Hill Tracks (Scottish Uplands) (BANFFSHIRE and BUCHAN COAST Liberal Democrats)

BANFFSHIRE and BUCHAN COAST Liberal Democrats <info@banffandbuchanlibdems.org.uk>

Hill Tracks (Scottish Uplands)

June 9, 2010 12:00 AM
By Alison McInnes in The Chamber, Scottish Parliament
Originally published by Alison McInnes

First, I congratulate Peter Peacock on securing the debate. His motion addresses an important issue and I am happy to speak in support of it.

I am privileged to represent an area that includes part of the Cairngorms. Many of my constituents are keen hillwalkers; indeed, the North East Mountain Trust represents more than 1,000 hillwalkers and climbers in the north-east of Scotland, and I am grateful to those who have taken the time to write to me with their concerns about hill tracks.

Scotland is indeed blessed. We have magnificent wild land that is valued by many people-locals and tourists alike. However, it is under threat. SNH has reported that the extent of Scotland that is unaffected by any visual influence declined from 41 per cent to 31 per cent between 2002 and 2008. In the north-east, one threat is the proliferation of bulldozed hill tracks. The bulldozing of tracks for agriculture, forestry and, in particular, sport has led to scars across the hills that are often visible over a wide area. They area also prone to erosion. I query whether the continuation of such unrestricted development is in the best interests of the environment. As the John Muir Trust has said, because hill tracks fall into the category of permitted development, no record is kept of their number, total distance, location, purpose, condition or rate of change. Surely that should not be sustained.

I do not suggest that hill tracks are not needed. They are, of course, important for essential land management and they allow ease of access for farmers. Farmers, crofters and foresters have a legitimate need to construct, maintain and develop tracks for their land management purposes. However, such tracks are usually on lower-lying ground, as Peter Peacock said. Concern is felt that loopholes in the current system are being exploited to the detriment of our special environment.

Tracks must be designed to fit into the landscape in which they are needed; they should not obliterate existing paths or historic trackways, and their design should minimise the need for engineering and road-related earthworks. Drawing hill tracks into a more affirmative planning approval system would assist with that. A scheme should be developed that takes a light-touch approach to the obvious necessities of agriculture, but which tightens rules that we think are being abused.

In some areas that have special designations, such as national scenic areas, special areas of conservation and SSSIs, the planning authority's prior approval should be sought. However, even now, the hill tracks campaign has identified several areas in which that does not seem to have been done appropriately. I share Peter Peacock's concern and bewilderment that national parks are not drawn into that system.

I do not doubt that a review of permitted development rights for hill tracks is overdue. I agree that the suggestion of developing a register of existing hill tracks has merit. I hope that cross-party agreement will be achieved tonight on the need to undertake that review and to have the discussion to protect our wild land for future generations.