KCC : Jim Morrison (JM/Chair), Gavin MacLellan (GM/Vice-Chair), Andrew Sinnott (AS/Sec),
Anita Anderson (AA/Treasurer) and David Scott-Park (DSP).
WDC : Cllr Sally Page (SP)
Plus 6 other members of the public
JM opened the meeting with the sad news of the passing of Alan Dewar. The CC and
attendees paid their respects.
Bob Shand, Peter Page, Rory MacLeod.
None.
AS corrected the date of the meeting in the draft.
Proposed as accurate by DSP, seconded by AA.
None.
The end of year is coming soon and the accounts will need to be audited.
GM will introduce AA to David Taylor and check to see he will be available and willing to provide his services once again.
New
Conversion of existing buildings into 1 business use unit (Class 4)
Ref. No: 2021/0455/DET | Received: Mon 13 Dec 2021 | Validated: Wed 22 Dec 2021 | Status: Current
This is a reapplication under a new reference number. The previous application was discussed under the old reference number.
KCC has no comment
Formation of vehicular access, public car parking, footpaths and installation of bird hides.
Ref. No: 2021/0392/DET | Received: Wed 03 Nov 2021 | Validated: Fri 05 Nov 2021 | Status: Current
A pre-application statement was discussed in September and no issues raised.
KCC notes that although still listed as current, it appears that ground work has
commenced.
Older
Sub-division of garden ground and erection of dwellinghouse with detached garage and waste water treatment plant.
Ref. No: 2021/0280/DET | Received: Thu 05 Aug 2021 | Validated: Thu 05 Aug 2021 | Status: Current
The applicants were present to discuss the Planning Authority objections to their proposals.
There is a presumption against new housing based on the existing Local Development Plan, all proposed material considerations have so far been rejected.
AS noted that the current LDP is overdue for replacement and has been extended until 2024 to allow for Community Engagement via Local Place Plans to be factored in. Since the local community are generally supportive of more homes for locals and less for visitors the next LDP may well allow such an application. There may be some leeway gained in demonstrating community support for this application during the LDP transition phase.
GM suggested that the applicants make a presentation to the community at the next KCC meeting inviting planners, councillors, MSP’s etc. A special meeting could be arranged if needed before then.
Erection of training centre (use Class 8) comprising leadership centre and 4 no. visitor accommodation buildings with associated parking and landscaping
Land Adjacent To -
Ref. No: 2020/0055/DET | Received: Mon 02 Mar 2020 | Validated: Mon 02 Mar 2020 | Status: Current
This application remains open but no new documentation has appeared to explain why. Concerns were raised about the pumping of sewage from the new development, including that of Ross Priory, neighbouring households and waterworks, to the Gartocharn Treatment Works.
KCC would like clarity on the capacity of GTW to take this volume and what, if any, capacity would remain for future developments in the village.
Cllr Page is corresponding with Scottish Water to ascertain capacity before and after
development and suggests that if the development was to use all the capacity then THF should consider providing their own treatment works.
KCC (GM) will write to CEO of The Hunter Foundation and ask for an update on
progress with the application and the timeline of development works.
Other
There was a general discussion on planning priorities as there is more and more bias from local housing to holiday residences as a result of planning policies and LDP. As there is now ongoing dialogue with NP and CC’s due to Community Empowerment, more community voices should contribute.
It was suggested that the next meeting should be widened out to public, local councillors and MSP’s.
KCC (GM) to write to Stuart Mearns to formalise the next meeting along the above lines.
Community Garden
WDC postponed presentation – partly COVID advice not to attend meetings partly as other work is being done which may affect WDC approach – namely other sites on WDC land being looked at in Bonhill – WDC may not want to go for a lease arrangement but may partner a community group that could take on the lease instead.
Landfill Site
In the short to medium term, Barr will continue as operators at Auchincarroch. They are appealing the fine from HMRC. They have reduced operations at other sites to concentrate on this one as it is a good revenue generator.
