Comment on Roger Wheater/Alex Hogg session

"Enhancing our environment: holistic management or single species priorities"

SCA conference "Getting the balance right: rural Scotland 2005"
12th April, Edinburgh

James Irvine

Teviot Scientific, Cultybraggan Farm, Comrie, Perthshire

Filed 27 Apr 05
©www.land-care.org.uk

The conference organised by the Scottish Countryside Alliance (SCA) is to be congratulated on giving us the best insight to date as to why there continues to be a struggle to "Get the balance right" in terms of the management of Scottish rural affairs.

First up was Lesley Riddoch, media celebrity, with manifestly little knowledge of rural matters whilst living in one of the most elite of urban commuter hideaways in rural Perthshire (1). Although, through her position in relation to BBC Radio Scotland and other media outlets, she could influence the attitude of many to rural affairs, the impression she gave during her keynote speech was that she had not bothered to inform herself in any depth as to what the main issues were. Rather she joined the bandwagon of "community right to buy" in relation to the Isle of Eigg as being good for her image, while denouncing the Scot's innate emotional attachment to their native land. There was no evidence that I could detect that she had made any positive contribution to the rural environment that she preferred to live in rather than cities. Her negative contributions included a general theme of anti-landlord, her complaint that she did not meet anybody in the countryside and her desire to flood it with second homes for those who work in the cities. So much then for the contribution of the media to "Getting the balance right: rural Scotland 2005"

Professor Roger Wheater and Alex Hogg
taking part in the discussion of their papers

(copyright Kimpton Graphics)

But the session that followed was even more revealing. That was the session called "Enhancing our environment; holistic management vs single species priorities" in which Professor Roger Wheater and Alex Hogg presented papers. Through the courtesy of the speakers and of SCA the transcripts of these two papers are published in full on Land-Care (2, 3).

Comment on Professor Roger Wheater's paper

First of all I suggest that readers rehearse the bibliography of the speakers which was also kindly provided by the SCA conference.

In the case of Roger Wheater (2) we clearly have a distinguished ecologist/zoologist - expert in the game reserves of Uganda where elephants are important, and expert in the care of animals in captivity (zoos) and expert about gardens (really important ones like the Royal Botanic Gardens in Edinburgh), but absolutely no evidence of any tangible experience in the type of agriculture that is involved in some 85% or more of Scotland's land. Yet he was the chairman of the Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) Access Forum and was one time deputy chairman of SNH, and currently chairman of the National Trust for Scotland.

There can be little wonder that the outcome of the Access Forum was so far removed from the practical management of much of Scotland's land (4, 5, 6). As stressed so often during the access debate, the interests of ecology far out balanced the practical matters of good land management, through their failure to listen to others - or even be interested in widening their intellectual horizons. Although the SNH Access Forum may have heard abundant evidence from those who have managed land over many years, they clearly failed to listen (7).

His text also reveals an extraordinary disdain towards the efforts and concerns of others while omitting to mention key facts. Read again what Professor Wheater had to say about the culling of the humble hedgehogs in the Isle of Uist in the Hebrides.

"I am afraid there will always be varying degrees of conflict. What could be more absurd than the reaction to the culling of hedgehogs in North Uist and Benbecula? The species was introduced irresponsibly (where have we heard that statement before?) and following a build up in numbers was creating havoc for the ground-nesting birds. Despite this very clear man-induced upset of the natural order, Scottish Natural Heritage’s efforts - one might say responsibilities - to remove the hedgehogs were met with a horrified outcry from “Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells” and others. Tens of thousands of pounds are then spent on various forms of public relations activities; money that would have been much better spent on other conservation initiatives."

What he did not say was that the local gamekeepers had pointed out to SNH many years previously what the problem was and how it could be sorted at no cost to the taxpayer (8). Characteristically SNH did not listen. Characteristically SNH focussed the protest over the hugely expensive cull on the "disgusted from Tunbridge Wells". The word that comes to mind to describe such tricks in communication is "disingenuous".

Note also what he said about the ecologist's beloved raptors. Anyone familiar with the Scottish countryside will be aware that, following the programme promoted by SNH/RSPB to preserve raptors, there are now far too many raptors. And just listen to what SNH would have us all believe how innocent they are in relation to other important species - and more specifically that there was little they proposed to do about it, excusing their inactivity on the negative reaction of the Heather Trust

"There was a suggestion from some quarters that the conservation activities in respect of raptors should be relaxed somewhat and the Heather Trust was asked to support such a proposal. The Trust's response was that we did not believe that there could be any argument for raptor reduction until much greater emphasis was placed on management activity to improve degraded habitats. Only once this had been achieved could any such proposal be worthy of consideration."

With regard to the culling of deer using helicopters he said:

"I can state unequivocally that we neither drive nor shoot deer from these aircraft."

