Wild Land News no 53, Summer 2001

Cairngorms National Park Article

Anne Macintyre highlights the key issues raised in the recent consultation paper

The SNH consultation paper on the future shape and management of the Cairngorms National Park invited responses to 14 key issues - including the size of the park, detailed boundary principles, powers, planning functions, composition of the board and the name of the park. In the SWLG response to this consultation we commented on all the key issues however we considered the following issues to be of crucial importance.

Size and detailed boundary principles

We argued that the area needs to be large enough to ensure that integrated planning and management will be effective recognising that what happens in the mountains affects the surrounding communities and vice versa. Our view is that the area of the current Cairngorms Partnership should form the basis of the National Park. This stretches from Laggan in the west, Blair Atholl in the south, Aboyne in the east and north of Grantown. In takes in all the main communities and covers important designated sites such as Creag Meagaidh and the Drumochter hills as well as the core Cairngorms area and surrounding straths. There is an argument that such a large boundary will mean that the National Park Board will spend its time dealing with minor planning issues in local areas rather than the bigger picture. We therefore propose that the Board should be given powers to devolve as appropriate the more routine local planning decisions to the relevant local authority or appropriate community representation.

We supported the boundary principles proposed by SNH which included following easily distinguishable and permanent natural features wherever possible such as water catchment and slope boundaries. We suggested that hilltops and ridges can provide an easily distinguishable permanent natural feature but urged that skylines are protected through stretching the boundary between 100m to 500m beyond summit ridges. We agreed that land ownership boundaries, field boundaries, roads or paths should generally not be a determining factor as they are likely to change in the future.

Powers and planning functions

We consider this to be the most crucial issue of all as the National Park Board must have the powers to address all land and water management issues in the area including farming, forestry, fisheries, water, sporting, recreation, access and utilities. In our view it must have full statutory and non-statutory planning powers and it must be a statutory consultee for all relevant agencies involved. Experience from other countries shows that international, national and local priorities can only be effectively met where planning powers are the responsibility of the National Park Board. It is also important that the National Park has positive incentive powers as well as regulatory powers to promote good stewardship of the countryside through agri-environment schemes and eco-tourism initiatives. If the National Park Board is simply allowed powers of call in or as a consultee it will become a negative influence on developments - always slowing up the most controversial developments rather than providing positive guidance and support.

The consultation process concluded at the end of April and we now await the final recommendations on how this long awaited National Park status for the Cairngorms will shape up.

Copies of our full response to this consultation are available from Anne Macintyre or the Co-ordinator.

Editor's note: As we went to print, we heard that SNH has recommended that the National Park Authority should not be the planning body for the Park area. We disagree strongly with this arrangement, which we believe will undermine one of the most vital functions of a National Park. We expect to have more to say on this later.