Strategic Framework for Biodiversity consultation response

Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity 14 The Square Grant­own on Spey PH26 3HG

T: 01479 873 535

11 Decem­ber 2023

Dear Cate

Tack­ling the Nature Emer­gency — stra­tegic frame­work for biodiversity

Please find attached the response from the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity to the Stra­tegic Frame­work for Biod­iversity con­sulta­tion. Please do not hes­it­ate to get in touch to dis­cuss any of the issues raised.

Yours sin­cerely

Grant Moir Chief Exec­ut­ive Officer

---

Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity – Con­sulta­tion Response

The con­sulta­tion on Scotland’s Stra­tegic Frame­work for Biod­iversity is of great import­ance to the future of the Cairngorms Nation­al Park and the Authority.

Please find below the response from the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity which was agreed at the board meet­ings of 27 Octo­ber and 24 Novem­ber 2023.

Sec­tion 2 – Scot­tish Biod­iversity Deliv­ery Plan

Con­sulta­tion Ques­tion: Have we cap­tured the key actions needed to deliv­er the object­ives? Are the key actions suf­fi­cient to put Scot­land on track to end­ing the loss of biod­iversity by 2030? Which actions do you think will have most impact?

Scotland’s Nation­al Parks and Park Author­it­ies have a key role in deliv­er­ing the Scot­tish Biod­iversity Strategy. This should be recog­nised more fully in the Deliv­ery Plan.

The Park Author­ity is very sup­port­ive of the key actions described in the Deliv­ery Plan. There is sig­ni­fic­ant align­ment with object­ives in the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Part­ner­ship Plan and the Park Author­ity recog­nises and wel­comes the ambi­tion for Nation­al Parks to act as exem­plars of biod­iversity pro­tec­tion and recovery.

Many of the key actions are dir­ectly reflec­ted in the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Part­ner­ship Plan where the Park Author­ity is coordin­at­ing deliv­ery by a wide range of stake­hold­ers. The Park Author­ity is keen to con­tin­ue to work closely with Scot­tish Gov­ern­ment and part­ners to con­tin­ue to demon­strate a lead­ing role in tak­ing for­ward the key actions on the ground.

The Park Author­ity agrees with the key actions as being suf­fi­cient. How­ever, whilst the key actions are suf­fi­cient in the range of activ­ity, the imper­at­ive need to act at speed and scale will require invest­ment and resource. Deliv­ery of key actions will also be depend­ent on the involve­ment of stake­hold­ers, land man­agers and across sec­tors. Sup­port for the key actions must come from a range of incent­ives, reg­u­la­tions and align­ment of policy. We wel­come acknow­ledge­ment in the key actions that biod­iversity recov­ery must be main­streamed into oth­er areas of Scot­tish Gov­ern­ment policy and is an import­ant part of the fair and just transition.

---

Sec­tion 3 – Nature Net­works Policy Framework

Con­sulta­tion Ques­tion: Do you have any com­ments on the Nature Net­works Framework?

The Park Author­ity wel­comes the vis­ion for ‘…evolving, flex­ible and resi­li­ent Nature Net­works allow­ing wild­life and nat­ur­al pro­cesses to adapt to land use and chan­ging cli­mate pres­sures.’ How­ever, this vis­ion is at odds with the cur­rent des­ig­na­tions in the Cairngorms, which are not allow­ing the flex­ib­il­ity and read­i­ness to adapt as the vis­ion describes.

The Park Author­ity would like to see a review of the des­ig­na­tion sys­tem to allow for a more mobile and adapt­ive approach to pro­tect­ing biod­iversity which allows the neces­sary change in the landscape.

The Park Author­ity is very sup­port­ive of the guid­ing prin­ciples for Nature Net­works to meet loc­al needs and object­ives, with a focus on empower­ing and equip­ping deliv­ery part­ners, and involving part­ner­ships and com­munit­ies. The Park Author­ity would like to see Nation­al Park Author­it­ies overtly recog­nised as being respons­ible for deliv­er­ing Nature Net­works, along­side Loc­al Authorities.

Sec­tion 4 – 20×30 Framework

Con­sulta­tion Ques­tion: Do you have any com­ments on the 30 by 30 Framework?

The vis­ion and prin­ciples for deliv­ery of 30 x 30 are con­sist­ent with deliv­ery of the Nation­al Park Part­ner­ship Plan and the wider work of the Park Author­ity. The cri­ter­ia for selec­tion and des­ig­na­tion of 30 x 30 sites will have sig­ni­fic­ant impact on deliv­ery of the Nation­al Park Part­ner­ship plan objectives.

The cur­rent cri­ter­ia of des­ig­nated sites being part of the 30% of Scot­land pro­tec­ted for nature will be a sig­ni­fic­ant bar­ri­er to the Nation­al Park being an exem­plar of nature res­tor­a­tion and achiev­ing the Nation­al Park Part­ner­ship Plan out­come for ‘…a biod­iversity rich Nation­al Park with bet­ter func­tion­ing, bet­ter con­nec­ted and more resi­li­ent ecosystems’.