Unfortunately rather too many people have seen the video and their interpretation of what they saw allegedly differs from the denial so clearly articulated by Roger Wheater (9).

Although not mentioned at the conference, the credibility of SNH took a serious knock when its staff threatened strike action in response to the Scottish Executive's arrangements for their relocation out of Edinburgh to Inverness, even when the staff were offered a £20,000 tax free incentive on top of their removal expenses plus guarantee of job security and their career structure (10). It also appeared somewhat odd that the Scottish Executive delayed the overdue review of SNH until such time as this transfer had been achieved. Clearly the Scottish Executive was not much interested in the public's response to the consultation. For all they know the public may have wished a severe reduction in the size of this massive and extravagantly expensive quango, whose chairman/chief executive is appointed by the Minister.

Comment on Alex Hogg's paper

In contrast to the studious reading of his text by Professor Wheater, young head gamekeeper Alex Hogg gave a much more polished presentation - commendably brief and relevant to Scotland and the management of its wildlife. It was like a breath of fresh air blowing into the conference, when it was threatening to become too remote from reality - loosing itself in a morass of too much ecology relevant to Africa and too much emphasis on single species conservation. One could not help but feel that the whole process was being driven by misguided political motivation on the part of those living in Scotland's heavily urbanised central belt. Misguided because the protagonists of all this appeared essentially ignorant of what the debate was about - rural Scotland. All too seldom does one get the chance to hear the voice of the rural community itself. The Scottish Gamekeepers Association was formed in 1997 in protect and promote gamekeeping after the profession suffered months of adverse and damaging publicity in the media (11).

Alex Hogg's paper referred to the disastrous Langholm experiment on the grouse moors initiated by would-be conservationists. A superb grouse moor was ruined and experienced gamekeepers lost their jobs because their was no game left for them to keep.

He referred to the illogical claims made by conservationists about capercaillie and the expensive nonsensical advocacy about the alleged dangers of deer fencing to this particular bird. He convincingly used the example of the capercaillie to emphasise that:

"The current single species politics are the politics of the foolish, not only will the rural economy suffer, but so too will the social fabric."

He could have extended his case against single species conservation to include bovine TB transmitted by badgers (12), the severe stress caused by bats when they colonise people's homes plus the possibility that bats may transmit rabies virus (13). Badgers and bats are protected species (14).

With regard to the political motivation behind much of the drive to reform rural Scotland, his comment that

"There are many who desire nothing more than the demise of the sporting estate"

is revealing.

Is it simply the politics of envy that creates this destructive atmosphere? Such a policy fails to realise that people in all walks of life participate in field sports, and that sporting estates are a key factor in promoting the Scottish tourist industry especially in the international market.

General comment

There is growing concern over the validity of some of the claims made by the self-styled conservationists such as the RSPB (15) and the quality of the science that the Scottish Parliament claims to support their case (16, 17, 18)

But what is really galling about the conservationists' approach is that they want to claim that it was they who invented conservation in the last few years or decades. In reality they did no such thing. Gamekeepers, farmers and landowners have been involved in conservation long before these bodies got themselves established and acquired dominance of the media to promote their own extravagant and often misguided claims, usurping the role of local expertise (19, 20).

Conservation organisations are in fact responsible for much harm to the environment on account of their lack of balance in their approach. On account of the massive finance they receive from the taxpayer and their consequent lobbying power, bodies such as SNH and Environment Link (a group of 16 organisations claiming charitable status which is open to question [21]) have seriously distorted the management of the environment in Scotland.

This is shown by the choice made by the Scottish Executive to use the options provided by the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) to switch almost entirely from food production to what is referred to as "rural issues", with emphasis on the "environment". Unfortunately this is leading to the further demise of quality farming in Scotland with ever fewer people available with the requisite skills to maintain the high standards of both environmental management and food production that have been traditional in Scotland for generations. So in the space of two parliaments since devolution Scotland has essentially lost its fishing industry and is rapidly heading for loosing its quality livestock industry as well. It does not have many international standard icons left. A pretty environment on its own without quality livestock will not be enough.

©www.land-care.org.uk

References

1. Irvine, James (2005). Review - Part 2: Session 1, Keynote Speech, Lesley Riddoch. "Getting the balance right: rural Scotland 2005" SCA conference 12th April, Edinburgh
See SOCIAL/ECONOMIC/POLITICAL Homepage, filed 18 Apr 05, www.land-care.org.uk Click Here to View

2. Wheater, Roger (2005). "Enhancing our environment: holistic management Vs single species priorities." Part 3: Session 2a. SCA conference "Getting the balance right: rural Scotland 2005" 12th April, Edinburgh.
See SOCIAL/ECONOMIC/POLITICAL Homepage, filed 20 Apr 05, www.land-care.org.uk Click Here to View