Aber Dam Bridge Project
KCT chairman’s summary of current position -
Community Trust AGM and membership
As a Charity we require to hold an Annual General Meeting of members, which will be on 16 February in KMH. All members will receive invitations and we are keen for new members to join us. The purpose of the Trust is to progress and deliver local projects for Community Benefit, particularly sustainable development and related to recreation, citizenship development, education, heritage and the natural environment.
If anyone would like become involved in our work or attend the AGM please contact any of the trustees (details on Gartocharn.org).
Watch the Gartocharn Community Facebook page for more details.
There was a discussion on pros and cons of reintroduction of native species and the need to manage effects going forward as populations increase. Beavers, pine martens, white tailed eagles, etc. Are they just to attract visitors with binoculars as opposed to improving biodiversity?
Similarly, control of invasive non-native species – what goes on the list? Why some species and not others and who decides? Mink, Canada geese, etc. This applies to Flora as well as Fauna – noxious weeds.
Who is responsible for the management and what enforcement is available on landowners who do not cooperate?
It was suggested that we write to LLTNPA for more info and invite them to provide a guest speaker for one of our meetings.
KCC (AS) will formulate a letter of invitation with some briefing notes of what we are interested in.
Lighted Buoys on Loch Lomond -
When the White-tailed Eagles took residence additional yellow marker buoys were deployed on Loch Lomond to designate exclusion zones. These are lit buoys that significantly contribute to light pollution against LLTNPA policy (The LLTNP Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) report 2014 identifies wild camping as a significant source of light pollution). As these were intended to be temporary no planning permission was applied for, thus no-one informed let alone consulted.
Should the eagles return then planning permission will be sought.
Note that these lighted buoys are operational long since the eagles departed.
AS gave an update on the last meeting with WDC Roads Dept. An inspection of the footway along the A811 has been done and a scope of works for various sections has been made.
Next step is to discuss with Greenspace to get indicative costs.
Councillor Page -
The section of A811 at the Wards which has disintegrated has been reported. JM informed us that there has been an accident there recently.
JM commented on lack of availability of electric vehicle charging points for the public in Dumbarton. SP will follow up.
Police crime report appended.
RSPB
We received a copy of a letter circulated to neighbours adjacent to the RSPB nature reserve, a copy of the programme of works and a link to their most recent blog (which will be kept updated throughout the project) here.
SEPA
Communications started on finding out who to invite to a meeting to explain SEPA role in engaging with planners and talk about protection of water quality of the local watercourses and loch & maybe about private sewage treatment standards and flood plains etc.
WDC
Proposed boundary change around new Dumbain Rd scheme - when it was a field it was Kilmaronock but now it is housing branched off Dumbain Rd in Haldane it will be taken into Balloch and Haldane CC
NP
NP are consulting on a suite of planning guidance that will form interim guidance over the next 2 years relating to the current Local Development Plan 2017-2021. The Local Development Plan will not be replaced until 2024 and the guidance provides clarity about the delivery of the current policies until the plan is replaced. We are seeking comments on the
guidance but we are also seeking comments to help us form the new policies in the next Local Development Plan 2024-2034.
Share your views by answering questions set out in our online consultation survey available at:
The eight week consultation opened on this December and the deadline is the 9 February 2022.
JM suggested we post this on our website and the FB page to get a wider participation.
AS to follow up.
JM proposed that we submit a communal CC response, all (CC and attendees) were in favour.
AS to follow up – if online version unsuitable, try to obtain an offline version from NP.
Please send in any agenda items in good time to secretary@kilmaronockcc.org.
This week an ambulance attending Duncryne Terrace could not get into the layby so parked in Church Rd instead. This left little space for passing traffic and pedestrians resulting in a near collision.
Meeting closed at 21:40h.
Name of Community Council:- KILMARONOCK
Date of Report:- 07/01/2020
Submitting / officer:- PC Dale Logsdon
Crimes/Offences that have occurred in community area since last meeting
Police Report covering the period 01/11/2021 – 31/12/21
inclusive.
1 reported crime.
