Seòmar agus comataidhean

Agenda item 2 is an evidence session on the draft delivery plan to accompany the Scottish Government’s new biodiversity strategy. The committee is continuing work that we started in late 2022, when we took evidence on the draft strategy. On 12 December, we discussed the delivery plan with a panel of experts on marine biodiversity. This morning, we will hear from a panel of experts and stakeholders on the terrestrial aspects of the plan.

I am pleased to welcome Dr Caroline Brown, director for Scotland, Ireland and English regions at the Royal Town Planning Institute; Sarah Cowie, policy manager for the National Farmers Union Scotland; Dr Paul Walton, head of habitats and species for RSPB Scotland; and Bruce Wilson, head of policy advocacy for the Scottish Wildlife Trust. Joining us remotely is Ailsa Raeburn, chairperson for Community Land Scotland.

I point out to those watching and to committee members that Dr Hannah Rudman, who was down to attend as a witness, has been unable to attend. Thank you to all those who have attended. I am pleased to welcome Finlay Carson MSP and Rhoda Grant MSP from the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee, who are in attendance for today’s evidence session. You will both get a chance to ask questions nearer to the end of the evidence session.

We will spend about 90 minutes on this session and move straight into committee members’ questions. Before we do, because the evidence is on the biodiversity strategy on land, I will make a voluntary declaration of interest and remind members that my entry in the register of members’ interests shows that I am a member of a family farming partnership—we farm land—and that I am also involved in a wild salmon fishery, where I am a partner. Both of those have possible relevance to what we are discussing this morning. Full details can be found in my entry in the register of members’ interests.

On that note, I turn to the first questions, which come from Douglas Lumsden.

We can now, but we missed the first part, and I would hate it if you did not get your most salient point across.

Douglas, just before you go on to the next question, I will float this point. I am concerned that it took quite a lot of time to get in all the answers to the first question. I have worked out that we have three hours of answers to come back, but we do not have three hours of time. Therefore, I will push you all continually during the meeting to be as brief as possible. I have started off 2024 on a sharp note on that.

I have a couple of questions, if I may. It was interesting to hear Paul Walton’s point about stoat control in Orkney, which will cost us £60 million by the time we get to the end of the project. It is necessary, and I fully accept that, but what I do not understand is who draws the lines. For example, we would probably like to see white storks back in Scotland and across the United Kingdom, and we would probably like to see the return of the common tree frog—two very easy species to manage. We might be a bit more reticent about wild boar. In fact, I do not want to see wild boar ripping up our woodlands in Scotland. They might be able to control ponticum on the west coast, but maybe we do not need them elsewhere.

We are talking about the wolf and the lynx and we already have beaver coming back, but we seem to introduce these things without considering control. The perfect example is Abernethy, which Paul Walton will know very well, and I know very well, and the need to protect the capercaillie—although we seem to allow pine marten to run riot, which definitely affects ground-nesting birds. Does there need to be a more persuasive and clear management plan, which could mean that we have to manage species within zones in the same way as we manage agriculture or trees within zones, and should we not accept that we cannot have everything running around all over the place?

—along woodland edges to protect riparian habitats. I see conflict, however, so I am trying to ask whether we should accept that management should be in the plan.

Please do not get me wrong. I am all for stoats being wiped out of Orkney because they should never have been there in the first place. Perhaps we should be doing something about controlling how they got there to ensure that that never happens again.

Ailsa Raeburn wanted to come in; Paul Walton is waving as well. I do not know whether you have already picked a hand, Monica.

I am tempted to ask the witnesses to give a yes or no answer, but I know that that is not going to work—you will all have views on the matter. However, I ask you to keep your answers short.

If you are happy, Finlay, I will just work along the line from Bruce Wilson to Caroline Brown and then to Ailsa Raeburn.

The one part of Finlay Carson’s question that none of you answered was whether there was enough money to achieve all of this and where that money might come from. Perhaps that question should be left hanging at the end of the session, given that we are now out of time.

I thank the witnesses very much for coming here and giving evidence this morning, and I thank Ailsa Raeburn for doing that so well online. I knew exactly when she had finished and when it was appropriate to bring the next person in.

The committee will now consider the evidence that has been given. Later this month, we will hear from the Scottish Government in relation to the plan.

RSPB Scotland is a big landowner in Scotland; it has huge tracts of land. Does the organisation need de-risking so that it can do the right thing, or will it get on and create more woodlands on its reserves?