3. Hogg, Alex (2005). "Enhancing our environment: holistic management Vs single species priorities." Part 3: Session 2b. SCA conference "Getting the balance right: rural Scotland 2005" 12th April, Edinburgh.
See SOCIAL/ECONOMIC/POLITICAL Homepage, filed 21 Apr 05, www.land-care.org.uk Click Here to View

4. Mylius, Andrew (2003). Land Reform and the Access Code: Problems and Unanswered Questions.
See LAND REFORM Homepage, filed 26 Feb 03, www.land-care.org.uk Click Here to View

5. Irvine, James (2003). Scottish Natural Heritage’s Policy on Access. Is it being mis-sold in relation to enclosed farmland next to urban communities? A report on the press conference held by SNH at the Royal Highland Show, Ingliston, Edinburgh, June 2000
See LAND REFORM Homepage, filed 07 Jan 03, www.land-care.org.uk Click Here to View

6. Irvine, James (2003). SNH Conference September 2000 "Enjoyment and Understanding of the Natural Heritage: Finding the New Balance between Rights and Responsibilities". A review of the proceedings.
See LAND REFORM Homepage, filed 22 Jan 03, www.land-care.org.uk Click Here to View

7. Irvine, James (2003). Analysis of responses to SNH Draft Scottish Outdoor Access Code
See SCOTTISH OUTDOOR ACCESS CODE Homepage, filed 29 Sep 03, www.land-care.org.uk Click Here to View

8. Editorial (2003). Gamekeepers Association official joins growing row over hedgehogs. Article reproduced from Oban Times 9th January 2003.
See ENVIRONMENT Homepage, filed 13 Jan 03, www.land-care.org.uk Click Here to View

9. Editorial (2004). Deer Commission severely criticised on Landward for alleged breaches of animal welfare and food safety regulations.
See ANIMAL WELFARE Homepage, filed 23 Jun 04, www.alnd-care.org.uk Click Here to View

10. Editorial (2004). Strategic review of Scottish Natural Heritage.
See SOCIAL/ECONOMIC/POLITICAL Homepage, filed 27 Aug 04, www.land-care.org.uk Click Here to View

11. http://www.scottishgamekeepers.co.uk

12. Editorial (2003). Tuberculosis in Cattle: DEFRA in no hurry to review Strategy
See TUBERCULOSIS Homepage, filed 10 Mar 03, www.land-care.org.uk Click Here to View

13. Irvine, James (2003). Bats and Rabies. Poor Advice from Prof Colin Galbraith, SNH Chief Scientist, on Landward Programme (Scottish TV BBC1 - 11.30 am - 9th February 2003)
See ENVIRONMENT Homepage, filed 10 Feb 03, www.land-care.org.uk Click Here to View

14. Irvine, James (2003) Conservation and the Misuse of Science. Hedgehogs, Bats and Badgers
See ENVIRONMENT Homepage, filed 15 Apr 03, www.land-care.org.uk Click Here to View

15. Irvine, James (2004). Concerns about the validity of statements on the condition of SSSIs in Scotland made by members of Environment LINK. Review and comment on a case study presented by Kirsty Macleod at People TOO conference, Perth.
See SOCIAL/ECONOMIC/POLITICAL Homepage, filed 17 Nov 04, www.land-care.org.uk Click Here to View

16. Editorial (2003). Nitrate vulnerable zone (NVZ) in Lower Nithsdale. Poor science accepted by Scottish Parliament and promoted by RSPB. Farmers Leader March 2003.
Reproduced in Land-Care.
See ENVIRONMENT Homepage, filed 18 Feb 03, www.land-care.org.uk Click Here to View

17. Editorial (2003). Nitrate vulnerable zone (NVZ) in Lower Nithsdale. Demonstration of poor science over-ruled by Scottish Parliament
See ENVIRONMENT Homepage, filed 19 Feb 03, www.land-care.org.uk Click Here to View

18. Booker, Christopher (2002). Pointless prohibition - NVZ’s. Daily Telegraph 22nd Sept 2002.
Reproduced on Land-Care. Click Here to View

19. Macleod, Kirsty (2005). Our Countryside - We live here. Paper given at Conservative Rural Action Group Scotland 2005 Campaign Rally, Perth, 26th February 2005
See SOCIAL/ECONOMIC/POLITICAL Homepage, filed 01 Mar 05, www.land-care.org.uk Click Here to View

20. Robertson, Liz (2004). SNH and the Isle of Arran. A Case Study presented at the PEOPLE TOO conference, Perth, 29th October 2004 "Who governs rural Scotland?"
See SOCIAL/ECONOMIC/POLITICAL Homepage, filed 19 Nov 04, www.land-care.org.uk Click Here to View

21. Macleod, Kirsty (2005). If the charitable status of private schools is questioned, why not that of the RSPB?
See SOCIAL/ECONOMIC/POLITICAL Homepage, filed 22 Apr 05, www.land-care.org.uk Click Here to View

MENU