More Sitka Spruce - blessing or a curse?

Special feature on the forestry 'dilemma' facing the South of Scotland.

by LESTER CROSS

The forestry industry's drive for many more coniferous woodlands across the Scottish Borders and Dumfries and Galloway will encourage £150 million of further investment locally by timber processors over the next ten years, it has been claimed.

But the continuous planting of fast growing sitka spruce trees, largely paid for by publicly funded grants, is causing increasing concern in many communities with calls for a much greater emphasis on broadleaved species on newly afforested land.

The sharply contrasting views over the future of the industry in the two regions are clearly seen in a transcript of proceedings at the last meeting of the Convention of the South of Scotland [CoSS]. Representatives from 'both sides of the argument' considered a paper entitled Innovative Forestry and Woodland Creation written by the local authorities, South of Scotland Enterprise and Skills Development Scotland.

There is no denying the importance of forestry so far as the South's economy is concerned.

As the paper pointed out, around a third of new woodlands in Scotland are created in the south, with an economic benefit of around a third of a billion pounds per year and associated employment in wood production, forest management, haulage and processing sectors. 

"South of Scotland (SoS) is the biggest timber marketing zone in the UK at over 3.8 million cubic metres of timber removals each year, predominately (but not exclusively) conifer production. The industry delivers 3-5 thousand jobs with three primary processors, including two major sawmills and the only producer of home grown shiplap [overlapping boards] in the UK. 

"Forestry in Scotland contributes £1-2 billion GVA each year with approximately 35% of that delivered in the SoS. In addition, since the start of the current Forestry Grant Scheme over £90 million of grants have been given for woodland creation and sustainable forest management, with the SoS issuing more small farm woodland options that any other area."

However, the authors concede that the ways local communities are consulted and included in the decision making about the delivery of woodland creation and forestry management have raised challenges over how the process is currently handled. 

"This issue has emerged through the Regional Land Use Partnership (RLUP) process, our Community Wealth Building (CWB) and direct engagement with communities across the region. There is concern that if there is an increase in delivery rates, the scale of land use change in some areas may have unintended negative impacts on the local communities and their associated economies for a long time into the future."

The consultation to date had produced calls for more diversity of species in commercial forestry, more native broadleaf generally (for biodiversity and societal benefit), more robust and effective community consultation and regional and local assessment of cumulative impacts. 

"Both local authorities aspire to increase the size of forestry across its administrative border. However, without clarity and transparency of decision making across the SoS there are issues of agency for delivery.  The outcomes of the RLUF consultation also indicate there is a need for further work in assessing the cumulative impacts of significant planting. This is currently missing in the woodland creation planning process, as it falls outside the traditional Local Authority planning process and is causing significant community issues. This area of tension is being explored through discussions with SOS communities and will be supported by the Borderlands Natural Capital Programme."

The Convention heard Andy Leitch, deputy chief executive of the Confederation of Forest Industries (Confor) describe the South of Scotland as the engine room of wood production and wood processing, not just in Scotland but mainly in the UK too.

He said current production of two million cubic metres of timber annually was set to double over the next twenty years. The wood-processing sector was already using over two-and-a-half million cubic metres, so there was a gap between what's available in South Scotland and what they're using. 

"That's currently being imported from North England, Argyll and Central Scotland. Once we get to 2031, we're in a potentially self-sufficient situation and for the next 10 years, we've got surplus, which might attract additional investment", said Mr Leitch.

He added: "The big issue is where that (level of production) line goes from 2038. It goes downwards and therefore investors are a bit concerned about, uh-oh, if I put my money in now, where's that wood going to be in the future?"

Mr Leitch explained that the processing sector had invested £300 million in the area over the last few years. They had plans to invest another £150 million in the next 10 years in added value. But that money could be invested elsewhere if that timber was not going to be available.

Charles Dundas, chief executive of Borders Forest Trust, told delegates the area's semi-natural broadleaved woodlands were reduced to just a scattering of small remnants - fragmented and fragile. The extremely comprehensive Native Woodland Survey of Scotland had shown that native woodland makes up just 2.6 per cent of the total area of Dumfries and Galloway and only 1.4 per cent of the Scottish Borders. While 19 per cent of Scotland has forestry on it, only one out of every four trees was native and the other three out of four were non-native. 

