Proposals for a new national park in Galloway fail to explain the tangible benefits it would bring to the region, businesses and communities

This is according to Scottish Land & Estates (SLE), who it would not support plans for the new national park following a survey of its members.

Of the SLE members surveyed within the proposed park boundaries, 91% were opposed to the plans. Amongst members in the wider south-west ‘ripple area’ around the proposed boundaries, opposition stood at 67%.

MORE NEWS | Strike averted at UK fertiliser factory as pay rise agreed

MORE NEWS | Meat sector calls for urgent action in Scotland

SLE said that whilst it was not opposed to national parks in principle, there had not been a clear explanation as to why the added bureaucracy and apparently unbudgeted funding of a national park was the only means through which progress could be made on issues such as growing the economy and tackling the climate emergency.

The organisation pointed to the existing designations and organisations in the area such as the UNESCO Biosphere Reserve Partnership, the International Dark Sky Park and South of Scotland Enterprise (SOSE) and said additional resources for these initiatives may achieve the same or better results than the creation of a costly new national park.

Director of policy at SLE, Stephen Young, said: “It was important that we engaged with our members, local businesses and representatives on the Galloway National Park proposals before taking a position as an organisation.

“What has become clear is that there is very little support from land-based businesses in Galloway and they are the ones who will be most affected by a new national park being formed.

“In our view, the unsound proposals fail to demonstrate how the creation of this national park will deliver positive outcomes for people, jobs and nature.

“There are already a number of designations in the area such as the biosphere and dark sky park plus organisations such as South of Scotland Enterprise (SOSE), all of which are delivering results for wildlife, the environment and the economy. Why a national park is needed on top of that, and where it will deliver where others cannot, is as yet unclear.

“Public spending is hugely constrained at present and we see no suggestion that the national park will unlock funding for the region that would not be possible otherwise. Indeed, a national park designation will almost certainly increase pressure on existing infrastructure if it leads to increased traffic and footfall. Greater opportunities for visitors and tourism are generally a plus but as we have seen in other parts of Scotland, it can also bring environmental issues of pollution, littering, irresponsible behaviour and wildfires as well as pressure on housing that would require further investment to be dealt with.

“Galloway is one of the most productive areas of Scotland in terms of agriculture and forestry and it is important that we ensure the region is able to thrive whilst also looking at how to deal with other issues such as depopulation by younger people. We are deeply concerned that new cost pressures will be brought to bear on businesses through having to comply with national park regulations. We’ve seen very little on how the national park will engage and benefit farming businesses in a region that is vitally important for Scotland’s food production.

“A national park needs to be an enabling force for the people who live and work in the area but we hold concerns that this has been hugely overlooked when drawing up these plans.

“We will continue to engage with our members, businesses, stakeholders and communities as the 12-week public consultation begins in the autumn and we would urge people within the region to participate in that process.”