Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill scrutinised by Rural Committee

Wednesday (5 March) saw the Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill reach the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee in Holyrood. This is the first stage of scrutiny following the publication of the Bill last month. The Scottish Countryside Alliance, along with partner organisations, including The Association of Deer Management Groups, have been combing the proposed legislation to ensure that it accurately reflects what our sector needs, and that each addition or change is underpinned by experience or science. Much of the Bill is as expected, but some areas fell short of our expectations.

National Parks

Government Policy Officials and their legal representatives were quizzed on new legislation relating to National Parks. With the proposed site in Dumfries and Galloway firmly in focus, it was suggested that the recent public consultation was conducted based on ageing legislation, and any new legislation may introduce policies that have not properly been considered at the consultation stage. It was also suggested by Tim Eagle, MSP that the local economic complexities of developing a new National Park in Dumfries and Galloway lacked any detail in the legislation. Officials stated that the new laws would go some way to updating the existing National Parks (Scotland) Act 2000.

Fixed penalty notices were discussed, and some clarity was offered in relation to how this may simplify the addressing of potentially new offences, such as lighting fires or BBQs in restricted areas. The Scottish Countryside Alliance will seek to ensure that the introduction of any new law is sufficiently publicised, and that education comes before sanction.

Deer

Much discussion took place in relation to some significant adaptations to the Deer (Scotland) Act 1996. It is agreed and understood that legislation needs to remain contemporary, so long as the work undertaken is done in conjunction with those who it affects and with industry experts in an advisory capacity. Deer Management Nature Restoration Orders (DMNRO’s) seem to have been dropped in name, but the power reach appears still to be present whereby the Scottish Government may enforce deer culls, passing on cost recovery in full to the landowner/occupier.

From the outset, Scottish Government policy officials seemed somewhat unsure of their own responses and were outwardly cautious when trying to explain their rationale behind some changes. They were asked about why ministers felt the need to adapt current legislation and in what areas current legislation wasn’t working. The response encircled the perceived loss of powers as the UK exited the EU as well as this being a way to enhance environmental standards in order to aid the objective of meeting environmental goals.

As part of an explanation, Hugh Dignon, Head of Wildlife Management at the Scottish Government, stated that there are a number of things that have “got in the way” and that they were trying to address this. Mr Dignon also spoke about interventions (by NatureScot) and stated that there were “obstacles that have got in the way of that”. The language used doesn’t suggest that the new legislation is for the good of all, and that it has the welfare of both the deer and the sanctioned party in mind, but more that the new laws will just pave the way for ministers to do as they wish, without barriers. Explanations were often a bit wishy-washy, and the phrase “power-grab” has been used more than once within our sector of late.

When pressed by Emma Harper, MSP on what the Scottish Government deem to be “Fit and Competent”, it was clear that there was a lack of understanding in relation to what a Firearm Certificate (FAC) is. It was explained that competency related to training, which would make sense, but the word “fit” is to be added to the Deer (Scotland) Act. Mr Dignon alluded to fit being in possession of a FAC and therefore one is fit to cull deer. This is not the case. Police Scotland may issue a FAC to anyone they deem safe enough to hold a firearm. This does not make you a competent deer stalker and, in some cases, rifles have been held by target shooters and pest controllers who have never shot a deer in decades of owning a rifle. Better knowledge of these practicalities needs to be formed before legislation is created, and this is where the Scottish Government should be seeking our help instead of introducing meaningless additions on a perceived understanding.

After further pressing by Convener Finlay Carson, MSP, it was deciphered that NatureScot would make the final decision on who would be responsible for the deer management and be served the control plan/order. The confusion had begun in the draft Bill where, in some cases, it stated that the landowner and occupier (stalker) would be served an enforcement plan, yet later in the bill it states landowner or occupier. Yet more legal uncertainty. Worryingly, when asked by Tim Eagle, MSP, officials seemed to confirm that once NatureScot had identified that they were not satisfied with the population of deer in an area, an enforced cull plan would be issued without any negotiation or discussion with the responsible party. Focus seems to be on meeting targets or goals, rather than working with our rural industry, a common theme over the past few years.

We would like to thank those MSPs that allowed us the time to offer our understanding and concerns prior to this committee session, and with Stage 2 due to be debated later in 2025, we hope for a bit more clarity in some areas. The Scottish Countryside Alliance will continue to engage with MSPs, ministers and government officials and will offer any assistance in clearing up some of the ambiguity within this bill.

Watch the full committee meeting here.about this blogabout this blog