour of this designation, or the way the national park is being managed (Strathy letters, March 14).
Prior to the national park being established there was local opposition about the designation.
In March 1991, the Cairngorms Working Party was set up to consult the private and public sector in the area along with other interested parties.
Following monthly meetings around the Cairngorms plus two rounds of public consultations, the working party reported to the Secretary of State for Scotland in December 1992.
They concluded a national park designation was not appropriate. They recommended a Cairngorms Partnership reflecting local, national and international interests of this area, assisted by a small partnership staff.
The Cairngorms Partnership was established in November 1994. In May 1997, the Scottish Wildlife and Countryside Link, a consortium of recreation and conservation interest groups, published a paper calling for national parks for Scotland.
The area was too important to the nation for recreation and conservation to be managed by local residents.
In September 1997 Scottish Natural Heritage was asked to advise on how national parks in Scotland could best operate. They claimed only five per cent of the responses from the Cairngorms area were not in favour.
In November 1998, a group of Strathspey farmers, land managers and consultants were funded by SNH to visit the Cevennes National Park and the Volvans D’Auvergne Regional Nature Park in France. I was part of that group.
In the Cevennes National Park the majority of board members resided within the park. Local involvement in running the park was important along with maintenance of the cultural and historic built landscape.
There were grants of up to 80 per cent to maintain and enhance local buildings using local materials and traditional methods. Government support was targeted at local rather than outside organisations and individuals.
Farmers were paid to maintain footpaths around and through their farms. Efforts were made to disperse tourism away from ‘honey pot’ developments to benefit farms and communities.
SNH organised a further consultation January to March 2000 on the proposed National Parks (Scotland) Bill to enable local areas to express their views on this proposal. SNH claimed that as the national park designation is a national issue, all views received will be welcome.
At the time Scotland’s population was around 5.25 million while the population of the Cairngorms was around 15,000 people. The views of the local population were in the minority. SNH’s advice was:
* the balance of interests should favour long-term conservation of the natural and cultural resources of the area.
* Scotland’s national parks would need to integrate economic development with the proper protection of the natural and cultural heritage.
* National parks should engender trust between national and local interests.
* The effects of national parks will be essentially on those living or working within them.
The Cairngorms National Park was established in March 2003. It was promoted as a destination for tourism, recreation and conservation, a nice place to retire to, live in, commute from or have a holiday home, not to support the resident population that depended on their landholdings for their livelihood.
Initially residents were invited to participate in several forums and advisory groups. Over the years resident managers with views that diverged from the Cairngorms National Park Authority, were replaced with those who supported the CNPA view.
Within the now 18,000 residents, there are a declining minority who still depend on our rural land for their income.
By consulting nationally or internationally about how we should manage our resources locally, we effectively disenfranchise those resident stakeholders with the most knowledge, training and expertise in managing our local resources.
Promotion of the national park as a nice place to live in, commute from or retire to has resulted in those associated with production from our land being in a minority even within our rural communities. We are left relying on those organising these consultations on how to package the responses to suit their agenda.
I have some sympathy with Mr Ewing’s claim that residents within the park have no real say in the decisions being made.
I recall a Land Managers’ Forum meeting in March 2017 at Allargue, sitting next to the CNPA’s then head of land management.
He enquired about a 50 page report I kept referring to. I explained that it was our response to their latest consultation, had he not read it? His reply was that they did not read any of our responses, they were all read by others who provided him with a summary.
I understood our response to their consultations based on our experience and knowledge of the subject was given the same weight and consideration as someone who had never even visited the park.
The topic of this meeting was on deer management. As land managers we disagreed with the views of the CNPA officials.
The next day in The Scotsman newspaper there was an article giving the considered views of the CNPA on deer management. It was clear their press release had been issued before the CNPA staff had consulted with their Land Managers Forum.
In the Cevennes National Park, local involvement was considered important along with maintenance of the cultural and historic built landscape. But here there have been no grants to maintain and enhance local buildings using local materials and traditional methods.
A few years ago, I showed a bus load of CNPA staff my farm steading of local granite plus slate roof. I enquired about support to preserve our built heritage. Their response was pull it down.
Jamie Williamson
Alvie Estate Office
Kincraig.
