SHAMED continue to oppose SACs
Oct 28th, 2009 | By ssacn | Category: Other OrganisationsUpdate ::
An angry crowd walked out of the SNH meeting on Barra after being barred from airing their views on creating marine national parks in the sea around the island.
SNH was holding one of its “meet the public” meetings when it was faced with vociferous demonstrations against proposals to bring rich fishing grounds under two Special Areas of Conservation (SACs).
The conservation body had infuriated islanders by lodging a hugely-important scientific study, which some islanders claim skirts around any negative economic impact on the human population, to Scottish Environment Minister Roseanna Cunningham in advance of its public meeting at Castlebay, Barra.
Full Press and Journal article here.
===========
Campaign group Southern Hebrides Against Marine Environmental Designations (SHAMED), has written to Roseanna Cunningham, minister for the environment and rural affairs, and to Ian Jardine, asking why, in the face of such strong opposition, they are persisting with the proposal for two proposed marine Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) in the Sound of Barra and off the island of Mingulay.
People in Barra are also being urged to turn out in force and attend a meeting with the chairman and officials from Scottish Natural Heritage(SNH), to make clear their opposition to the two SACs .
The proposal has aroused strong opposition from fishermen who claim their fishing interests and the fish factory at Ardveenish will be affected. They also claim that any other marine developments, such as marine windfarms, and the proposal for giant deepwater salmon farms by fish farming giant Marine Harvest, will be forbidden.
A SAC was proposed for the Sound of Barra in 2000, but it was suspended after fierce local opposition. The SAC, which will cover 10,849 hectares, is being proposed afresh to safeguard sandbanks and because of the presence of common seals.
The 30,527 hectare SAC for the Mingulay reefs will protect coldwater coral, the only inshore corals known in the UK. The people of Barra feel that opposition nine years ago was disregarded and that SNH continued the process of creating the Sound of Barra SAC, and a new one off Mingulay, behind their backs.
The proposal has still to be put through formal public consultation. Once that is done, then ministers will have to decide if the proposed SACs will be forwarded to the European Commission. Ian Jardine, chief executive of Scottish Natural Heritage, has insisted that ministers still have the power to decide not to undertake the consultation, and even if they consult, they could decide not to take the matter further.
Angus MacLeod, chairman of SHAMED, said: “When we objected eight years ago, we did not get a response from SNH, even though our scientific case destroyed any reasons put up by SNH to designate the site. We can’t see why the proposal can’t be dropped just as it was dropped for a proposed SAC in Shetland.”
“Ministers are looking at the documentation submitted by SNH and then they will decide if they proceed to public consultation and whether or not to designate those sites. It is up to ministers to decide whether to propose these sites or not. There has been so much opposition that ministers will look very carefully at any consultation before they taken a decision. I wouldn’t want to suggest they would just rubber stamp anything. It’s not a foregone conclusion that even after consultation they will submit a site.”
He added: “Our communities have indicated very clearly that our future plans do not include large zones of the seabed being removed from local control and placed into the hands of a conservation quango. But SNH, in persisting with surveys since 2000, working in secrecy with the JNCC and, more recently, in producing draft proposals for an even greater area to be zoned in perpetuity for conservation, has clearly brushed aside any indigenous aims for the local economy, which are on public record, with a view to imposing its own conservation vision over vast areas of the seabed and foreshore. These resources are of vital importance to our local communities and we have been successfully managing them to date.”
Mr MacLeod also asked Mr Jardine to explain his remark in a letter to Western Isles MSP Alasdair Allan saying: “I don’t think however that it is any easy option for Government to pull back now as the quality of the site seems pretty clear”.
Mr MacLeod said that this made the consultation appear to be a farce, and that any scientific evidence gathered by the community to counter the proposal would be a waste of time and money.
Ian Jardine said: “When I said it wasn’t an easy thing to stop now, I meant before going to consultation. No way does that bind ministers and there is a world of difference between what is not easy and what is impossible. It is the ministers’ decision to take. If I speculate a bit, my expectation is that if ministers decide not to proceed with these sites, they will be asked be asked by the European Commission to propose other sites. The UK submitted a long list of sites to be protected under European law and the Commission said they thought there were gaps in it. The proposal for the Sound of Barra is to plug a gap in the list. If ministers say that they don’t think this site is the right answer, I would expect the Commission will ask them what they want to do about the gap that still remains.”
Mr MacLeod said: “We want as many people as possible to turn out to the meeting with SNH on Thursday in Barra. SNH officials have told us things that appear to contradict each other, and they appear unwilling to listen to the local community. We are pretty clear that the Scottish Government could stop this if they wanted to. They have no understanding of the damage this will cause to the local community and how it will restrict fishing and stop any future marine development. I suspect that this might also make Marine Harvest think twice about their proposals for large fish farms and the jobs that will bring. It will be far easier for them to locate these in areas not affected by SACs where they will have to do far less preparatory work to get development permission.”
Related posts:
