|
The Herald newspaper 13 Dec 2002
Climbers claim park boundaries 'seriously flawed'
DAVID ROSS
MOUNTAINEERS yesterday claimed that the final boundaries of the Cairngorm national park were seriously flawed and had
been drawn up for political rather than natural heritage reasons.
The Mountaineering Council of Scotland (MCofS) has now written to Jack McConnell warning that if the boundaries are
passed, they are likely to lead to years of conflict and ineffective park management.
It made a last-ditch plea that the first minister reconsider the alignment of the southern boundary of the proposed
park, which excludes Highland Perthshire.
The executive is determined that the park's final outline, announced last month, will come into force in March. But
the MCofS - which represents walkers, climbers, mountaineers and cross-country skiers in Scotland, and has more than 8000 members and 135 clubs - believes it is still worth opposing.
John Mackenzie, its vice-president, said yesterday: "The Scottish Executive is walking into a disaster with its
eyes closed tight. It is clear to anyone who so much as glances at this issue that the south western boundary has been drawn to fit an artificial local authority border, as opposed to the criteria laid down in
the National Parks (Scotland) Act."
These had included Highland Perthshire and Mike Dales, MCofS access and conservation officer, said: "Communities
in Highland Perthshire, such as Blair Atholl and Calvine, which form the kicking-off point for many who will walk or cycle into the national park, are being denied the resources to manage the associated impacts.
"This is not because the area is scenically less attractive or that it attracts fewer visitors, but because MSPs
from Highland are more concerned that Highland councillors receive five, rather than four, places on the park board."
Many opponents of the executive's proposals have long suspected that Peter Peacock, deputy finance and public
services minister, has influenced the final outcome.
As convener of Highland Council, he was determined that the local authorities should not give up their planning
powers to the park authority.
Mr Peacock could not be contacted yesterday, but Rhoda Grant, Highlands and Islands Labour list MSP dismissed the
MCofS charges. She said: "They are just casting around for reasons to attack the proposals because they are very unhappy about local authorities sharing planning powers with the park authority."
The Herald
Dec 13th 2002
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Scotsman Newspaper 13th December 2002
Park boundaries flawed, say climbers
JOHN ROSS
YEARS of conflict and ineffective management lie ahead for the Cairngorms National Park unless the Scottish Executive
changes controversial boundary and planning proposals, it has been claimed.
The warning comes from the Mountaineering Council of Scotland in a letter to Jack McConnell, the First Minister and puts further pressure on the Executive to change its plans on the park
which is due to open in March.
The MCofS, which represents over 8,000 members, is the latest in a series of organisations to say the proposed park boundary is seriously flawed and has been drawn up for political rather
than natural heritage reasons.
It has been claimed previously that the proposed boundary was only introduced as a result of pressure from Highland Labour MSPs who wanted to ensure Highland Council was given a greater say
on the park board.
John Mackenzie, the MCofS vice-president, said: "The Executive is walking into a disaster with its eyes closed.
"It is clear to anyone who so much as glances at this issue that the south-western boundary has been drawn to fit an artificial local authority border."
Mike Dales, MCofS access and conservation officer, added: "This is the worst example of blatant gerrymandering I have ever seen.
"Communities in Highland Perthshire, such as Blair Atholl and Calvine, which form the kicking off point for many who will walk or cycle into the National Park, are being denied the
resources to manage the associated impacts.
"This is not because the area is scenically less attractive or that it attracts fewer visitors, but because MSPs from some Highland constituencies are more concerned that Highland
region councillors receive five, rather than four, places on the park board."
The MCofS is also concerned about the proposed planning powers for the national park - due to be split between the park board and local authorities - which it says are unworkable.
The Cairngorms park will be the biggest in Britain. Originally, Scottish Natural Heritage recommended it cover 4,600sq km (1,775sq miles) and be spread over five local authority areas -
Highland, Aberdeenshire, Moray, Perth and Kinross and Angus.
In May, the Executive issued draft proposals which almost halved the size to 2,460sq km (950sq miles) in Highland, Aberdeenshire and Moray. But last month it decided it would cover 3,800sq
km (1,466sq miles) and re-instated areas within Angus Council and parts of Laggan.
It is proposed the park authority will have 25 members - five to be directly elected and ten appointed by the Executive. The other ten will be local authority nominees - five from Highland,
three from Aberdeenshire and one each from Moray and Angus.
In the letter, Mr Mackenzie says the proposed southern boundary runs through the heart of the mountain massif and through the middle of a loch.
He said landowners, communities, environmental and recreational bodies and politicians have all opposed the proposal.
"The only supporting voice, Rhoda Grant (a Highlands and Islands MSP), explained that her main reason for supporting it was that it made Dalwhinnie the southern gateway for the park at
the expense of Perthshire communities further south on the A9.
"It may be understandable that she would say this in the interest of her political constituency, but it is hardly the most objective criteria for establishing the most appropriate park
boundaries in the national interest."
Rhoda Grant dismissed the claims: "I did not argue against Perth and Kinross being in the park.
"But once Dalwhinnie and Laggan have been included, giving a much-needed focus as a gateway to the park, I could not argue against that happening. The Executive has increased the size
of the park by 50 per cent and gone a long way to meet what people requested."
She also rejected claims that MSPs moved to give Highland Council a greater say on the park board.
"That is absolute rubbish. There would be no political reason for us to back Highland Council, I am representing the views of my constituents."
Perth and Kinross Council is considering seeking a judicial review of the
boundary which was also attacked this week by the North East Mountain Trust.
Earlier this month Robin Pellew, chief executive of the National Trust for Scotland, also criticised the boundary and said proposals to share planning powers would be cumbersome and a
recipe for tension.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Return to
BSCG
Home Page
|
