The section of the Speyside Way between Kincraig and Speybank is a beautiful walk through oak and birch woodland, with a scattering of aspen, hazel and rowan. Though not far from the pinewoods of Glen Feshie, somehow the very occasional pine looks out of place. The strip of woodland along the river is regenerating and full of bird song. There are fine views down onto the Spey, where on Friday goosander were fishing, and out over to Glen Feshie and the Cairngorm plateau. The newer multi-use main path – the older path follows a more direct route above the river – has been well done, with sympathetic materials and is a credit to the Cairngorms National Park.
The recreational experience has changed, however, since the last time I was here, a year or so ago. The peace had gone. Instead, for much of the way, we were accompanied by the noise of traffic. What has changed is that the new section of dual carriageway between Kingussie and Aviemore has opened. I cannot recall hearing any traffic here previously though I do remember hearing the train – the railway track here runs even closer to the Spey and we did hear one pass. The volume was lower and the noise temporary.
I was quite surprised that the woodland did not deaden the noise of the traffic more but it is open, not dense. There are places where you drop down or behind moraine and out of the noise and with an easterly wind or other atmospheric conditions maybe the traffic would be out of earshot. This walk though is unlikely to be the same again until such time as the internal combustion engine gives way to electric power.
It brought home the impact of the new road on the residents of the higher part of Kincraig whose homes must now be blighted by this noise.
The politicians will argue that enabling thousands of people to access the Highlands more quickly – and some of the noise on Friday was created by people, like us, heading north to enjoy a holiday weekend – is vastly more important than the recreational experience at Speybank or local residents. And its quite true few people live here and we saw just a handful of people out walking in a couple of hours. Yet most of the tourists heading north are doing so for that recreational experience and the cumulative impact of the additional noise created through the whole of the Cairngorms National Park by the A9 dualling will be considerable.
A similar situation is faced with the A82 upgrade which is being planned along the north section of Loch Lomond. The noise levels of the existing road on the West Highland Way is already considerable – the loch acts as a sounding board – and can be heard from the summit of Ben Lomond. If the upgraded A82 follows the edge of the loch – as it does with the new section which replaced the traffic lights near Pulpit Rock – the noise will beome even worse.
Both our National Parks should be helping to highlight the increased noise pollution which will inevitably result from the A9 and A82 upgrades and not just treat these road upgrades as another Scottish Government target which has to be met. Road noise impacts on what our National Parks are supposed to be all about – the ability of people to enjoy the natural environment. I hope our National Parks will push for more public debate on this issue nationally, based on the experience of the road upgrades in the last couple of years, and argue strongly that the roads are designed in a way that minimises noise. For the people who live along the line of the old A9 through Kincraig there is nothing to baffle the noise from the new section of road. While there are no are no easy solutions, apart from electric cars – a major road is a major road – I am sure the design could be improved and undergrounding and tunnelling in places – particularly along Loch Lomond – would make a real difference.
Tunnelling at present has been ruled out by Transport Scotland on grounds of costs – but what price our National Parks? Public debate on noise pollution might persuade our government to make the investments necessary.
The answer to most of the pollution issues to do with private transport (electric vehicles included – their small particulate pollution levels are comparable to any other vehicle that has similar brake disk design) is more and better public transport. Unlike England and Wales, virtually all of the train tracks ripped up last century have not been built on in Scotland – and certainly not in the Highlands. Putting them back is much more economic. The logic is obvious – but where is the political will to think longer term, and, the really difficult bit, show leadership and sell longer term benefits to the voters?
It’s much easier to control the noise pollution of, say, a particular design of trains and a particular train line – than the random set of private transport options that trundle up and down the A82. It’s also easier to justify, as the cost vs benefit is much lower.
Why does Transport Scotland rule out tunnelling on the grounds of cost? Any long journey on the roads of western Norway cannot be completed without passing through innumerable tunnels, some old, many new and with others planned or under construction. Any Norwegian roads engineer looking at Pulpit Rock on the A82 would regard the Transport Scotland solution there as plain daft. A major re-think is needed before any more mistakes are made at critical points on the A82, A9 and other locations where tunnelling would be a better option.
Excessive traffic noise affecting the Speyside Way is a direct result of landowner resistance to the construction of this long distance trail. It is remarkable how little of this trail actually passes close by the River Spey, or even within sight of the world famous river. Too many landowners have been allowed to preserve the exclusivity of the river banks in defiance of the public interest. This needs to be corrected with alternative routes promoted along the river banks for those who want to enjoy the scenery and escape the traffic noise while walking or cycling the Speyside Way. A good place to start developing alternative routes would be on Kinrara estate between Aviemore and Kincraig.
Dave, to the best of my knowledge Transport Scotland does not rule out tunnelling.
A tunnel was one of the option considered for the Pulpit Rock improvements. It was discounted because of the presence of the West Highland Railway tunnel through the same obstruction above and to the immediate west. The close proximity of the two routes at the southern portal would have required massive temporary works to maintain traffic along the A82 so was discounted at the planning stage.
I struggle to think of other locations on the main highland trunk road networks requiring tunnels (certainly not along the A9 corridor).
Graham, I can think of several places in Scotland where tunnelling might provide good solutions on trunk roads: the A82 south of pulpit rock; the A83 on the Rest and be Thankful where the attempt to stabilise the hillside has marred the landscape and not solved the problem – why not tunnel under Beinn Luibhean?; the A82 through Glen Coe which is also sometimes closed by landslides from the Aonach Eagach; up at Loch Carron. If we had one decent tunnelling machine for Scotland we could address all these issues over a number of years
It may be a beautiful walk, though I suspect some if it could be better, but for cycling (one of its advertised uses) it’s a pretty horrible botch. A poorly thought out surface, already badly rutted, especially on the tight downhill bends; a plethora of gates, most there apparently either to provide employment for a fencer or as a statement of ownership; and gradients and cambers enough to render it scary for the inexperienced.
Not hard enough to be a challenge, tedious to commute on, off putting for children. It really could have been better.
Ian, this is very interesting – we kept to the footpath mostly and certainly on the steep bits and I did not really think about the other path from a cycling perspective though there was a sign warning of tight bends!
Agree the views from the footpath are good – always have been, and it’s a nice path. At the Aviemore end the path is already breaking up, in part because some of it clearly gets ATV use (estate vehicles?)
In one part the tight bends come with a 20% gradient and a chicane at the bottom to “protect” cyclists from the estate road!