Wild Lands and Endangered Species

Yesterday in Parliament I spoke during Murdo Fraser’s member debate on wild land and endangered species. With 2013 being the year of Natural Scotland we have an opportunity to ensure a robust biodiversity plan will promote and ensure our countries heritage, wildlife and landscapes.

Please find below Murdo Fraser’s motion that was departed along with a copy of the speech.

Motion S4M-05602: Murdo Fraser (Mid Scotland and Fife) That the Parliament notes that 2013 is the Year of Natural Scotland; recognises the efforts of conservation charities and other organisations to save endangered species and wild land in Mid Scotland and Fife and across the country; understands that the indigenous red squirrel and the wildcat face a significant threat; believes that only 150 breeding pairs of wildcat are not in captivity; considers that habitat conservation coupled with breeding programmes could hold the key to saving endangered species; believes that there should be a network of grey squirrel trapping areas; notes the report, Public Perception Survey of Wildness in Scotland, which was published in July 2012 by Scottish Natural Heritage in association with Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park Authority; understands that the report claimed that 86% of people surveyed felt that further action was necessary to preserve wild land and that the most popular means by which this could be ensured was by introducing a specific wild land designation, and acknowledges calls for a concerted effort in 2013 to deliver a step change in conserving wild land and endangered species.

Taken from the Scottish Parliament Official Report: 

Claire Baker (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab): I congratulate Murdo Fraser on securing this evening’s debate. As the motion recognises, 2013 is the year of natural Scotland, which gives us an opportunity to focus on biodiversity and promote our heritage, wildlife and landscapes. I hope that it is about more than pinning a natural Scotland label on events that are already in the pipeline. We need much more debate and discussion about our environment, and a tangible legacy of the year would be a robust biodiversity plan with clear actions to deliver on our targets.

In focusing on endangered species, the motion highlights the red squirrel. Last summer, I went to a red squirrel fun day in Tentsmuir forest in north-east Fife to find out about the work of the Fife red squirrel group. Fife is not a target protection area, but the peninsula at Tentsmuir provides an opportunity for local activists to try to grow a population there. I commend the work of the Fife red squirrel group and groups like it across the country as they work tirelessly in raising awareness and introducing programmes to protect endangered species. However, as Murdo Fraser said, they need support to do that successfully.

Not for the first time in the chamber, I highlight the work of Scottish Environment LINK and its species champions programme, which is certainly capturing the imagination of MSPs. Although it is a bit of fun, it is proving to be an effective way in which to engage the Parliament in the challenges that many endangered species are facing. I am grateful to Dave Thompson, who is not here this evening, for adopting the sand eels. My puffins need them as they provide a valuable food source and help to grow their habitat.

Habitat protection is vital to securing the future of species. The minister will be aware that there are concerns that the marine protected areas do not protect seabirds. The motion also mentions habitat conservation. That is just as important offshore as it is onshore, and the minister knows that there is growing concern about the delayed marine plan.

The Minister for Environment and Climate Change (Paul Wheelhouse): I understand the concern about migratory species such as seabirds, but I put it on the record again that we are proposing to protect sand eel populations through the MPA network.

Claire Baker: I am aware of other measures that the Government is taking, but the minister will know that there are still concerns about marine protected areas not protecting seabirds. Their inclusion would give an extra layer of protection.

To show that I am not someone who will back away from trickier issues, I note that the motion also mentions wild land designation, and I understand that the Public Petitions Committee will take evidence on the John Muir Trust petition in the near future. I recognise the concerns of the John Muir Trust and other organisations such as Ramblers Scotland about wild lands in Scotland. Effective protection of wilderness areas is important and, as Murdo Fraser highlighted, it is valued by the public. The Parliament has introduced protective measures over the years. The National Parks (Scotland) Act 2000 resulted in the establishment of the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs national park in 2002 and the Cairngorms national park in 2003.

In a response to the Public Petitions Committee, the minister outlined the existing means of protection, which include sites of special scientific interest, national parks, national nature reserves and national scenic areas. NSAs are defined as areas

“of outstanding scenic value in a national context.”

There are 40 such areas and they cover 13 per cent of the land area of Scotland. They ensure that areas such as Glencoe, Ben Nevis, the Hebrides and some landscapes in Perthshire and the Borders are protected from inappropriate development.

There is a system of protection and there is already a system of constraints that are placed on developers. It is not easy to achieve the right balance between competing demands, but it is essential to do so. The John Muir Trust has a clear position on the limiting of renewables development and it raises concerns about the impact that such development has on our landscapes and the environment. However, Murdo Fraser started to explore the fact that designating wild lands would present other challenges. Decisions would be fairly subjective and they would run the risk of creating an imbalance in another direction. The key debate needs to be about the value of what is being protected, rather than what is being prevented.

The Government has said that it is

“satisfied that existing legislation and administrative systems for land use planning and environmental management provide appropriate means for meeting the obligations and objectives set out in the”

European landscape convention. However, there are issues, such as hill tracks, on which we need progress to make the protections that we already have work better. I am sure that there will be an interesting debate on the matter in committee, and I look forward to hearing the minister’s response when he closes the debate.