The next petition is PE1655, by Christine Metcalfe on behalf of Avich and Kilchrenan community council, on Scotland’s national scenic areas. When we considered the petition on 14 September, we took evidence from the petitioner and agreed to write to the Scottish Government, Scottish Natural Heritage and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities. The written submissions that have been received are included in our meeting papers.
The Scottish Government states that it has no plans to review either the process for designating or the extent of national scenic areas. In response to the committee’s question about how, or whether, its policy on wind farms affects its position with regard to national scenic areas, the Scottish Government states that its policy is to support the deployment of onshore wind while protecting the environment. It adds, in response to a suggestion that Parliament be regularly updated on the cumulative impact of wind farms, that it considers that this is not something that could be
“readily or meaningfully quantified as a national impact for reporting purposes.”
Scottish Natural Heritage acknowledges some of the issues that are raised in the petition, including that the current suite of 40 national scenic areas remains as it was originally designated. It acknowledges that NSAs represent an important natural asset, but notes that one purpose of the designation is
“intended to manage landscape change, not prohibit development.”
It considers that reviewing or revisiting the existing suite of NSAs is not a priority at the present time.
In their first submission in response, the petitioners express their surprise at the Scottish Government’s position. They argue that to use an energy policy as a reason not to review the current process for designating NSAs is irrelevant, particularly as pressure on the landscape from wind farms
“would not have been envisioned in the 1970s.”
The petitioners consider that Scottish Natural Heritage’s ability to fulfil its task in this context has been “seriously weakened”, and say that they believe that there is much to be gained in terms of economic, environmental and social benefits by having more NSAs and national parks.
In their more recent submission, the petitioners refer to a report by Mountaineering Scotland, which they consider demonstrates how visitor numbers have fallen in areas that host wind farms. The petitioners suggest that it is difficult to have an entirely accurate idea of the number and impact of wind-power developments in Scottish national scenic areas, but consider that the UK Government’s renewable energy planning database provides “a good insight”.
Do members have any comments or suggestions for action?
10:00