(This post first appeared as a letter in the Helensburgh Advertiser on Thursday 5th April)
As the Loch Lomond and Trosssachs National Park Authority have now belatedly applied Tree Preservation Orders (TPOs) to the decimated area in Drumkinnon Bay is it not time that the Park were more proactive in protecting other areas within the Park before this happens yet again?
The papers for the Nation Park Authority Board Meeting of 12th March ’18 (Item 9 Organisational Update 8.4.2) indicates other unlawful tree felling as having taken place. This, apparently, was taken to Court but only after members of the public had complained!
Yet in the Planning portal on the Park’s website under “Protecting trees in the National Park” it states that “as part of our responsibility as a Planning Authority, we have a duty to preserve trees … “ .
The Park even employs a Trees and Woodland Advisor who appears to be based at NPA headquarters.
Legally the NPA has the power to apply TPOs, create a planning condition or legal agreement to protect trees on a site during construction and/or post construction and can use planning legislation to protect trees in Conservation areas.
Surely these legal measures should be applied more widely before any more unlawful tree felling takes place in our area and where new planning applications arise, especially for major developments such as Flamingo Land and West Riverside, Balloch (where it is likely that a monorail will be built up in the trees) and the area of Balmaha with mature oak trees (where planning permission has been granted for 12 houses, 8 flats and 2 plots).
After all, the first aim of the National Parks (Scotland )Act 2000 is ‘To conserve and enhance the natural and cultural heritage of the area’. It behoves the National park Authority to do just that!
Nick, thanks for drawing attention to this beyond the blog. With regard to the Balmaha housing development, the planning authority’s planning portal has information about the replanting that will be undertaken to offset the felling. While I agree it is a shame to lose woodland, a balance has to be struck between truly sustainable development (twenty of the twenty-two homes are affordable with a variety of legally binding mechanisms to maintain the affordability of rent and purchase price, in an area where the house prices are truly eye-watering and completely inaccessible to people on modest incomes) and the loss of trees where an agreement has been struck to replace with native species.
Steve, thanks for comment, I am hoping to cover the Balmaha housing planning in a post – I agree affordable housing in the NP is a major issue. Nick
I agree that affordable housing is badly needed in the Park. I am delighted to note that in the case of Balmaha LL&TNPA have placed conditions in perpetuity. I just hope that they also manage the building of this project more closely than they appear to do in other projects such as hydro schemes and related works tracks, and ensure the protection of the remaining ancient woodland on the site.