* * *
Independence is over-arching aim
Many people are now disillusioned by the lack of accountability from all politicians and governments including the SNP and the former power base of Nicola Sturgeon and her silent husband Peter Murrell.
Again accountability was lacking when Alex Salmond was cleared of all 13 charges of sexual misconduct, following a High Court trial.
As a former successful SNP leader and First Minister he was investigated by the Scottish Government following two spurious staff complaints.
On a judicial review all was found to be ‘tainted with apparent bias’.
As a result Holyrood conceded defeat and paid out £512,000 to Mr Salmond.
Despite these rulings from the Court of Session, by Lord Pentland, of ‘unlawful and unfair behaviour’ along with potential perjury at the criminal trial, not one person has been held accountable.
However, in this crucial election year all independence groupings must come together and vote accordingly.
Honest questions and honest answers must take place, with accountability guaranteed.
Grant Frazer
Newtonmore.
* * *
Another potential danger on roads
Recently a battery-powered Jaguar went out of control on the M62 with the driver unable to slow it from speeds over 100mph.
Last October an MG EV had to be brought to a halt near Glasgow by ramming a police van.
Teslas have also been involved in similar incidents, some fatal.
I shudder to think what could happen if such an eventuality happened on the A9.
If I ever wanted to cut the power on my petrol-engined Mazda when driving I just need to press the stop start button, which returns the car to an ignition-on state but does not apply the electric parking brake or or lock the steering.
So why cannot a kill switch be fitted on the dashboard of EV’s to cut power completely and override all electrical systems?
I’m sure this could be developed as an after-market accessory to reassure EV owners.
William Loneskie
Lauder
Berwickshire.
* * *
Why the need for huge subsidies?
If renewables – wind in particular – are now seen as the financial way forward, why were we not already using them on a vast scale.
In particular, why did it need huge government subsidy to get wind farms built in the first place, thus turning Britain into a gold mine for subsidy farmers with a sideline in producing expensive electricity on a part time basis.
Malcolm Parkin
Kinnesswood
Kinross.
* * *
A small Covid cut
Dermot Williamson is an enthusiast for Net Zero CO2 (Strathy Letters, March 7). During covid all ‘non-essential’ industries and institutions were shut down.
These included the tourism industry, educational establishments, hospitality and office work where staff could work from home. Yet the global CO2 reduction was only seven per cent. Could Mr Williamson tell us where the other 93 per cent will come from?
Geoff Moore
Alness.
* * *
Take leaf out of Una’s book and get entries in for poetry contest
What prompts the native bardic talent in you good folk of Badenoch?
Although there is a specific theme for the 2024 competition for Badenoch Poetry Prize your abilities will flourish with every attempt on any topic that holds your mind.
As encouragement to flex your bardic potential I offer an example of thoughts that entered my mind when passing a remote dark lane in Edinburgh.
I chose to render the ensuing lines in Scots, but would much have preferred to be able to write them in Gaelic.
The deadline for this year’s Badenoch Poetry Prize contest is April 1 and more details can be found at https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/badenoch-poetry-competition-2024-tickets-750616232357
ALANE ALANG A LANE
Alane alang a lane
is nae a wise pursuit
of that there is nae doot
these days o’ mindless violence
when aw’ sense has bin forsook.
Ye maun gang whaur ye’re fir goin’;
alang anither route.
Nae mair alane alang a lane
on scooter bike or foot
is guid advice tae decent folk
on that there’s nae dispute.
Ùna Cochrane
Edinburgh
(formerly Kingussie).
* * *
Locking horns again
For many years in these and other newspaper columns, Mr Roy Turnbull (Strathy Letters, 14 March) and I have disagreed about the significance of present and future global climate changes, their causes and any possible means mankind could effectively employ to seek minimisation of any threats.
In my opinion, if there are indeed any threats from world climate changes, they have been knowingly exaggerated.
There is neither need for nor benefit from UK participation in the UN-based schemes to avert perceived climate risks.
Trillions of pounds are still being wasted in our joining in a Quixotic climate wild goose chase, at our taxpayers’ expense.
The only beneficiaries have been the passengers on climate gravy trains, both British and foreign.
Would Roy Turnbull please comment, never discounting our already dire national straits?
Charles Wardrop
Viewlands Rd West
Perth.
