Developers hope to avoid second windfarm 'nightmare' at Hawick

by LESTER CROSS

The company promoting a massive renewables development close to Hawick is planning to bring huge components, including 210ft long turbine blades via roads south of the town in a bid to avoid a repeat of the 'logistical fiasco' associated with construction of the so called Pines Burn wind farm in the same area.

Meanwhile, Muirhall Energy which is seeking permission for the 52-turbine Teviot Wind Farm has confirmed it has signed a community benefits agreement with no fewer than 12 community councils - a deal estimated to be worth £2.45 million annually or £98 million over the lifetime of the facility.

But despite Muirhall's efforts to address concerns and opposition to their plans - the original scheme has been scaled back from 62 turbines to 52 - there remain a number of issues which have provoked a large number of objections.

After several delays, Scottish Borders Council is due to decide whether to support or oppose the Teviot project at a meeting in March. The final outcome will rest with the Scottish Government.

Local councillors will be only too aware of the anger and frustration of many residents and businesses who suffered while Energiekontor installed seven turbines at Pines Burn, a project which experienced 'manifold challenges', according to the company.

These included increased capital costs and a substantial drop in output value.

Roads and streets in and around Hawick were frequently clogged or closed altogether as the heavy goods vehicles carrying the tilted turbine blades crawled from a storage area alongside the A68 road near Jedburgh to the development site. The decision to route this abnormal traffic through Hawick itself proved to be disastrous.

According to the minutes of a meeting convened to consider the Pines Burn issues, Morrisons supermarket in Hawick lost £25,000 worth of trade in a single day thanks to the road closures while there were claims that at least one rural business had been forced to close its doors permanently.

It is understood a number of businesses and individuals investigated the possibility of seeking compensation from the developers. Some were told there was no compensation mechanism in such cases.

Energiekontor laid some of the blame for the traffic issues on a lack of communication between developer and local authority. There had also been delays before Scottish Power removed overhead lines to facilitate the movement of the turbine blades.

A Pines Burn community benefits fund, originally promising annual payments of £150,000 for seven nominated community councils - based on 12 turbines - was revised down to £87,500 linked to the seven operational turbines. The contract is still to be signed.

In a newly lodged statement in support of the Teviot project, Muirhall's senior project manager Kirsten Leckie acknowledges the community's concerns about the potential disruption caused by the proposed access route through Hawick. 

"In response, we are actively exploring the feasibility of an alternative southern approach route for delivering the largest wind turbine components to the site. This proposed route would make use of existing infrastructure that has a proven track record for transporting similar components successfully. Currently, we are formalising land agreements—already agreed upon in principle—and conducting internal assessments to evaluate the planning implications and the scope of any necessary remedial works. We will provide further updates as soon as we have a clearer understanding of the route’s full feasibility."

The statement says Muirhall continues to demonstrate its commitment to mitigate the most significant effects on 'local and environmental receptors' by actively investigating alternative opportunities to avoid repeating the community's recent experience with turbine component transportation.

"Our primary focus is identifying a viable route that accommodates the large components while minimising disruption to residents".

 According to Muirhall the infrastructure project associated with Teviot Wind Farm will greatly increase the network capability between Southern Scotland and Northern England, and will also increase access to the transmission network in the Borders area, by forming part of the new north to south electrical spine. 

"The key benefits of this reinforcement include: provision of significant capacity for power flows between Scotland and England; reduction in constraint costs for consumers; and enabling onshore and offshore wind to be used more effectively. This reinforcement along with its associated developments, is crucial for alleviating the extreme congestion in the regional grid network".

Council care village's 'detractions' a concern for planners

by OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT EDITOR

A senior planner at Scottish Borders Council has expressed her misgivings about the design proposals for the local authority's own £20 million 60-bed care village at Tweedbank which will be the first building project on the idyllic Lowood country estate. near Melrose.

When the council started drawing up a development strategy for the 34 hectares estate - purchased over six years ago for £10 million - the pledge was for well designed, high quality projects including 300 new homes and the specially created care village for people diagnosed with dementia.

But according to Julie Hayward, team leader for development management at SBC the proposed group of three buildings designed by architects commissioned by the council are not considered appropriate to their surroundings or the character of the immediate area.

When members of the council's planning authority meet next week to decide whether to give their own project the go-ahead they will have before them a detailed report from Mrs Hayward.

