Borders bid for National Park status 'lacked coherence'

by DOUGLAS SHEPHERD

An assessment panel which considered five nominations for the designation of Scotland's third national park rejected a bid from a Borders campaign group and claimed opposition from the local council had been an important factor in their decision.

A rival bid from nearby Galloway will now be taken forward following the approval of Scottish government ministers.

The Borders campaign started in 2016 to promote the benefits of a new designation for an area of the former county of Roxburghshire as a national park adjoining the existing Northumberland National Park on the south side of the Cheviot Hills.

Promoters commissioned an independent study which was published in 2017.  The document claimed that the proposed area met the three conditions for National Park status required by Scottish legislation and reported enthusiastic support from local people, communities and businesses.  

It argued that designation would strengthen the economy within the National Park and the surrounding area, encouraging tourism and attracting other companies to the region. It also suggested that establishing and running a National Park need not be costly but would soon yield a substantial return on investment.

However, campaigners were dealt a devastating blow last December when members of Scottish Borders Council voted 27-2 to back a recommendation by local authority officers not to support the establishment of a park.

The report to council cited potential negative impacts, including increased house prices, additional bureaucracy and pressures on infrastructure and services. Members also criticised the park proposal for not incorporating in its geographical area large parts of the Borders.

Former council leader David Parker declared: "This has been a half-baked proposal since its inception. We have had seven years for the campaign group to set out why we should have a Borders National Park and they have consistently failed to to do that.

“In fact is this is not a Scottish Borders National Park, it’s a bit of Roxburgh National Park, with most of the Borders not included in it."

In their final report published today, the independent panel chaired by Simon Fuller, states: "Whilst smaller than the existing two National Parks, the area proposed (c.136,000 hectares) was deemed by the expert panel to be of an appropriate size for consideration as a National Park. The panel felt the coherence of the proposal could be clearer, particularly in relation to the River Tweed, which featured prominently in the nomination text, but was much less central to the geography of the proposed National Park area."

The panel recognised that a limited number of natural heritage designations within the area were of outstanding national importance with the River Tweed being an important Special Area of Conservation (SAC). However, it was noted that the Tweed fell only partly within the boundary of the nomination.

"In terms of how a National Park in the Borders could meet the special needs of the area, the nomination lacks a coherent assessment of the vision and opportunities for natural heritage enhancement. It demonstrates a good understanding of the pressures and opportunities of National Park designation for enhancement of cultural heritage. The nomination presents a range of issues relating to the sustainable use of natural resources and the area’s social and economic needs, however there is a lack of specific detail about how National Park designation could help to address these issues."

The panel assessment also claimed the role of a National Park in promoting tourism and addressing visitor management issues was not coherently set out in the nomination. 

"It does not appear to take account of wider regional or national strategies. The nomination presents some issues that are of wider strategic importance and identifies the general role of a National Park, however it lacks specific detail of how a National Park in the Borders would address issues such as climate change mitigation and adaptation and nature friendly farming."

The nomination lacked more recent evidence of local support. Support from local businesses and community councils was mentioned but not evidenced. 

"The nomination has not been supported by Scottish Borders Council and a resolution by the Council states that it does not believe that a compelling and cogent case for a National Park in the Scottish Borders has been made. The panel noted that further public and stakeholder engagement and consultation would need to be undertaken to determine the level of local support comprehensively."

The panel’s overall assessment was that the Scottish Borders nomination did not sufficiently meet the appraisal criteria and therefore should not currently be considered for designation as a new National Park. The opposition to the nomination from Scottish Borders Council was also considered to be important.