National Park Consultation Document Needs Correction

The following letter was sent on 13 September to the Director of Planning of the Cairngorms National Park after BSCG had alerted the Park planners by telephone of the need for corrections. This matter has also been reported in the press (see extract from an article in the Scotsman by John Ross below)..

A reply to this letter is also provided below. In this the Director of Planning described the omissions of 2 European conservation sites as “drafting/presentational issues”. He also indicates that the National Park Authority will not be correcting the omissions during the 1st phase of the public consultation that ends on 24 September. BSCG has expressed concern about this to Danny Alexander head of communications of the National Park Authority and have explained to him that we think it would be perfectly possible to include both these European Conservation sites on the maps on the website.

Dr Adam Watson of the Shadow Park Board is reported in the Strathspey and Badenoch Herald of 16.9.04 as commenting "Even if they take the reasonable actions requested by the Badenoch and Strathspey Conservation Group it is already too late for those residents who have sent their questionnaire responses." He added "This is sadly yet another depressing case of incompetence with the Park Authority"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BSCG's letter read:

Dear Mr McKee,

Urgent - Local Plan Consultation Information and Recommendations

The map of the Nethy Bridge area distributed to all the households in Boat of Garten and Nethy Bridge and displayed on the Cairngorms National Park website has important omissions of “Areas designated for Nature Conservation Value”.

These are:

1. Craigmore Wood Special Protection Area (EU site code UK9001801; 654.09 ha classified by the Scottish Ministers on 30th October 2001) is not shown as an area “designated for Nature Conservation Value”.

2. While this map shows the Special Area of Conservation (SAC or cSAC) for the main stem of the River Spey as an area “designated for Nature Conservation Value”, it does not show the River Spey Tributaries Special Area of Conservation (SAC or cSAC) as an area “designated for Nature Conservation Value”.

The whole of the Spey Tributaries cSAC may have been omitted.

3. No sites on the Ancient and Semi Natural Woodland Inventory are indicated, yet the UK government is committed to the UK Forest Partnership for Action.

It is self evident that these matters need to be addressed as a matter of urgency if the correct information is to be available to the public before the end of the present consultation period on 24 September. I am aware that some consultation papers will already have been completed and returned to you.

As a step towards redressing these omissions we suggest:

The maps are corrected on the website immediately;

A prominent notice is put into local newspapers, including the Strathspey and Badenoch Herald, informing the public of these errors and providing a clear map showing the correct boundaries of areas designated for nature conservation value.

A prominent notice and paper copies of corrected maps are put into public places such as local post offices.

Please can you advise us whether staff members working within the CNPA are properly briefed on designations and inventories of nature conservation and landscape sites, and whether the park will adopt the good practice of providing an easily accessible map of these sites on its public website to inform the present consultation?

I look forward to hearing from you about what action is being taken on the above matters.

Yours sincerely

Gus Jones

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr McKee replied:

Dear Dr. Jones

Thank you for your e mail and attachment.

My colleague Gavin Miles, one of our local plan/policy officers, spoke to you on the telephone yesterday morning and dealt with the issues that you raise, but I am only too happy to offer further clarification.

I think it is important to understand the process on which we have embarked. The Cairngorms National Park Local Plan will be owned to a significant degree by the communities that live and work within the Park. To this end we wish to involve all sections of the communities from the outset and before a single word of the local plan has been written. The community profiles and questionnaires are the first stage in the process and are the means of identifying issues and priorities within each community. Once we have the feedback from this stage there will be an intensive series of workshops/meetings with local communities to discuss and refine the issues raised. Only then will drafting of the local plan begin, with ongoing consultation at a local level on relevant aspects and a wider consultation on the first draft next spring. This consultation will in turn inform the finalised draft that will be placed on deposit for formal consultation in autumn 2005.

I thought it important to give this context in order that you can appreciate the purpose of this first stage. The profiles are intended to give a brief flavour of each area, explain about the local plan process and afford an opportunity for some initial feedback on a variety of issues. The maps in the profiles are largely indicative to identify the area concerned and any significant designations that a map on such a scale can meaningfully illustrate. Turning to your specific points:

1. We are aware of the Craigmore Wood SPA, but, as it is a relatively recent designation, our map data set at the time of compiling the profile did not include it. We now have an updated map data set and future in depth discussions/meetings with the local community and others will use more detailed maps reflecting this information.

