Outcomes

National Parks for Scotland: Scottish Natural Heritage's Advice to Government

7: National Parks elsewhere in Scotland

7.1 In its original request, Government asked SNH to make recommendations on other areas which "... might benefit from National Park designation". In the consultation paper, we did not make any immediate recommendations. This approach was taken for three main reasons.

• First, it could be seen to be against the spirit of seeking local involvement in the establishment of any new National Parks were we to make firm proposals at this stage.
• Second, we recommended that the establishment of National Parks elsewhere should follow on from a measured review of the problems and possible solutions for some of the main candidates, with a view to confirming the need and support for any such proposals.
• Third, National Parks may not be the most appropriate solution for some of those areas proposed in the past for National Park status, and we referred briefly in the consultation paper to the parallel review of the National Scenic Area designation, and the role which other mechanisms might play alongside National Parks.

7.2 In response to this part of the consultation paper, we received quite diverse comments, summarised as follows.

• An appreciable number of respondents agreed with our approach of not rushing on to recommend new National Parks. The main argument in support of this way forward was the need to learn from the early National Parks before considering new proposals. Some respondents thought that this top-tier designation should be reserved for only a very few candidates; and a small number of respondents said that other mechanisms should be explored first, or that the case has yet to be made elsewhere.
• In contrast, there was some frustration that our approach was too cautious and would simply contribute to further deterioration in other valued areas: therefore we ought to be bolder in recognising the quality of some of the other candidate areas and move now to secure stronger protection for them.
• Almost all the areas raised in the past were mentioned, along with some new possibilities, such as parts of Easter Ross, extensive areas in the Southern Uplands, St Kilda, a link with the existing Northumberland National Park, the Inner Clyde Estuary, and the Isle of Mull. The Ben Nevis and Glen Coe area received most mentions, although these suggestions rarely came from within a possible Park area; local views were more inclined to be cautious expressions of interest. There were also some negative views, as in the case of Arran, where there was a strong local view against National Park status.
• A welcome was given by several commentators to the prospect of Marine National Parks.
• There was some challenge to our view that a National Park for much of the Highlands was not a viable way forward. These views highlighted the quality of the whole area and therefore the difficulty of selecting individual areas for special treatment; or it was said that other existing designations were not working effectively. Implicit in this view were ambitions that National Parks could have a role to play in resolving the wider economic weaknesses of some of these areas.
• Finally, there was some comment on other mechanisms, including the current review of the NSA designation, which was generally regarded as being ineffective, but with potential - for some respondents - to play an important role if its mechanisms could be strengthened. Some other voices said that we should move onwards and look to a designation with a broader base across the whole range of the natural as well as the cultural heritage.

Developing Proposals for Other Areas

7.3 While several areas were mentioned by individuals and organisations, we conclude that there is as yet no overwhelming support for any one area. We suggest therefore that it is too early to make proposals, but we recommend that the matter is not closed down. Having opened up the debate on National Parks, we should not set aside continued debate about other areas which might merit National Park status in the future.

7.4 As proposed in the consultation paper, we envisage that the process leading to proposals for any future National Park should evolve through a structured review of needs; through consideration of alternative approaches to safeguarding the natural heritage interest of these areas, alongside their social well-being and economic prosperity; and through development of local support for action. Local initiatives, such as those which are currently being established in the Ben Nevis area and the Southern Uplands, may well provide the structure for this process to evolve . Alternatively, the Government may wish to consider a more formal mechanism for developing National Park proposals for one or two other areas based on the establishment of working groups comprising local and national interests.

Consideration of other mechanisms

7.5 As noted above, there was a range of views on other mechanisms. For those who commented on this issue, the National Scenic Area designation was recognised as the most relevant mechanism: it already exists and it exists in many of the areas considered in the past as potential National Parks. But all correspondents recognised that the effectiveness of this designation falls short of what is needed in areas of such high national importance. The NSA designation is also under review, and a consultation paper on this issue will be released shortly. This paper will set out a number of proposals for more effective means of safeguarding and enhancing the scenic value of these areas, as well as debating the prospect of expanding the NSA series to include a wider range of Scotland's most scenic landscapes.

7.6 Debate about designations inevitably connects other long-standing and unresolved issues about the management of land of low productivity. A number of responses to the consultation made a strong connection between designation and the need to assist the weak - and in some areas weakening - social and economic structures of those remote parts of Scotland, which are also of high significance to the natural heritage. This argument links onwards to the issue that assisting some areas through National Park status has the risk of causing disadvantage to other areas, which may already be less favoured economically than the prospective National Park areas. There is also the difficulty of identifying the priorities as to where to act next when many of the problems are of a general nature. These are not new questions, but they have not been wholly resolved in the past, because the way in which we have addressed the management of rural land of low productivity (and the marine environment) has been unduly sectoral.

7.7 Better management of land of lower productivity has been a matter of continuing debate over the past 50 years - and longer - and the way forward in this difficult topic is not clear, because the economy of these areas is less resilient than other parts of the country to economic forces beyond its control: even the now important tourism industry - as with timber or agriculture - cannot be seen as a solution, because all are influenced by market-place forces which arise well beyond Scotland. Finding a way forward will require continued debate and an acceptance of a more co-operative approach to land management which is founded on:

• a mix of land-uses which are individually and collectively within the carrying capacity of the land and the marine environment;
• an approach which is based on ecological principles and the sustainable use of the land for the long term;
• the delivery of a wider range of public benefits from the support systems which are necessary to sustain most land management in these areas;
• the creation of stability in the land-use framework to allow for longer-term objectives to be set and pursued;
• the protection and enhancement of the special values of these areas - their wildlife, landscapes and wildness; and
• serving the whole nation's needs as a partnership between all sectors of society.

7.8 Building a stronger framework for the sustainable use of the natural resources of our less favoured rural areas is a matter which is not just for SNH to resolve, but SNH will continue to have a very close engagement in this matter because of its role in promoting sustainable use of the natural heritage. How the nation makes best use of our land is an issue which we can expect the Scottish Parliament to address in some depth as part of its future debates on land tenure and use. We believe that National Parks have an important role to play, through providing innovation and leadership. They are not the whole solution, but they could help to pave the way to a more integrated and sustainable use of land, as part of their primary role in safeguarding and providing for the enjoyment of Scotland's most special places.