It includes the following passage: "The main areas of concern with the proposed development are the scale, massing and design of the buildings, particularly their cumulative footprint, which has the potential to introduce a more urban character into the landscape that risks detracting from the estate’s semi-rural aesthetic. 

"In addition, all three buildings are of similar scale and design, with only difference being variations in the proposed cladding colour. It is considered that this lack of legibility or distinct identity detracts from the overall quality of the scheme."

A planning department file for the care village shows that architects lodged amended plans and drawings as recently as January 17th in a bid to address the concerns of senior officers.

In an email to JW Architects project director Yunming Thomson, Mrs Hayward wrote: "I have consulted the relevant consultees. I note that the elevation drawings have been revised. Whilst we appreciate the efforts taken to address our concerns regarding the scale and massing of the buildings, we feel that these drawings are not an improvement; the lowering of the ridge and eaves and the shallower roof pitch have resulted in a squat gable. 

"In addition, the false gables on the side elevations add interest so should be retained. Further, the use of brick on the gables is discouraged and brick should be restricted to less prominent areas as previously agreed. It is therefore felt that the original drawings submitted with the application are preferred and either the original drawings will be presented to Councillors or a condition will be recommended that a set of revised drawings be submitted for approval, which would also take into account the revised floor layouts."

In her committee report, Mrs Hayward lists the key planning issues for councillors to consider: whether the proposal complies with Development Plan Policies and the Supplementary Planning Guidance and Design Guide for Tweedbank; whether the scale, siting and design of the development are appropriate for the Lowood Estate setting; whether landscape and visual impacts are acceptable; whether the proposal would have adverse impacts on trees, woodlands and ecology; and whether the proposed development would adversely affect road and pedestrian safety.

She reminds the committee: "This is the first detailed application (with the exception of the road layout) for the Lowood Estate and the aim is to achieve an exemplar development that complies with the vision set out in the Supplementary Planning Guidance, setting design standards for the remainder of the estate and allocated sites."

 But due to the topography of the area a significant amount of cut and fill, with retaining walls, is required to provide the level site necessary for the care village. 

"It is clear that the chosen site for this much needed development, has its challenges. It is considered that the heavily engineered solution shown on the submitted plans (involving significant cut and fill and formation of a level platform) would not be a sympathetic response to the natural landform and would have a significant adverse impact on the landscape character of the estate."

Mrs Hayward says the revised drawings attempt to reduce the overall scale and bulk of the building by introducing shallower roof pitches and reducing ridge and eaves heights. They also remove false gables from the side elevations, introducing a simpler approach with continuous eaves details. 

"Unfortunately, this has not addressed officers’ concerns and further revisions are required to ensure a suitably designed and scaled building appropriate for this location, consistent with LDP [Local Development Plan] policies. 

The report concludes that if committee members are minded to approve the application it is recommended that this matter is delegated to officers to resolve. This will ensure that the scale, mass and height of the building, as well as any changes to the layout and arrangement of windows and doors are addressed before a decision is issued.

Mrs Hayward's recommendation is accompanied by fourteen specific conditions.

Battery storage risks being disregarded, claim critics

SPECIAL REPORT by OUR ENVIRONMENT CORRESPONDENT

The flood of applications from a plethora of companies seeking to develop Battery Energy Storage Systems [BESS] at locations across the Scottish Borders is not being properly scrutinised, according to critics who claim planners and Scottish Government ministers are 'waving through' projects without insisting on rigorous environmental assessments.

There are allegations that correspondence from agents claiming that Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) costing upwards of £10,000 are not necessary can be misleading or inaccurate in some instances while opponents say scant regard is being paid to the potential risks of battery fires and pollution of water courses. 

The loss of significant amounts of agricultural land is another concern being voiced. And little if any heed is being paid to the cumulative effect on communities of construction traffic associated with BESS projects and windfarms, it is claimed.

The widespread criticism is refuted by Scottish Borders Council which claims its planning officers are carrying out their remit under the processing system. And BESS projects with more than 50MW of storage capacity have to be processed and decided by the Government's Energy Consents Unit (ECU).

Before a formal planning applications is submitted, the business promoting a BESS lodges a so-called scoping request which determines whether an EIA is required.