The Crimes can be summarised as follows;
Mobbing and Rioting 0
Wilful fire-raising 0
Common Assault 0
Theft/Att Housebreaking – Domestic 0
Theft (Unclassified) 0
Possess Drugs 0
Breach of the Peace/Disorder 0
Vandalism 0
Vehicle/traffic Crime 0
Fraud 0
Breach of Bail 0
Other 1
1 x Unknown person did allow dog to chase, corner and kill a lamb at Gartlea Farm. 1 persons or dog identified.
The above excludes fixed penalty notices issued in respect of anti-social behaviour, non-endorsable and endorsable offences (Road Traffic).
Kilmaronock Community Council
8
Some useful links for crime prevention;
Advice & Information - Police Scotland
Doorstep crime and bogus callers - Police Scotland
Updates on previous actions Incidents of note or crime trends
Forthcoming events / Initiatives
This month – Issues raised at the meeting
I would urge the community to continue to use Crimestoppers if wishing to leave anonymous information regarding incidents which are happening within the community.
The telephone phone number is 0800 555 111 and is operated 24hrs a day.
It should be noted that due to a recent restructure within Argyll & West Dunbartonshire Division we no longer have a dedicated Community Policing Officer for your area.
Information contained on this form has been gathered by an officer from the Community Engagement Team.
Any issues raised at the meeting will be disseminated to either Local
Policing or Problem Solving Team officers.
If you wish to contact us direct with any specific complaints or concerns, please contact the following based at Dumbarton Police Office;
Community Engagement Team Sergeant – Brian Simpson
Tel: 101
Draft Agenda
1. Sederunt
2. Apologies
3. Declaration of interest
4. Minutes of ordinary meeting 10 January
5. Matters Arising and Associated issues
6. Treasurers Report
7. Planning Matters
8. Community matters & Local Place Plan
9. Kilmaronock Community Trust
10. National Park Issues
11. West Dunbartonshire Council
12. Correspondence
13. Next meeting
14. AOCB
The following update was received from the applicant in relation to page No. 2 of Minutes (Planning section). ‘Formation of vehicular access, car parking, footpaths and installation of bird hides.’ “The note in the KCC minutes suggests that works relating to the aforementioned planning application had commenced, but to clarify this point, the works relating to planning application have not started. From initial concept of the works, we have consulted with the Planning Department on a regular basis and they informed us, that a planning application was not required to form the pond, to prepare the flower meadow and the new farm lane, please note that all excavations to date only relate to the items work not requiring Planning Approval. Hopefully, by April we can obtain planning approval for the items within the Planning Application, this will allow us to carry on and complete the project by early summer.”
New
Restoration of Memorial Marker
Ross Priory Gartocharn Alexandria G83 8NL
Ref. No: 2022/0038/LBC | Received: Mon 07 Feb 2022 | Validated: Tue 01 Mar
2022 | Status: Current
KCC has no comment
Diversification and intensification of training centre (class 8) to include wedding
venue (class 11) with temporary siting of marquee
Ardoch House Gartocharn Alexandria G83 8ND
Ref. No: 2022/0034/DET | Received: Fri 04 Feb 2022 | Validated: Thu 10 Feb 2022 | Status:
Current
KCC has no comment
Other
Sub-division of garden ground and erection of dwellinghouse with detached garage and waste water treatment plant
The Aber Mill Ross And Aber Road Gartocharn Alexandria G83 8NQ
Ref. No: 2021/0280/DET | Received: Thu 05 Aug 2021 | Validated: Thu 05 Aug 2021 | Status:
Decision was to Refuse
The applicants were present to discuss the Planning Authority refusal of their application.
Three reasons for refusal were given. The applicants will be appointing a new agent to prepare for appeal.
Community Garden
WDC Greenspace’s Andy Devine gave a presentation on the work of Greenspace in general and their role in Community Garden projects. The presentation will be uploaded to the KCC website page for this meeting.