According to Mr Dundas: "We've turned around this historic deforestation pretty quickly, but we've managed it by focusing on fast-growing, non-native productive plantations. It's worth noting that the 25 per cent, 75 per cent split that we see across the rest of the country, that doesn't represent the South of Scotland. 

"Just nine per cent of the forestry in Dumfries and Galloway is native, which means 91 per cent is non-native. In the Borders, it's even more imbalanced. Only seven per cent is native, which means 93 per cent of the forestry in the Scottish Borders is non-native. I think that's why we see in the recent RLUP  consultation, the public's top priority for land use change across the South of Scotland was for far more native woodland to be planted. It's an imbalance there.

"I would actually like it to go on the record now that as an environmentalist I am saying we need more productive plantations, not less. But we also need far more native woodland. That balance, particularly in the South of Scotland, is out of whack. You've heard it from the public. I'm telling it to you now as well. We need a more balanced landscape."

Morag Paterson, representing Communities for Diverse Forestry, based in Galloway illustrated how much forestry there was in the south, and how much of that was predominantly conifer, albeit with the fringes of broadleaves and open land. 

She said: "But the cumulative impact of this level of concentration can't be ignored. It's a real concern for people, whether it's on wildlife, the environment, acidification of rivers or just rural depopulation is also a perceived issue.

"There's a lot of concern about putting all our eggs in one basket with this predominantly one species of tree, albeit I realise it's fast growing and it's very effective and people have bought into it. But that doesn't mean we don't look to the future with our eyes wide open and say, how could we diversify our supplies?"

 The concerns over the mass planting of sitka spruce were raised by the Southern Upland Partnership (SUP) in a report published in 2021.

It warned: "There is a real concern that South Scotland is taking more than its’ share of new tree-cover. In addition, disproportionately more of the planting is coniferous forest and much less of the planting is woodland compared to other parts of Scotland.  

"There are also concerns that the drive to meet planting targets is pushing forestry onto sites which are not suitable eg peatlands (where the climate benefits are questionable) and species-rich habitats (where there is likely to be a net-loss of biodiversity)." 

And SUP claimed: "There is currently, within the region, considerable anti-forestry feeling. Consultation exercises will therefore need to seek to show how land use change can be integrated with other land uses and demonstrate that the proposals can deliver significant local and regional benefits. 

"Loss of farming families, loss of open ground, loss of biodiversity, loss of archaeology and cultural heritage, more monotonous landscapes and increased timber movements along poorly maintained roads and through small towns and villages are all regularly blamed on forestry. We suggest more could be done to increase the benefits to local communities (as is done when wind farms are developed)."

 

 

Berwickshire farmer's concerns over pylons scheme

by EWAN LAMB

Twelve years ago Borders farmer Simon Bennett's attempt to erect a small wind turbine to power his business was blocked by council planners who claimed the structure would detract from the iconic landscape surrounding Hume Castle atop a rocky crag.

But now Mr Bennett is fighting proposals by Scottish Power to put up a row of electricity pylons and overhead lines [OHL] even closer to the roofless fort because, he says the towers and cables will threaten his family's health while at the same time wiping hundreds of thousands of pounds from the value of Caldside Farm, near the village of Greenlaw.

The 30 kilometre-long collection of pylons (up to 38 metres high) and OHLs linking sub-stations in Galashiels and Eccles will be the subject of an application to the Scottish Government's Energy Consents Unit later this year. The project is designed to replace two aging power lines.

In 2012, Scottish Borders Council Planning Committee members rejected Mr Bennett's application for a single turbine after being told by officers: "It is considered that the proposal would undoubtedly create an adverse impact on the views to and from Hume Castle with an unacceptable cumulative impact in conjunction with the two existing turbines nearby.

"I concur with the Landscape Section that the proposal would contribute another high and prominently located structure to views that are already significantly impacted by existing turbines, and by the high pylons. It has not been demonstrated that the development would not have any unacceptable landscape and visual impacts as a consequence of its proposed siting."

It is clear that the likely impact of Mr Bennett's proposal will be dwarfed by Scottish Power's scheme.

But the Bennetts have been told the power company is unable to route the replacement OHL along the same path as the existing line which sits in a valley.

In a letter of objection to the planning authority, Mr Bennett cited the following reasons for his concerns: "Their proposal is to route the replacement just to the south of our farmhouse along some of the highest geographical points in the area. I ask for a review and reconsideration of the proposed route due to the impact on an area of outstanding beauty.

