Proposal for a National Park in Southwest Scotland: report

Section 1: Introduction

1. In July 2024, Scottish Ministers made a formal proposal under Section 2 of the National Parks (Scotland) Act 2000 for a National Park in Southwest Scotland (covering Galloway and extending into South and East Ayrshire). They also asked NatureScot to act as the statutory reporter on this proposal, as required under Section 3 of the Act. We were required to consult widely on the proposal and to report in light of the responses to the consultation. This report sets out our findings.

Background

2. In 2021, the Scottish Government announced that the time was right to establish a third National Park. This builds on, in its view, the generally positive experience of the existing National Parks in Loch Lomond & the Trossachs and the Cairngorms in caring for two of Scotland’s most special places. A Scottish Parliament debate in June 2022 also demonstrated cross-party support for new National Parks in Scotland and a NatureScot public opinion survey in 2022 indicated that 89% of people in Scotland supported the creation of a new National Park.

3. At that time, Scottish Government did not have a specific area in mind for Park status and instead developed a non-statutory process to seek nominations from local groups. Five areas came forward. They were appraised by an expert panel against the published criteria. Scottish Ministers agreed that the bid put forward by the Galloway National Park Association (GNPA) and the Galloway and Southern Ayrshire Biosphere Reserve (G&SABR) had met all of the appraisal criteria.

4. The bid for a Galloway National Park built on previous work by the GNPA and had been subject to extended discussion locally over many years as well as specific consideration within the local development plan for Dumfries and Galloway. In its report on the support it provided to the bidding groups during 2022/23 on behalf of the Scottish Government, Lateral North noted the following:

Out of all of the areas that [we] facilitated engagement work….. Galloway was clearly the least divided with the conversation much more focused around exploring ideas and opportunities rather than asking questions about what a national park is or the process. This will without a shadow of a doubt be because the GNPA have been promoting their campaign for over 7 years now within the local area so a lot more people are aware of what a national park is and what the process is as well.

The engagement sessions were a mix of people of different backgrounds - farmers and landowners through to dog walkers and artists - which were reflected in their varied comments. The four engagement sessions took place in four very different communities, however there was an overall sense within each of those that the creation of a national park within the area is something that a majority of the community want to see happen.

5. While not everyone was in favour of Park status for area (as the bid itself made clear), the bid was supported in principle by all three local authorities and the South of Scotland Enterprise (SOSE).

6. On the basis of its appraisal, Scottish Ministers initiated the first stage of the statutory process for designating the National Park, appointing NatureScot as the reporter and providing guidance to us about how we should undertake this task.

7. Scottish Ministers will consider NatureScot’s report, including the findings of the public consultation, and consider whether or not they wish to designate the area as Scotland’s third National Park. If they decide to do so, the next step set out in the legislation would be the preparation of a designation order which provides for the National Park to be legally established by the Scottish Parliament. The designation order would first be subject to a further period of public consultation before it is finalised and submitted to the Scottish Parliament for further scrutiny before approval or rejection.

8. Despite an earlier commitment to designate a National Park in this Parliamentary term, no decision to establish a National Park has yet been made with Ministers making clear that they want to use the formal proposal to gauge the level of support locally and nationally for a National Park in the Galloway area and alternatives to it. If having considered NatureScot’s advice as Reporter they agree to proceed with the designation process, Ministers will consider the most appropriate timetable for it.

9. Alternatively, Ministers may decide to withdraw the proposal or undertake further work on it. Under Section 5 of the National Parks (Scotland) 2000 Act, Scottish Ministers also have the power to hold a formal public inquiry to allow examination of those issues which require more detailed scrutiny.

Issues for the Reporter to address

10. As the Reporter, NatureScot was asked to gauge the level of support or opposition to the proposal and alternatives to it. At the same time, we were required to develop the detail of the proposed National Park and seek the views of local people and other stakeholders on it. The starting point for the Reporter investigation into these matters was the bid submitted jointly by the GNPA and G&SABR together with the relevant findings within the Scottish Government’s appraisal panel report.