---

The Park Author­ity feels there is a good oppor­tun­ity to con­sider the way the des­ig­nated sites are deliv­er­ing for future eco­lo­gic­al needs in the Nation­al Park as part of the 30 x 30 process.

The Park Author­ity recom­mends con­sid­er­ing mech­an­isms for one, over­arch­ing des­ig­na­tion for the cent­ral mas­sif and sur­round­ing areas in the core of the Cairngorms, such as an Inter­na­tion­al Uni­on Con­ser­va­tion Nature Cat­egory 2 Nation­al Park or a Nature Recov­ery OECM. This would encom­pass nature pro­tec­tion and recov­ery ambi­tions and enable a more mobile, adapt­ive frame­work for des­ig­nat­ing areas for their poten­tial, enabling action to reach a future state rather than pro­tect a cur­rent one.

Where desir­able, com­mit­ments in cur­rent des­ig­na­tions would be met in a more dynam­ic fash­ion, allow­ing the des­ig­nated fea­tures and out­comes to have tem­por­al and spa­tial flex­ib­il­ity as part of nat­ur­al pro­cesses whilst retain­ing their nature and extent with­in an over­all, land­scape-scale des­ig­na­tion. We recog­nise it is import­ant for any new mech­an­ism to retain safe­guard­ing and account­ab­il­ity for fea­tures that are still con­sidered to be nation­ally and inter­na­tion­ally import­ant. We feel these safe­guards and com­mit­ments could be retained and over­seen through the Nation­al Park Part­ner­ship Plan and sub­sequent Cairngorm Nature plans.

It is also import­ant that any future sys­tem is developed with the col­lab­or­a­tion of land man­agers, com­munit­ies and interest groups.

The Park Author­ity would like to see a review and reform of the cur­rent des­ig­na­tion sys­tem in the Nation­al Park to identi­fy which hab­it­at and spe­cies out­comes should be retained and which are overly pre­script­ive and/​or restrict­ive, with­in a new land­scape- scale des­ig­na­tion for the cent­ral core of the Nation­al Park.

Sec­tion 6 — Stat­utory Tar­gets for Nature Restoration

Con­sulta­tion Ques­tion: Do you agree with the approach, cri­ter­ia, scope, top­ics, timeline, report­ing and review of stat­utory targets?

The Park Author­ity agrees with pro­pos­al to place nature res­tor­a­tion tar­gets on a stat­utory foot­ing and that they are able to adapt and be flex­ible with fur­ther detail to be added in sec­ond­ary legis­la­tion with review, report­ing and inde­pend­ent over­sight processes.

---

It is sug­ges­ted that tar­get top­ics cov­er the indir­ect drivers of biod­iversity loss as well as biot­ic and abi­ot­ic factors. The Park Author­ity appre­ci­ates the chal­lenge of identi­fy­ing and mon­it­or­ing met­rics that work at a nation­al and inter­na­tion­al scale that would also adequately reflect region­al cir­cum­stances. The Park Author­ity is devel­op­ing the Cairngorms Nature Index for baselin­ing and mon­it­or­ing eco­lo­gic­al func­tion­al­ity and biod­iversity in the Nation­al Park. We look for­ward to the oppor­tun­ity in fur­ther con­sulta­tion to identi­fy oppor­tun­it­ies for sup­port­ing mon­it­or­ing of Nation­al Park Part­ner­ship Plan deliv­ery and syn­er­gies with the Cairngorms Nature Index.

Sec­tion 7 – Nation­al Parks

Ques­tion 7a: Do you agree that the pur­pose of Nation­al Park author­it­ies should be amended in order to emphas­ise the import­ant lead­er­ship role that Nation­al Park author­it­ies need to play in restor­ing nature and in mit­ig­at­ing and adapt­ing to cli­mate change?

The Park Author­ity sup­port this amend­ment to the pur­pose of Nation­al Park Author­it­ies. The Park Author­ity does want to make sure that the role of people and place is reflec­ted in pro­posed changes to the legislation.

Ques­tion 7b – 7^e: Do you agree with the sug­ges­ted change to the Nation­al Park aims?

The Park Author­ity sup­ports the pro­posed changes to the Nation­al Park aims. The Park Author­ity how­ever would wish to input into the final word­ing of the aims as some of the lan­guage is cur­rently slightly clunky e.g. his­tor­ic envir­on­ment assets.

Ques­tion 7f: Do you agree that the Nation­al Park ​‘prin­ciple’ set out in sec­tion 9(6) of the 2000 Act should be retained? This would mean that, if there is a con­flict between the Nation­al Park aims, great­er weight should be giv­en to the first aim which would seek to pro­tect, restore and enhance the nat­ur­al assets, biod­iversity and eco­sys­tems with­in the Nation­al Park.

The Park Author­ity sup­ports the reten­tion of the Nation­al Park ​‘prin­ciple’ as key back­stop for Nation­al Park man­age­ment and it apply­ing to the new first aim.

Ques­tion 7g: Do you agree that pub­lic bod­ies oper­at­ing with­in the Nation­al Park should have regard to the pro­posed Nation­al Park aims?