"A viable alternative route is available a short distance to the south; the health risks associated with proximity to OHLs; significant financial impact on the value of our farm and ongoing businesses".

The proposed new towers carrying the OHL will be seen on the skyline for miles around, said Mr Bennett, adding: "The proposed pylons are all significantly higher, wider and closer to Hume Castle than our proposed small wind turbine which was rejected due to its size, proximity to Hume Castle, and detrimental effect on the skyline".

In his reference to health risks, Mr Bennett explained the proposed routing would place the family's farmhouse in the middle of a corridor of OHLs. The health risks associated with exposure to Electric and Magnetic Fields (EMFs) were well documented. The proposed route at its closest would put the general living area at Caldside under 250 metres from the new OHL - the farm would be in the middle of a hazardous EMF corridor.

The letter of objection added: "We bought Caldside farm to grow the business to hand down to our children, and to have a safe and secure environment to raise our children.

"We have invested in our farmhouse, infrastructure and land, and in the local community, including currently developing a small holiday let business. With the replacement pylons in the proposed locations directly in front of our farmhouse it is estimated that the position of the proposed replacement OHL will reduce the overall value by hundreds of thousands of pounds".

Mr Bennett told us: "The community consultation was ineffective, as the majority of homeowners directed impacted by this routing were unaware.  Only those landowners who would have a pylon imposed on their property, or the line went over their property were informed. Those who live within a few hundred feet of this new line will receive no compensation, but their health and property value will be significantly damaged."

He was at a loss as to what more he could do to stop the damage to the health of his family, the huge negative financial impact and the obliteration of one of the best views in the Scottish Borders, all for the sake of Scottish Power not moving the proposed route a short distance to run in a natural valley alongside an existing OHL.

Mr Bennett asked his local MP John Lamont (Con) to intervene on his behalf.

A response to Mr Lamont sent by Laura McGhee, Scottish Power Government Affairs Assistant, set out to answer each of the points raised by Mr Bennett.

She wrote: "Health Risks – EMFs dissipate relatively quickly over a short distance from an overhead line. Please find attached an EMF measurement survey taken from a similar overhead line to that being proposed. Also included is an impartial information document compiled by an independent body on EMFs etc." 

Ms McGhee claimed there was no direct evidence to suggest that property values would be affected with the distances between the towers (pylons) and property involved in these circumstances. In relation to the proposals, the project team were considering all feedback received which included the points raised by Mr Bennett.

And, according to Ms McGhee: "Impact on area of outstanding beauty – planning legislation guides SPEN (Scottish Power Energy Networks) in overhead line routing – this involves a documented environmentally led approach also considering both technical feasibility and the economic cost to the public. All potentially significant environmental impacts are being assessed by the team, which include the concerns raised by Mr Bennett. The assessment outcome will further shape the design and any mitigation measures involved. SPENs Land Officers will share the updated proposals with landowners prior to any submission of the planning application.  

"Viable alternative route – your constituent mentions potentially following the existing overhead line route for the new replacement overhead line which on the surface is an obvious suggestion – however in the case of replacing an existing overhead line which was built decades ago, the planning regulations do not allow the original route to be followed as the starting point – rather the documented, environmentally led approach is a requirement." 

She said SPEN recognised that delivering new national infrastructure projects could be difficult and involved challenges – the company made every effort to consult and work with all stakeholders, including communities and landowners. If the new proposed overhead line received planning permission and was completed, the existing OHL being replaced would be removed, providing a positive visual enhancement at this location. 

Those tourism strategies from days gone by (part two)

Continuing our tongue-in-cheek trawl through 50-odd years of blueprints and master plans

by PHIL ROOMS, our TRAVEL EDITOR

In part one we'd reached 1973, and that madcap suggestion from Edinburgh consultants that Jedburgh's Market Square should be made to look like Dubrovnik, or was it Copenhagen? Now read on...

Another grandiose scheme - this one hatched in 1974 - which never got off the ground involved the development of a £750,000 "cultural centre" alongside the England-Scotland border on the A1 road at Lamberton, near Berwick-on-Tweed.

The complex was supposed to incorporate a motel plus a theatre and conference centre to lure northbound travellers, and teach them all about Scotland. But despite local enthusiasm for the venture, the Scottish Development Department and the Department of the Environment stepped in and blocked it on road safety grounds.