11. As set out in the reporter requirements under Section 3 of the National Parks (Scotland) Act 2000, Scottish Ministers asked NatureScot to consider and advise them on the following specific matters:

a) the area which it is proposed should be designated as a National Park;

b) the desirability of designating the area in question (with or without modifications) as a National Park;

c) an assessment of whether the conditions in section 2(2) of the 2000 Act are satisfied in relation to the area that has been proposed as a National Park;

d) the functions which it is proposed the National Park authority for the Park should exercise;

e) the proposed governance arrangements for the National Park authority including: the proposed size of the authority; the proposed number of elected members; the proposed number of members appointed by Ministers (including those to be nominated by the local authority/local authorities in the area); the proposed date of election to the board; and any particular expertise, knowledge and skillset that should be represented on the board;

f) consider options for a new National Park authority in Galloway to be cost efficient, contribute to Scotland’s public sector reform agenda and provide value for money for Scotland as a whole;

g) recommend the development of any transitional arrangements in the area prior to designation as a National Park; and,

h) the proposed name of the National Park.

12. In our advice to Ministers, we were asked to report on the engagement and consultation we undertook and how we analysed the views provided including:

a) reporting on who the major stakeholders and interest groups are and how they have been engaged and consulted;

b) providing an analysis of the balance of opinion on the matters considered, including specific reference to the views expressed by local communities and businesses (including those representing agriculture and forestry interests) and by bodies and agencies representative of interests which fall outside our remit; and,

c) ensuring that any views which are those of NatureScot as statutory adviser on natural heritage matters are kept clear and distinct.

13. In accordance with these requirements, this report distinguishes where necessary three separate elements:

i. The range of views expressed by consultees and, where possible, the reasoning behind those views

ii. Discussion and analysis of significant points, the evidence underpinning them and their relevance to the proposal

iii. NatureScot’s advice as Reporter.

14. The views and conclusions set out in this report are based on the analysis of the responses to the consultation. The engagement and consultation work undertaken demonstrated considerable polarisation of views on the proposal. From some quarters there was also distrust in the decision makers and NatureScot’s ability to act as Reporter given our general position of support for new National Parks where these are supported locally. Given these circumstances, we have carefully described the range of views expressed to us and by whom. We have also explained our line of reasoning which we have used to come to our conclusions so that Scottish Ministers can decide on the way forward.

The role of the Reporter

15. Our role as Reporter is separate to our role as natural heritage advisor. As Reporter, we are asked to consider the proposal in terms of the National Park (Scotland) Act 2000 which includes the natural heritage aspects of a National Park, but also a range of other environmental, social, economic and administrative factors. We are also asked to come to a view both in light of our analysis of the consultation we were required to undertake and also the expertise we have as an organisation. In contrast, as natural heritage advisor we are required to focus on core aspects of our remit only. To ensure clarity between our roles, we have therefore presented our advice as natural heritage advisor in a separate letter.

Structure of the report

16. The report deals with the various issues on which NatureScot was asked to report as follows:

Section 2 - The engagement and consultation process

Section 3 - The principle of a National Park in Southwest Scotland

Section 4 - The arrangements for the proposed National Park if Ministers decide to proceed with designation:

• Area
• Powers and functions
• Governance and staffing
• Name
• Other issues

Annex A Requirement for NatureScot to act as the reporter

Annex B List of accompanying reports

Annex C Breakdown of responses from business and organisations

Annex D A selection of quotes from the surveys from individuals, businesses and organisations

Annex E Assessing and selecting the area of the proposed National Park

17. The reports accompanying this advice provide additional detailed information on our approach to the consultation and its analysis, and the results of the detailed analysis of the responses to the separate consultation surveys; the programme of public events and surgeries organised and facilitated by the consultancy Outside the Box (OtB); correspondence; and bespoke engagement with young people. NatureScot also commissioned an independent review of the engagement and consultation process by the Scottish Community Development Centre (SCDC).

Distribution of this report

18. This advice and its supporting reports are all available online. Where respondents have given permission for this, the data from the responses to the surveys are also available on request. We have circulated a summary of the advice to community councils and organisations, local authorities, public bodies and other groups who contributed to the consultation process.

19. Anyone who has questions about any aspect of the report and the process of engagement and consultation which underpinned it should contact NatureScot at NationalParkReporter@nature.scot.