However, members of the public have no say at this stage. After seeking the views of its own officials, including transport and ecology specialists, the local authority decides on its recommendation to the ECU. In the overwhelming majority of scoping cases dealt with by the Borders local authority the outcome has been 'no EIA needed'.

A BESS is used to store electrical energy in lithium batteries, allowing it to be released later when needed, primarily to manage fluctuations in electricity supply from renewable sources such as windfarms or solar panels. The systems are housed in rows of units which can be the size of shipping containers.

The promoters of the Borders projects comprise a complex network of developers and consultants, many of them registered at addresses in England or in continental Europe. During the course of an application, control of the earmarked site for a BESS can change hands several times even before it becomes clear who will actually build the facility.

The countryside surrounding the burgh of Hawick is in danger of becoming festooned with 'green' energy projects, among them battery storage systems as well as scores of wind turbines at various upland locations. A growing volume of proposals has led to calls for a moratorium on further activity by the renewables industry.

When an EIA scoping request for a 90MW BESS at Calaburn, close to the town, was lodged last year by GSC Calaburn Farm Ltd., of Liverpool - a subsidiary of Green Switch Capital Ltd, of the same address - Bruce Mactaggart whose Green Dale farm lies close to the proposed site provided the planning authority with a detailed statement, setting out his concerns and suggesting an EIA was vital.

Mr Mactaggart wrote: "Due to the nature of the proposed development I am very concerned this could be exempt from an EIA. I hope you decide it is necessary to make sure the EIA is implemented as the project is a relatively new development in the renewable sector and needs close monitoring at present."

But he was told by planning officer Kyle Wise: "As per regulations, we do not consider public comments as part of our response (opinion) to EIA Screening Requests as to whether an EIA is required for the prospective development."

Mr Wise advised Mr Mactaggart to submit his concerns at the planning application stage, adding: "Unfortunately, your comments will not be considered otherwise in this EIA Screening Request/Opinion, as per legislation." 

A similar response was sent by Mr Wise to Michael Gallacher, of Whitehaugh House, near Calaburn, after he claimed an EIA assessment was "mandatory" in this case. His concerns about potential flooding, contamination of water sources and other environmental matters were copied to the local MP, MSP and to Hawick area councillors.

Mr Gallacher wrote: "It is unacceptable and undemocratic that an application such as this for a screening request is carried out without the public and local residents being able to comment and make representations to SBC".

A few days later Mr Wise told the ECU by letter: "It is the view of the Council as planning authority that the impacts of the proposal would not require to be subject of an Environmental Impact Assessment. Nevertheless, it is anticipated due to the scale and nature of the proposed development, it would pose environmental impacts that will require thorough assessment as part of any prospective planning application.”

The 19 pages of evidence opposing the need for an EIA at Calaburn was assembled by the applicant's 'agent', Renewable Planning Consultancy (RPC), whose Board member, Gerald Beelaerts van Blokland is also a director of GSC Calaburn Farm Ltd.

According to Mr Mactaggart, there were at least 36 'incorrect facts' in the RPC document, an issue which he pointed out to the planning department.

From August 2024, Green Switch Capital (GSC) and its collection of BESS promoting subsidiaries have been owned by Qair UK Holdings which is in turn controlled by French-based Jean-Marc Bouchet's Lucia Holding 2. GSC is now known as Qair Renewables UK Ltd.

The loss-making Green Switch business owed several millions of pounds to another renewables business. Its debts were settled as part of the sale agreement with Qair.

Mr Mactaggart told us: "By advising the ECU as the SBC Planning department. has done in this instance, they are showing a complete disregard for Environmental Health issues. Their decision in the Calaburn BESS plan has been taken in the knowledge there in excess of thirty inaccuracies in the screening request. 

"As a result I can only assume SBC planning department will be happy to defend themselves at a later date based on incorrect information."

He believed that BESS proposals needed to be investigated fully before they were allowed to be installed.

"Extensive Carbon Footprint reports need to be completed to illustrate the 'greenness' of these systems.  Unfortunately due to the legislation Renewable Planning Consultants were able to say anything in order for them to avoid a vital part of our democratic system as highlighted in this case."

Only last week, an EIA scoping request was made on behalf of Stirches Solar Farm Ltd. for the construction and operation of a proposed Renewable Energy Park, including a co-located solar farm and BESS on 54 hectares to the south and east of Stirches Mains farm, Hawick. The applicants are part of London-based IB Vogt UK Ltd.