The disgruntled architect declared: "We are planning a high-quality centre at Lamberton, not a shanty town of chalets and caravans".

Meanwhile, the fledgling Borders Tourist Association was having to survive on a "hopelessly inadequate" annual budget of £25,000 while promoting a sector estimated to be worth £8 million a year to the Borders economy.

Equestrian tourism always appeared to be a natural fit for the Border counties, and 1975 marked the launch of a campaign to have an "Aviemore-type centre" built with activities for horse riders taking the place of winter sports.. The centre would offer show jumping, riding to hounds, polo, dressage and pony trekking.

A variety of other sporting facilities was recommended to widen the centre's appeal...a fish-farming complex, clay pigeon shooting, an eighteen-hole golf course and an indoor centre catering for at least 14 sports ranging from snooker to judo. Sadly, this one never materialised either.

The fragile united Borders front on tourism suffered a serious setback in 1982 when rebellious Roxburgh councillors pulled out of a proposed joint tourist association for the region with the intention of 'going it alone'. The other three districts - Tweeddale, Ettrick & Lauderdale, and Berwickshire were happy to work together. Roxburgh eventually caved in and joined forces with its neighbours.

However, seven years later, Roxburgh broke ranks again when the district's councillors refused to sanction a demand for £20,000 to help pay for a tourism strategist who was meant to transform the local industry's fortunes.

Yet another firm of consultants had recommended the appointment of the expert on a three-to-five-year contract, and an annual budget of £50k. Their report declared: "If there is not a serious willingness for the bodies involved to work jointly in taking such a first step, it may be as well to agree that, given the problematic administrative structure, a strategic approach towards tourism cannot be pursued in the Borders Region".

But the entire strategy was kicked into touch when Roxburgh chairman Gideon Yellowlees - at the time he also happened to be head of the Scottish Borders Tourist Board - quipped: "My council could not afford £20,000 this year to pay for such a proposal. The whole idea is not viable".

There was an element of friction further west too in 1989 when Dumfries & Galloway Tourist Board members voted 7-3 to sack Beltie the Bull - standard bearer for south-west tourism for five long years - and replace the 'boring' Belted Galloway with an image of a barnacle goose. The controversy kept the letters editor of the Galloway Gazette in work for weeks.

The 1990s saw a whole range of strategies...the aristocratic owners of stately homes - descendants of feuding families - banded together to form Scottish Borders Heritage, another (failed) attempt was made to create a Gateway to Scotland on a 27-acre site near the village of Ayton, and golfers were offered the chance to play 15 local courses for a bargain fee under the so-called Freedom of the Fairways marketing scheme.

The decade was nearing its end when, at the first ever seminar on the Border reivers, the bands of outlaws who created their own medieval crime wave, it was suggested wealthy Americans, Canadians, and Australasians might be prepared to visit the region to trace their family roots.

It would seem virtually every trick in the book has been tried to ignite a tourist boom in the South of Scotland since the 1960s. But there have probably been more failures than successes, according to the evidence in our archives.

Borders Heritage Tourism - the next big thing?

by DOUGLAS SHEPHERD

History buffs from all over the world may soon be able to participate in archaeological digs at Iron Age and Roman sites in the South of Scotland as the region promotes its unrivalled but under investigated heritage assets in a bid to boost visitor numbers.

Some twelve national and local agencies are considering the potential of heritage tourism in the territories covered by Scottish Borders Council and Dumfries & Galloway Council. Between them, the two local authority areas have more than 1,750 scheduled monuments, many of them dating from the Iron Age (1200 BC - 550BC).

A paper prepared for a recent meeting of the Convention of the South of Scotland (CoSS) covered five themes which are at the heart of the area's latest tourism strategy. The list also includes cycling and food and drink.

According to the discussion paper: "The South of Scotland has a developing vision to enable the rich Iron Age and Roman heritage of the area to reach its full cultural and economic potential. The South of Scotland has one of the most vibrant Iron Age landscapes in Europe, with a superabundance of upstanding monuments, most of which are little known, little visited and little explored." 

And delegates to the CoSS session, including two Scottish Government Cabinet ministers - Mairi McAllan, Cabinet Secretary for Wellbeing Economy, Net Zero and Energy, and Mairi Gougeon, Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs -  were told: "Superimposed on this mix of indigenous sites is the intense conflict landscape of the period of the Roman invasion (AD 40 -AD410), with its attendant rich repository of Roman monuments.

"The area is neatly sandwiched between two World Heritage corridors of Roman remains. To the north, the Antonine Wall - essentially traversing the isthmus of Scotland from Glasgow to Edinburgh - and to the south Hadrian’s Wall which cuts across the isthmus from Carlisle to Newcastle. The South of Scotland is criss-crossed with the remains of conquest: Roman roads and studded with Roman forts and campaign camps."

The paper's authors claimed that in many ways this ancient landscape has parallels in Europe with the Berlin Wall, the Maginot line and the Normandy beaches of more modern conflicts. 

"In economic and cultural terms, the area’s story is seriously under investigated, under told and undersold. Most of the region’s sites are not even sign-posted or interpreted in any way."

Co-ordinated by South of Scotland Enterprise, the partners are developing activity around the Iron Age and Roman heritage potential through existing visitor attractions such as Trimontium Museum, Melrose and the early medieval monastic site at Whithorn. The partnership members are Archaeology Scotland, Dumfries & Galloway Council, Historic Environment Scotland, Museums Galleries Scotland, National Museums Scotland, Scottish Borders Council, South of Scotland Destination Alliance, South of Scotland Enterprise, Trimontium Trust, Whithorn Trust, and VisitScotland.

The members of CoSS were asked to supports and assist the partnership to develop plans for a participatory archaeological dig in the South of Scotland to act as a potential catalyst to open the Iron and Roman Heritage offer up to visitors.

The meeting heard from Mark Rowley, Tourism Strategy Manager at South of Scotland Enterprise that the area had literally thousands of cairns and hillforts, ditches and ramparts, a lot of them never examined before. 

He said: "The Roman stuff, some of it has been examined but not to the level of places like Vindolanda and Hadrian's Wall just a few miles to the south. Of course, we're linked with that, because we have Dere Street running straight through the two. We think there's a huge opportunity to look at these two civilizations, to get involved in some participatory archaeology."

There had already been pilots on that, he explained. Projects like the Twelve Towers of Rule that had literally thousands of children and enthusiasts getting involved. 

"We have a real opportunity to use that culture and heritage and those stories to entertain and interact with people when they're here but also to bring people here. If you can bring four Roman emperors here into the cold and wet to see what's happening, I'm sure we can bring an awful lot more Italians, Americans, French and Germans to come and hear our stories but also to see some of that heritage in its situation."

Jane Morrison-Ross, chief executive of the enterprise agency said they were examining the potential for a Whithorn masterplan to look at the future of the museum there, how that could be expanded and how the unique archive at Whithorn could have a home that encouraged not just tourism - which was really important - but academic tourism as well, because the Whithorn archive, like the Trimontium collection, was unique. 

"They have artefacts that are unrivalled anywhere else in the world, 50,000 of them that are coming back to Whithorn that had been dispersed across a number of universities. More are being found all the time actually that they didn't know they had." 

Council 'ignoring' grassroots in wind farm decision making

Campaigners seek greater 'local' involvement in wind farm deliberations

SPECIAL FEATURE by OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT EDITOR

As the never ending flow of applications seeking to develop major new wind farms in the Scottish Borders continue to flood in, it is claimed elected councillors in the region are not always being made fully aware of the views held by their own constituents.

The projects which have the most profound consequences for communities and their landscapes are those with a generating capacity greater than 50 megawatts given the height of the towers and sheer scale of the blades. 

The fate of these multi-turbine schemes rests with Scottish Government ministers rather than the local  planning authority following the submission of so-called Section 36 applications to the national Energy Consents Unit [ECU]. But whenever Scottish Borders Council [SBC] objects to a particular application that triggers the mechanism which eventually results in a public inquiry.

Although the local authority is a statutory consultee in each case handled by the ECU, there is no obligation on it to invite or publish representations from community councils or members of the general public. Those letters of objection or support can be submitted to staff at the consents unit who will post them on the ECU website.

Now, a group which believes the current system is grossly unfair is campaigning for change by lobbying politicians and by petitioning SBC. The initial reaction from local planning officers has been decidedly cool.

The petition which went before a council committee last month read as follows: "We ask that the Planning & Building Standards Committee of Scottish Borders Council review the procedures currently operated by planning officers in preparing documentation (including that posted on the Council’s website), and their procedural advice given to councillors when the Committee are considering and coming to their decisions on Wind Farm Planning Applications where the final decision will be made by Scottish Ministers guided by the Energy Consents Unit under the terms of Section 36 the Electricity Act 1989.

"We particularly ask that the Committee instructs officers to include in their report to Committee representative comments and responses from Community Councils formally consulted by the ECU, and also local residents clearly affected by the application, in line with the procedures of other local authorities. In effect we are asking: can a Planning Committee member truly, exercising due care and attention as an informed, elected member of a Council, say what a Council’s opinion is on an application under S36 if he, or she, doesn’t know what their Community Council’s and constituents think?

"Direct representation to Council planning officers and a public question to Council on this subject have both effectively been stone walled, arguably in the case of the question denying that there is an issue. Policy is the responsibility of Council or its Committees, it is not the sole responsibility of either officers, or of the relevant convener.  We ask that the currently operated SBC procedure in respect of the handling of S36 Applications is discussed with and agreed by the SBC Planning Committee."

John Williams, chairman of Heriot Community Council - the village has numerous wind farms close by - is one of those seeking greater input when the council is processing and commenting on each Section 36 application.

He told us: "The local authority has the casting vote as to whether an application goes to a public inquiry and a Reporter for a decision. I know of NO application that has been referred by ECU to a public inquiry on the objection of a local community council or local residents."

Mr Williams explained that  neighbouring community councils were statutory consultees, and the ECU ensured these grass roots councils were consulted. 

"But our responses to ECU just get posted on their portal, and that is that. ECU is staffed by civil servants on rotation — they are not planners and have no training in planning", he added. 

Said Mr Williams: "So we have regularly forwarded our responses to SBC planners to inform them. But SBC has over the years gradually developed an ever more rigid policy of ignoring all such responses — they are not posted on the SBC planning website; the officer's report does not discuss them. All the planning officers do is point the Planning Committee to the ECU web site if they wish to see what local community councils and people have said."

Lead petitioner John Campbell KC, a specialist planning lawyer, has been involved in countless wind farm cases in every corner of Scotland. He addressed Borders councillors when the petition was submitted.

Mr Campbell said: "Section 36 projects represent the largest forms of development in Scotland today with the biggest impact on communities. Yet the council can make up its mind without any input from the public. How can councillors properly represent unless they listen to their constituents? 

"There is a widely held feeling that the public's views are not being taken into account. But when it comes to wind farms virtually everyone does have an opinion".

In a briefing note prepared for elected members, John Hayward, Planning & Development Standards Manager at SBC, wrote: "Crucially, it is the Scottish Government, and not the Council, that is the determining authority. It is not a planning application. 

"[The Electricity Act] makes no further statement as to how the planning authority should prescribe that duty internally, including on to whom that responsibility falls within the organisation. It is silent on all other aspects of the process and the expected role of the planning authority. The legislation therefore squarely places the duty of considering third party representations upon the Government in its capacity as determining authority. Furthermore, regulations direct that those third party representations are made directly to Government."

Mr Hayward also pointed out that should Councillors wish to view any community or individual comments about an application, they are able to do so by checking the ECU website, something they are actively encouraged to do within the report on the proposal that goes to the Planning & Building Standards Committee. 

"They are thus able to gauge the level of opposition (or support) and the reasons for it. In the context of the limited statutory role of the Council, that is considered to be a reasonable and proportionate response", he added.

And he warned that if the approach being advocated by the petitioners were to be accepted, there would be further implications to be considered. 

"Firstly, the Council will need to dedicate additional resources to administer the process being suggested. There are additional costs in neighbour notifying residents and administering the process, which it has no statutory obligation to do. Additionally, if the Council does adopt these non-statutory processes, it then places itself at risk of legal challenge if it fails to follow those procedures, even though there is no legal requirement for them to be adopted. This would seem to be creating an unnecessary additional legal risk."

Oh! Please, Not Another Tourism Strategy

Our Travel Editor takes a tongue-in-cheek look at previous masterplans and blueprints aimed at luring visitors to the Borders

by PHIL ROOMS

Had you noticed? The South of Scotland's new Tourism Strategy is doing the rounds. Not just any old strategy this one...it's a RESPONSIBLE tourism strategy no less which tends to suggest its dozens of predecessors were probably IRRESPONSIBLE.