---

The Park Author­ity sup­ports pub­lic bod­ies hav­ing regard to the aims. The Park Author­ity would like cla­ri­fic­a­tion wheth­er the term ​‘pub­lic bod­ies’ cov­ers Loc­al Author­it­ies and organ­isa­tions work­ing on behalf of a pub­lic body e.g. man­aging agents.

Ques­tion 7h: Do you agree that pub­lic bod­ies oper­at­ing with­in the Nation­al Park should have regard to the Nation­al Park principle?

The Park Author­ity sup­ports pub­lic bod­ies oper­at­ing with­in the Nation­al Park hav­ing regard to the Nation­al Park ​‘prin­ciple’ and request that this is applied to the Scot­tish Government’s Plan­ning and Envir­on­ment­al Appeals Divi­sion and Scot­tish Min­is­ters when it is deal­ing with any plan­ning appeals. This is to ensure that plan­ning applic­a­tions are being con­sidered against the same cri­ter­ia at dif­fer­ent levels of the process.

Ques­tion 7i: Do you agree that the duty on pub­lic bod­ies oper­at­ing with­in Nation­al Parks should be strengthened so they have an oblig­a­tion to sup­port and con­trib­ute to the imple­ment­a­tion of Nation­al Park Plans rather than hav­ing regard to these plans?

The Park Author­ity strongly sup­ports the duty on oth­er pub­lic bod­ies oper­at­ing with­in the Nation­al Park being strengthened so they have an oblig­a­tion to sup­port and con­trib­ute to the imple­ment­a­tion of Nation­al Park Plans rather than hav­ing regard to these plans.

Ques­tion 7j: Do you agree with the pro­pos­al that Nation­al Park Author­it­ies should be able to enforce byelaw breaches with­in Nation­al Parks by issu­ing fixed pen­alty notices rather than refer­ring them to loc­al Pro­cur­at­ors Fiscal?

The Park Author­ity sup­ports that Nation­al Park Author­it­ies should be able to enforce byelaw breaches with­in Nation­al Parks by issu­ing fixed pen­alty notices rather than refer­ring them to loc­al Pro­cur­at­ors Fiscal.

Ques­tion 7k: Do you think that any oth­er changes should be made to the gen­er­al powers of Nation­al Park authorities?

---

The Park Author­ity sup­ports powers asso­ci­ated with rights of way being trans­ferred from Loc­al Author­it­ies to Park Author­it­ies. This would be in line with the Park Author­ity being the Access Author­ity for the area.

The Park Author­ity sup­ports revi­sions to Man­age­ment Rules with­in the cur­rent legis­la­tion to update them and poten­tially allow a com­pre­hens­ive suite of man­age­ment rules to be adap­ted by each indi­vidu­al Nation­al Park Author­ity to suit the cir­cum­stances in the loc­al area.

Ques­tion 7l: Do you agree with the pro­posed changes to the gov­ernance of Nation­al Parks?

The Park Author­ity Board sup­ports the exist­ing gov­ernance arrange­ment for the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity. The Board believes the cur­rent struc­ture and size provides a com­pre­hens­ive approach cov­er­ing both loc­al and nation­al interests and is right for the Cairngorms Nation­al Park.

The Park Author­ity Board does not sup­port a reduc­tion in the size of the Board nor a change in the split of the pro­por­tions from the dif­fer­ent appoint­ment pro­cesses. This is espe­cially import­ant, giv­en the pres­ence of five loc­al author­it­ies with­in the bound­ar­ies of the Nation­al Park.

How­ever, if there is a reduc­tion to the size of the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity Board the pref­er­ence is for a 5÷5÷5 split between the three cat­egor­ies (elec­ted, min­is­teri­al, nom­in­ated by LA). This change, whilst not the Boards pref­er­ence, does at least retain the cur­rent approach of hav­ing the three dif­fer­ent ways of get­ting onto the Board and provides continuity.

The Park Author­ity Board strongly sup­ports the elec­tion of the Con­vener and Deputy Con­vener by the Board as this is seen as provid­ing loc­al accountability.

Ques­tion 7m: Do you have any oth­er com­ments that you would like to make about the aims, powers and gov­ernance of Nation­al Parks?

The Park Author­ity would like to see a stronger role and gov­ernance over­sight for the Park Author­ity Board regard­ing pub­lic land with­in the Nation­al Park. This would allow for great­er coher­ence of approach by the pub­lic sec­tor with­in this inter­na­tion­ally recog­nised area. The Park Author­ity would like to see the poten­tial trans­fer of public

---

land in the Nation­al Park to the Author­ity to provide great­er loc­al account­ab­il­ity and would wel­come a fur­ther dis­cus­sion with Scot­tish Gov­ern­ment around this issue.

The Park Author­ity would like to see the power devolved to the Park Author­ity to poten­tially imple­ment a core area approach in the Nation­al Park (poten­tially an OECM – Oth­er Effect­ive Area-based Con­ser­va­tion Meas­ures approach) that would help to deliv­er on nature and cli­mate tar­gets. This would tie in with the policies and object­ives of the Nation­al Park Part­ner­ship Plan but would need sig­ni­fic­ant dis­cus­sion with part­ners in the Cairngorms and at the Park Author­ity board to look at poten­tial models.