In 2023, SBC received a Screening Request for a proposed solar farm on the site. The council told Third Revolution Projects, agents for the applicants: "It is the view of the Council as planning authority that the impacts of the proposal would not require to be subject of an EIA. Nevertheless, the scale of the proposed development is vast, and its impacts will require thorough assessment as part of any prospective planning application”.

Stirches Solar Farm Ltd was formerly a subsidiary of Tyler Hill Solar Ltd which in turn was controlled by Brit Renewables Ltd.

Eighteen months ago, Ampyr Solar Europe acquired the solar PV and BESS portfolio from Tyler Hill comprising sites across the UK.

This time round the agents for Stirches Solar Farm Ltd. conclude in their 15-page letter to SBC: "The nature of effects arising are not anticipated to be adverse and no significant environmental effects

are predicted. We therefore request that the Scottish Ministers confirm that the Proposed Development

does not constitute EIA Development, and an EIA is therefore not required to support an application for

Section 36 consent".

And yet IB Vogt UK's strategic report for 2023 states at page four under the heading Community and Environment: "The company carries out environmental impact assessments on all projects to ensure the impact of all activities are assessed appropriately".

A Scottish Borders Council spokesperson, responding to our detailed request for comment, said: “Any proposal with a combined electricity generating or storage capacity of 50MW or more must be made to the Scottish Government’s Energy Consents Unit (ECU) for determination. 

“That means that the Council has the same standing as communities in the consultation process and is required to provide views on its own behalf, not those of other parties, who have their own opportunity to comment directly on the application to the ECU.

“The Council’s remit is to assess the planning implications of the proposal; in other words, to assess the proposal against development plan policies and make any technical assessments that it has responsibility for, such as landscape and visual impacts, access, noise and the effect of these on residential amenity.

“Our response will be considered by the ECU as part of the decision-making process in the same way as any responses submitted to the ECU by members of the public or Community Councils.”

A Scottish Government spokesperson said: “Scotland has some of the most stringent environmental impact regulations anywhere in the world and our planning and consenting system ensures that local communities can always have their say.

“It is untrue to suggest that projects are being ‘waved through’ without consideration of an EIA.  When applications are submitted for EIA screening, they are assessed on a case-by-case basis against Schedule 3 of the Electricity Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2017 and in line with the other requirements of the Regulations".

NHS Borders challenges revaluation of its buildings

EXCLUSIVE by LESTER CROSS

A total of nineteen appeals against new rateable values applied to hospitals, medical practices and other health service properties in the Scottish Borders are due to be considered by the region's assessor on a decision day next month.

Cash-strapped NHS Borders which needs to achieve savings running into millions of pounds during the current financial year, will face an increased rates bill if the figures set by assessor Brian Rout during the 2023 revaluation of non-domestic properties remain at their revised level.

Buildings with a rateable value of up to £51,000 are liable for rates payments of 49.8p in the £; for properties valued at between £50,001 and £100,000 the rate poundage is 54.5p, and those with a rateable value above £100,000 the levy is 55.9p.

NHS Borders has a number of properties with rateable values in excess of £100,000. And following the revaluation Borders General Hospital, the region's main treatment centre, is valued at £1,330,000 for rating purposes.

According to official figures a total of 92 health and medical properties in the Borders - including those which are not part of the NHS Borders estate - had a total rateable value of £3,905,100 following the previous revaluation in 2017. The figure increased to £4,167,950 in the wake of the 2023 revision of values. Of the 92 buildings, 64 saw an increase in their rateable values.

The 19 appeals lodged on behalf of the health authority - they are known as proposals - will be considered on February 12th.

A spokesman for the Assessor's department at Scottish Borders Council explained: "The Assessor makes the decision on the proposals in terms of the Valuation (Proposals Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2022. There is a right of appeal to the First-Tier Tribunal for Scotland – Local Taxation Chamber."

We sent a number of questions to NHS Borders about the challenges they have made.

We asked: "Can you please provide some background about the board’s reasons for submitting proposals? What was the annual non-domestic rates bill for the listed properties prior to the revaluation? What will be the annual non-domestic rates bill based on the assessor’s revaluations? What kind of reduction, say in percentage terms, does the board hope to achieve at next month’s determination date? 

