National Parks’ Squeeze
The front page article in the July edition of Comment raises a number of interesting questions regarding the future of Highland Perthshire if it becomes squeezed between two expanding National Parks.
http://www.commentonline.co.uk/general/SandwichedParksPressureHighlandPerthshire.htm
The well publicised southward expansion of the Cairngorms Park to Blair Atholl appears to have significant local support and in many ways this is a natural geographical boundary. The possible expansion of the Loch Lomond & Trossachs National Park (LLTNP) to include Loch Tay is a more recent phenonomen.
Whatever the merits of these moves it is clear that, if they were to expand and get bigger, then the bit in between that is outwith these Parks can only get smaller in that same process. The areas just outside designated sites, be they a National Park or an SSSI, are always affected by such designations. Sometimes the effects are good, sometimes not.
It is often said that being just outside a National Park is the worst place to be because of the reasons articulated in the previous article. It is easier building outside the Park than within, including the tourist infra-structure that inevitably springs up at each entrance to that Park to service it. This does create welcome economic activity, but potential problems as well. What would it be like living in an area that was just outside two National Parks, maybe only ten miles apart? Would an expanded LLTNP, for example, breath a bit more life into Aberfeldy, or would the effects be more negative?
Is a buffer zone required between National Parks, and, if so, how big should it be? Would a National Park lose part of it’s individual identity if it was too closely associated with a neighbouring Park? If two Parks get into the habit of expanding, will they both sit tight and ignore anything that remains in between, or would one be tempted to try and grab it before the other does, and what political effects would that have? Actually, there is a continuous band of mountains all the way through Perthshire, so is any one really any less important than the others? I suspect probably not.
Could the LLTNPA be expanded to take in Loch Tay alone, creating as it would an odd-looking protrusion that could only be referred to in a derogatory manner thereafter? And what would this new body be called? The Loch Lomond and Trossachs and Loch Tay National Park Authority( LLTLTNPA)? The current name is unwieldy enough!
If over-development is an issue on Loch Tay, surely it is possible to deal with that through the normal planning system? Land managers do not need to be within a National Park to benefit from it as there is already a porous boundary effect where they might benefit from training schemes and other measures if they are just outside. Highland Perthshire is an important link between the Parks, but we do not need to be in one or the other to get some benefit from them, and we can preserve their individual integrity (and our own) by keeping them a safe distance apart.
It might be an idea for people in Highland Perthshire to have these discussions in the near future and debate where this process might be going before it becomes too established. Otherwise we will end up sitting like an owl on a fence post in the middle, continually looking one way, and then the other, wondering who is going to make a move next, and what we should do to avoid the squeeze.
Victor Clements
Recent Comments