The current version certainly doesn't lack chutzpah. The authors claim it will "increase our visitor economy by £1 billion to £1.76 billion by 2034". And it will support a further 6,000 plus jobs, boosting the total number employed in the sector to 20,000 full time equivalent posts ten years from now.

Ever since the 1960s there have been different strategies spouting formulae calculated by expensive teams of consultants. Many of them were swallowed by wide-eyed members of the local tourist board before it became clear the targets which had been set would never be reached. So, time to ditch the bulging road map and commission a replacement. A veritable gravy train for 'specialist tourism advisers'.

Thankfully (or perhaps regrettably) remnants of many of these overblown grand designs can still be found in the archives here at Not Just Sheep & Rugby. Some of these gems may or may not be worth a second look.

The earliest example we could find is dated October 1967 when a working party of officials from six Border counties was to be set up to consider the formation of a Borders Tourist Council to "co-ordinate efforts to attract tourists". If such a body emerged from the talks it must have been short-lived and cannot have achieved much.

Next came initiatives linked to the bi-centenary of the birth of Sir Walter Scott in 1971. In the months leading up to the big day package tours were being offered to wealthy Americans. A Scottish Tourist Board spokesman stuck his neck out to declare: "I think it is fair to say that Scott is more popular in America than Burns".

The modern-day ten-year strategy for the Borders and Dumfries & Galloway with its 'Scotland Starts Here' slogan is merely a variation on a theme. As far back as 1970 Peeblesshire County Council produced its own ten-year programme aimed at improving tourist facilities in the locality.

Plans included a picnic area capable of accommodating 250 cars and a touring caravan park for 100 trailers. It was estimated that more than 500,000 cars (and their drivers) would be within an hour's drive of Peebles by 1985.

The accompanying report trumpeted: "Peeblesshire is going to experience a massive inflow of visitors as a result of circumstances largely outwith the county's control. It is hoped the proposals will provide the structure from which the influx can be controlled and exploited to the benefit of the population and without detracting from the charm of the county as a whole".

County councillors never had the chance to see the fruits of their labour...the authority was abolished in 1975 to make way for local government reform.

The early attempts by the Scottish Tourist Board [STB] - now called VisitScotland - to set up regional boards was fraught with difficulty when it turned its attention to the Borders, also in 1970. Melrose and Peebles, the two burghs with the best hotel accommodation in the area, decided not to join the party.

Provost Curtis Hutcheson, of Melrose, said bluntly: "We merely decided not to give encouragement to the regional body because we felt it would be of no value to us".

And Peebles provost Alexander Melrose was equally dismissive: "There is a perfectly efficient tourist authority operating in the town and covering our entire county".

Colonel Howard Paterson, the colourful champion of regionalisation for the STB warned: "Towns who do not take part cannot be branded as untouchable but they are isolating themselves from the benefits which a regional authority can bring".

The completion of the M74 motorway linking Glasgow and Carlisle in the early 1970s prompted councils on the east coast to come up with a strategy in a bid to reverse the falling volumes of tourist traffic on the A1 between Newcastle and Edinburgh.

This blueprint was far from slick...it simply involved handing out copies of a 'special' leaflet through the AA and the RAC, and at filling stations cataloguing the undoubted attractions along the east coast trunk road.

Civic leaders in the Borders must have been well pleased when, in 1971, the STB selected the area for a pilot strategy to provide "wet weather" entertainment for visitors. Naturally, the proposals had come from a working party.

As a first step it was planned to make films and equipment available to hoteliers and local groups at short notice. And the inaugural meeting of the Borders Tourist Association heard that Jedburgh would be getting one of three national tourist information centres at a cost of £35,000..

Recently appointed Borders Tourist Development Officer Alfred Scott said the first subjects to be considered included the production of a regional tourist guide, an accommodation register, an inventory of existing facilities, and a diary of events. Sounds like a tourism strategy, does it not?

AND FINALLY in part one of our trip down strategy lane...perhaps the most ill-conceived and ludicrous master plan ever dreamed up in the history of Borders tourism.

Jedburgh Town Council was daft enough and profligate enough back in 1973 to bring in Edinburgh consultants to look at the burgh's decidedly bland appearance with a view to transforming it into something more attractive.

The advisers certainly didn't hold back. I kid you not, their proposals to make Jedburgh 'the main tourist centre in the Borders' included the development of Market Square "along the lines of Dubrovnik, Venice or Copenhagen." So, how did that one work out?

According to the report which must have been quickly binned by the council: "Jedburgh should assume the role of principal gateway to an area of outstanding recreational and tourist potential.

"Outside seating and gay awnings in front of cafes and restaurants would add stimulation to the scene. The tasteful use of international flags and, at appropriate times, the tasteful use of either live or recorded music would add yet another dimension to heighten the total tourist appeal of the town.

"Something must certainly be done to brighten the burgh's facade. Presently speaking, too great an impression of dreariness and even dilapidation is conveyed to the visitor".

COMING NEXT - Strategies touting a "Horseman's Aviemore" in the Borders and plans to cash in on the region's bloodthirsty past.

Tweed salmon rod catches lowest since 2018

by DOUG COLLIE 

The number of rod caught salmon on the River Tweed's 50 angling beats during the 2023 season was the lowest for five years, according to figures released by fishery managers.

A total catch of 5,720 represented a 14.4 per cent decrease from the 2022 figure of 6,690. And numbers were down by 30 per cent on 2020 when anglers hooked 8,215 salmon.

A statement issued by the River Tweed Commission (RTC)  said the 2023 salmon catch had been accompanied by an encouraging increase in the sea-trout catch to 2,285, the best since 2015. 

"Tweed continues to maintain its position as the UK's premier river for rod catches", declared the RTC..

The statement explained that Atlantic salmon populations faced alarming declines across various river systems, highlighting the urgent need for proactive measures. Climate change posed a particularly grave threat, with rising temperatures endangering freshwater habitats during hot, dry summers.

In December last year the Atlantic salmon was reassessed on the red list of threatened species from 'least concern' to 'endangered' in the UK by international environmental agencies. 

The RTC said: "Recognising these challenges, the Commission initiated a comprehensive study in 2023 to bolster Tweed's resilience against climate change, with the preliminary analysis identifying key gaps and outlining strategies for long-term preservation. This work continues to be a key focus."

Building on the knowledge gained by the Tweed Foundation and  Tweed Forum, RTC aims to deliver a baseline audit of the Gala Water where existing tools, including fish counters, electrofishing, and smolt trap monitoring, will provide valuable insights into the tributary's condition and, wherever possible, prioritise the improvement of in-river, riparian, or wider catchment management issues relating to healthy fish stocks The findings will inform a detailed condition report and identify future work programs, serving as a blueprint for subsequent catchment-wide audits.

Jonathan Reddin, the RTC's Chief Commissioner, commented: "Our aim is to foster more meaningful involvement from all stakeholders in the Tweed community. However, there are no simple solutions or instant remedies. Our only recourse is to exert maximum effort and efficiency in addressing the underlying factors contributing to these challenges.

"In light of shared challenges faced by Scottish Fishery Boards and Tweed alike, collaboration emerges as a cornerstone of effective conservation practices. While there is no quick fix for enhancing adult salmon abundance, the RTC remains steadfast in its dedication to fostering partnerships and driving collaborative initiatives for the betterment of Tweed's aquatic environment."

The Tweed's reputation as one of the world's leading salmon fishing rivers is estimated to be worth around £24 million each year to the Borders economy, and supports over 500 full time equivalent jobs. Anglers caught a "staggering" 23,200 on the main river and its tributaries in 2010.

Last year's decline in the Tweed catch was much less than on the River Spey where the 2022 total of 5,439 salmon caught by rod slumped by 32 per cent last year to 3,691.

The Missing Salmon Alliance has pointed out that provisional Scottish Government statistics for 2023 revealed the lowest catches reported for wild Atlantic salmon since records began in 1952, and signal that Scotland’s salmon and sea trout populations remain in a critical state. 

Last year, 33,023 wild Atlantic salmon and 21,907 sea trout were caught. For salmon, this is a decrease of 25% on the 2022 catch. 

The Alliance said: "These figures are announced at a time when we are experiencing the twin crises of climate change and biodiversity loss, and concerted, urgent action is required now to prioritise the protection and recovery of Scotland’s wild Atlantic salmon populations."