Thank you, convener, and good morning to Alex Hogg. In the interests of transparency, I should say that Alex Hogg and I have known each other since he first gave evidence on Lord Watson’s bill, which I believe was 25 years ago. We have since become friends, and I am also a supporter of the Scottish Gamekeepers Association, although I cannot remember whether I have paid my annual subscription. Having made a clean breast of it, as it were, I will move to questions.

First, Mr Hogg, why is predator control required as a species conservation tool? I think that the main point of your petition is to acknowledge that that is the case. Could you explain why predator control is required and talk us through the main methods used by gamekeepers and the role that gamekeepers, in particular, play in species conservation?

What species are most at risk if there is an absence of the predator control that has historically been carried out?

Is that because the predators regard the eggs as breakfast, lunch and tea?

I believe that there is an agriculture bill coming forward and that next year sometime perhaps the Government will come forward with specific proposals about how future financial support for the rural economy should be dealt with. Are you saying that you think that predator control, recognising its value for species conservation, should be a recipient of an element of that future funding?

I have one final question. I am sure that other members of the committee wish to pursue other points, but I have a constituency interest here in relation to the capercaillie.

I think that Mr Hogg has stated that, despite the millions—tens of millions, I think; huge amounts of money—that has been expended with the aim of trying to protect the capercaillie population and see it not fall but grow, we have lost over 50 per cent of the remaining birds in five years. Is that right? Can you expand on that?

If they did employ keepers, we might have some chance of seeing species, including the caper, recover. Instead, we have had the great caper caper, as it were, with millions being blown. I will finish there.

I have a question on zoning. It is always good to have specific recommendations from witnesses rather than generalised commentary. I will take capercaillie as an example. There has traditionally been a capercaillie population in Strathspey. How big would the zones be? Can you expand on how the extent of the zoning would be assessed? Would it be helpful if local gamekeepers were part of the process and they helped to identify which areas should be subject to the measure and controlled? Should there be a requirement that gamekeepers are consulted so that we get the right areas zoned?

Gamekeepers could not only carry out the control but also be key advisers, given the work that they do on the ground. Am I right to say that only they have that knowledge as those who criticise predator control, unlike you, tend not to work in the countryside? Keepers would not only do the work but be instrumental in guiding the policy and shaping which areas need to be zoned in order to protect the songbirds, capercaillie and other species that are at risk, which might otherwise become extinct.

I respectfully agree that I do not think that a site visit is required or that we should take oral evidence from Transport Scotland. However, there appears to be a slight conflict in the evidence on exactly what analysis Transport Scotland has carried out on the apparent high road option. My impression on rereading the correspondence and submissions is that Transport Scotland has carried out some analytical work on the option and has concluded that it is not practical. I think that clarification of that in a letter would be very useful.

I would also like Transport Scotland to confirm how much a STAG report would cost, how long it would take and whether it thinks that it might delay the project further. Despite the objections that the petitioners have very sincerely set out, the fact is that a far greater number of people on the west coast—in Oban and Fort William—use this route as their link with the world and the Tarbet to Inverarnan stretch is arguably the worst section of an A-road in Scotland. There are routinely accidents, delays, damage to wing mirrors and so on, and I think that many people feel anxious about driving that section, as I did for many years when I represented Lochaber. A huge number of people want the A82 to become a proper road, so, while respecting the petitioner’s wishes, I think that it is useful to put that on the record out of a sense of balance.

I think that the witnesses from whom we heard—Mr Cook, Mr Barnett and Alison Dickie—indicated that one of the problems with public inquiries is that they take such a long time and that part of the rationale for having the proposed whistleblowing service that they advocate is that things can happen at the time, not after the kids concerned become adults when, frankly, the events will have long drifted out of the memory of those involved. Could we in writing to the children’s commissioner draw that specific point to the commissioner’s attention? After all, it does seem to be a gap. We could draw it to the minister’s attention, too, because if the point is not granted and dealt with, I do not think that we will have made much progress with this petition.

I just wanted to make the point, convener, because it was made in the evidence that we heard.