"At the same time can you provide information on the costs facing the Borders health authority because of the UK Government’s increase in employers’ NI contributions? What was/will be the annual spend on NI contributions before and after the increase in charges?"

Unfortunately, the health board told us: "Due to the nature of this request, I will forward your email on to our Freedom of Information team so that this can be processed as an FOI."

However, we were not prepared to wait for up to 20 working days for a response. By that time Mr Rout would have ruled on the proposals.

These are the properties which are the subject of 'proposals' together with their new rateable values:

Eyemouth Day Hospital £56,500; Coldstream Health Centre £52,500; Knoll Hospital, Duns £121,000; Galashiels Health Centre £129,000; Selkirk Health Centre £35,000; Office, Huntlyburn £8,700; Borders General Hospital £1,330,000; Office, Newstead £109,000; Stow Health Centre £17,800.

Melrose Health Centre £17,800; Newcastleton Health Centre £23,750; Hawick Health Centre (Teviot Road) £61,500; Hawick Community Hospital £255,000; Jedburgh Health Centre £62,000; Kelso Hospital £123,000; Kelso Health Centre £69,500; Hay Lodge Hospital, Peebles £116,000; Innerleithen Health Centre £24,500; West Linton Health Centre £18,600.

'Rare' Flavian fort to be investigated 70 years after its discovery

by DOUG COLLIE 

The layout of a Peeblesshire Roman fort, believed to have been built and then quickly abandoned by Agricola's troops in the first century AD will be surveyed in detail by a team of archaeologists and enthusiasts in a bid to uncover its hidden history.

Photographs taken from an aircraft in 1955 first identified the fort at Easter Happrew next to the Lyne Water, a tributary of the River Tweed. A brief excavation on a small part of the site was carried out the following year before it became a scheduled monument in 1959.

According to some scholars the briefly occupied fortifications bear the Latin name Carbantoritum. It was one of a series of military structures put up by the invading armies as they took control of the South of Scotland.

The new investigations over a five-day period at the end of January are part of the exciting Uncovering the Tweed programme which has already been featured in these columns.

In the words of Katie O'Connell, of AOC Archaeology, the specialists leading the Uncovering the Tweed initiative for Tweed Forum, the work at Easter Happrew will offer members of the public the chance to witness a geophysical survey of the fort. "This project will include magnetic gradiometer and earth resistance surveys, providing a hands-on chance to uncover history while learning advanced archaeological techniques."

The aerial photos showed traces of three timber-framed buildings and the 1950s excavation revealed gravel roads in and around the fort. 

According to the project organisers: "There is some evidence for annexes, but they are not clearly understood. The survey will provide a better understanding of the layout and survival of the fort. The ditches which have been levelled by cultivation may still be detectable by gradiometer survey.

"The resistance survey will hopefully map remnants of stone structures, if present, and the layout of roads, while the gradiometer survey may identify postholes associated with wooden structures.  As a result these non-invasive surveys will hopefully provide important information on the layout and development of the site, but also on its current state of preservation following decades of cultivation."

Historic Environment Scotland's entry for the scheduling of the Easter Happrew fort includes additional details.

"The fort is rhomboid in shape measuring around 140m across with three visible entrances, on the east, west and south sides. The north side of the fort has been eroded by the Lyne Water. The aerial photography shows that the fort is bisected by a road.

"There is an annexe measuring around 140m by 70m on the southwest side of the fort. Excavations suggest that the commander's house stood to the north of this road, near the eastern gate and the fort faced south. Outside of the fort on its northeast side are at least three buildings which may be civilian rather than military in nature."

The fort is deemed to be of of national importance because it makes a significant contribution to 'our understanding or appreciation of the past, or has the potential to do so', in particular in relation to the earliest period of Roman occupation of Scotland, and the construction, use, dismantling and abandonment of Roman frontier military installations during this period.

And the scheduling entry adds: "The monument is a rare example of an early Flavian fort in Scotland, apparently unaltered once it was abandoned in favour of the nearby fort at Lyne.

"The monument has research potential which could significantly contribute to our understanding or appreciation of the past, in particular, it holds the potential to enhance our understanding of the early Roman presence within Scotland, including the construction and use of Roman military architecture in the late 1st century AD, the social and economic conditions surrounding them, and their relationships over time, and there is high potential for archaeological evidence to survive in and around the monument."