2. We are aware of the extent of SAC designation on the Spey, but it is not realistically possible to show designations for tributaries on a map of this scale. The information will of course be available when detailed discussions take place.

3. The woodland inventory is not a designation. We do however have the information and again it will be available when considering local plan issues at a detailed level.

Whilst I am quite happy to acknowledge any mistakes or oversights in the profiles or any other material used in the local plan process, I do not, for the reasons outlined above, consider the matters that you raise to be of sufficient significance to merit the actions that you suggest. I feel that I must, however, draw your attention to the inclusive nature of the local plan process, the scale of this initial consultation exercise (some 11000 households) and the fervent desire of the CNPA to prepare a local plan that reflects the needs and aspirations of the communities within the Park and the wider national community for whom the Park was designated: all within the context of the 4 aims of the Park. I am sure you will agree that the positive aspects of the process as whole far outweigh the drafting/presentational issues on this one issue to which you make reference.

On your final point, the CNPA employs staff in a number of groups with a wide range of disciplines. Decisions on any particular matter are taken with full internal consultation and drawing on the full range of expertise, thereby maximising use of this valuable internal resource. This includes the issues covered in your letter. There is also a range of external consultation depending on subject matters. As the local plan process proceeds there will be a variety of maps available via the web site and other media to inform the ongoing consultation.

I hope that I have clarified matters for you. Your interest and involvement in the local plan process is much appreciated and we look forward to your future contributions as policy is drafted and potential site allocations considered.

Kind Regards

Don McKee

Head of Planning

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The following article appeared in the Scotsman newspaper

Capercaillie site 'not on map' charge (Extract)

JOHN ROSS

CAMPAIGNERS have accused the Cairngorms National Park Authority of missing out vital nature conservation areas in a public document seeking views on the future management of the area.

The CNPA recently sent out 12,000 leaflets and questionnaires to households in the park encouraging residents to have their say on the Cairngorms Local Plan, which will replace those currently in existence for Highland, Moray, Aberdeenshire and Angus councils.

But the campaigners say a map distributed to residents in Boat of Garten and Nethy Bridge and displayed on the park website has important omissions of "areas designated for nature conservation value". These include the Craigmore Wood special protection area, seen as one of the most important sites in the country for the rare capercaillie.

They also say that, while the map includes the special area of conservation for the main stem of the River Spey as a designated area, it does not show the River Spey tributaries special area of conservation.

The Badenoch and Strathspey Conservation Group has written to Don McKee, the authority’s head of planning and development control, pointing out the error and urging an immediate correction.

Dr Gus Jones, the group’s convener, said: "It is self-evident that these matters need to be addressed as a matter of urgency if the correct information is to be available to the public before the end of the present consultation period on 24 September."

He has called for a prominent notice to be put into local newspapers and public places to inform residents of the errors, with new maps showing the correct boundaries.

The issue has provided further ammunition for the campaigners who have criticised many of the park authority’s actions.

Recently a shadow authority was formed to monitor future decisions.

A spokesman for the authority said he did not think the maps will have a significant impact on the consultation: "Up-to-date maps will be made available at future consultation meetings. Not one word of the local plan will be written until the consultation is completed."

Meanwhile, Andrew Thin, the authority convener, has called for a consensus approach to managing and enjoying the park’s wild land.

He said that, while the Cairngorms is regarded as one of the UK’s finest wild-land areas - the ultimate place to escape from crowded cities - it is also a place where people live and work.

He added: "People are very passionate about wild places, seeing them quite rightly as wonderful places to escape the pressures of life and recharge their batteries but in doing so there is a need for considerable sensitivity.

"These same areas are also places of work for farmers and gamekeepers and they sometimes have a different perspective on management and care of wild land, and we need dialogue between all those involved."

Mr Thin claimed most wild land in the park is privately owned and there needs to be a balance between legitimate private and public interests. He said: "There is growing recognition that the land belongs to all of us but certain rights in that land can be held privately. It is vital that a small number of wild-land enthusiasts do not seek to replace one kind of elitist approach to land management with another."