The monument has significant associations with Gnaeus Julius Agricola, the Roman Governor of Britannia and military commander of multiple campaigns into Scotland during the late 70s and early 80s AD, culminating in his victory in the Battle of Mons Graupius around 83AD. 

The 1956 'dig' revealed important information on the date and character of the fort. These excavations showed that the fort was enclosed by a turf rampart around 8m wide with a ditch 4m wide and around 1.5m deep in front of it. The front portion of the rampart stood on a stone base, presumably to minimise the likelihood that it might collapse into the ditch. 

Behind the rampart was an area of ash, likely from ovens and beyond that lay a gravelled road. A small section of the garrison commander's house (the praetorium) was also uncovered. This was a timber building with wattle and daub walls. The excavations did not show any sign of repair or reconstruction which suggests that the fort was occupied only once and was then never re-occupied.

The survey work at Easter Happrew is due to run from from January 27th-31st.

LIDAR surveys by AOC Archaeology and their band of volunteers may have already pinpointed up to 200 previously unknown historic monuments on sites close to the Tweed from its source near Moffat to the river mouth at Berwick.

Not Just Sheep But Wildlife!

by EWAN LAMB

Borders farmers who would be in the 'front line' should the Eurasian lynx be reintroduced into southern Scotland will have the chance to air their views on the subject at a consultation being staged by the National Sheep Association [NSA] later this month.

Research by The Lifescape Project, a leading partner in the so-called Missing Lynx initiative concluded  that if lynx were to be released in Northumberland, they could grow into a healthy population covering north-west Northumberland, the edge of Cumbria and the bordering areas of southern Scotland. 

But a previous attempt to promote a lynx initiative in the same area eight years ago by the Lynx UK Trust had to be abandoned amid concerns that the proposal could result in the loss of large numbers of lambs and other animals on Borders farms.

An application for a licence to release six lynx into the Kielder Forest was rejected by the then Tory Government after it considered representations, including a submission from Rachael Hamilton, the Conservative Member of the Scottish Parliament for Ettrick, Roxburgh & Berwickshire.

Last year an exhibition promoting the latest initiative toured towns and villages in the Borders and Northumberland in an effort to drum up support for the release of lynx which became extinct in the area during medieval times. 

The campaign is set to continue this year with further exhibitions likely to be staged prior to another licence application being lodged at some point.

The NSA has been involved in several meetings over the past few months with the Missing Lynx personnel, and is now seeking views from farmers to help in forming the association's response to any formal consultation on the issue.

One of two meetings to canvass opinions will be held in St Boswells on January 23rd.

According to the NSA: "We will hear from Nuffield Scholar, Jonny Hanson via video link who will present his report on large carnivore reintroductions. Jonny carried out extensive research with farmers as part of his report".

In summary, Mr Hanson's report says large carnivore reintroductions are likely to be complex, contested and costly endeavours, whether with lynx, or, to an even greater extent, with wolves and bears. 

"The primary challenge with all three species is likely to be the management and governance of coexistence with livestock farming, particularly of sheep. The qualitative findings from this report suggest that there is a degree of consensus, among both farming and rewilding representatives alike, about the scope and scale of these challenges, with both groups citing the varied political, economic, social, legal and environmental dimensions. 

However, agricultural interviewees were more likely to stress the potential negative consequences of reintroductions. Overall, the strategic context for potential large carnivore reintroductions to Britain and Ireland is currently extremely challenging, Mr Hanson concluded.

The Nuffield report states: "The potential reintroductions of wolves, lynx and bears to Britain and Ireland after absences of centuries, or even millennia, is one of the most controversial agri- environmental topics of the century. 

"An application for a trial reintroduction of lynx in England was declined in 2018, with an unrelated project under discussion in Scotland. Yet with successful reintroductions of some non-carnivore species across these islands, from beavers to eagles, the idea is likely to grow in popularity and ambition. But despite the many social, economic and environmental benefits extolled by supporters of reintroductions, the costs and challenges are also significant, with many likely to be borne by livestock farmers. 

"Few studies have considered their perspectives to date. On the other hand, there are numerous examples from around the world of large carnivore conservation successfully coexisting with a range of rural activities and stakeholders, including livestock farming."