Q&A
Aber Dam Bridge Project
It is disappointing to report that after considerable effort, Kilmaronock Community Trust (KCT) has now withdrawn from the National Park’s funding process to replace Aber Dam Bridge. This is for two reasons: firstly, the unacceptable conditions which would be imposed on KCT, and therefore its Trustees as individuals, by the NPA relating to third party liability, and secondly because one of the landowners is refusing to grant consent to allow the work to take place.
As a Charity, KCT is not in a position to take on long term public liability responsibilities as it does not have assured funding in place. Furthermore, its volunteer Trustees are not willing to take on the negotiation of necessary land management agreements for a Core Path – that is clearly the responsibility of the National Park. KCT has informed the NPA of our position and have asked them to clarify what they will now do to ensure safe access to the footpath. KCT Trustees and our Project Management partner West Dunbartonshire Environment Trust have expended considerable effort on this project: making a successful grant application, arranging surveys of the ground and surrounds, obtaining quotes for the design and build of the bridge and consultation with landowners. We acknowledge the support of Leslie and Hilary Baxter and John Struthers and assistance from Alan McMullen.
Community Trust AGM and membership
As a Charity we require to hold an Annual General Meeting of members, which will be on 23rd March in KMH. All members will receive invitations and we are keen for new members to join us. The purpose of the Trust is to progress and deliver local projects for Community Benefit, particularly sustainable development and related to recreation, citizenship development, education, heritage and the natural environment. If anyone would like become involved in our work or attend the AGM please contact any of the trustees (details on Gartocharn.org).
Watch the Gartocharn Community Facebook page for more details.
Several community councillors collaborated in a joint response to the consultation on changes to the planning guidelines as a result of findings during COVID-19 visitor pressures. The consultation was very detailed so the response had been posted on the KCC web site (Link).
Several community councillors attended the NP’s virtual session on ‘Future Nature’ – policies on biodiversity, control of non-native species (flora and fauna) and reintroduction of lost native species. Next stage - Future Nature update report will go to the 14th March National Park Board to consider.
There was a discussion of the planning application for the island of Inchconnachan. Although out-with our CC area some concerns were raised to us about the Wallaby cull and the ground works affecting the ancient oak woodland which are part of a SSSI.
Roads
No response to request for an update on a scope of works for various sections of A811 footway.
Councillor Page
Water Safety Policy put forward by Cllr. Page has been adopted.
Budget due on Wed – cuts are to be expected due to shortfall.
Also no response from Roads Dept on outstanding issues even emergency ones.
A 2014 report on Balloch Park has been resurrected and will be updated and used to seek funding to regenerate the park.
Rather than pursue an asset transfer of Balloch Castle Country Park, it is more cost effective to alter the lease to allow WDC to keep revenue generated by the park as long as it is reinvested in the park.
General discussion on byelaws for dogs. Sheep worrying incidents seem to be on the increase. This is both costly and stressful to farmers.
DSP informed us that on 11 Jan 2022, SPARC, the Scottish Partnership Against Rural Crime, launched the national Livestock Attack and Worrying campaign with the slogan:
‘Your Dog – Your Responsibility’. Fines of up to £40,000 or 12 months imprisonment can now be imposed for livestock worrying.
Although penalty fines are now very high, if dog or owner not identified then fines cannot be imposed.
Police crime report appended. One crime recorded - Vehicle driving whilst in poor condition and license plate offence - Detected
Stirling Council – Catterburn Bridge at Croftamie – long update received and will be appended to these minutes but essentially no date given for completion.
SEPA – dialogue continuing to find an appropriate person to invite to a meeting to explain SEPA role in engaging with planners and talk about protection of water quality of the local watercourses and loch & maybe about private sewage treatment standards and flood plains etc. SP has a neighbour who may be able to help.
National Park – there is a new round of briefing sessions around Visitor Management – this is by teleconference on Fri 11th March.
Monday 16th May 2022 at 19:30 in KMH – AGM followed by ordinary meeting.
Please send in any agenda items in good time to secretary@kilmaronockcc.org
Discussion again on the state of the field behind the hall. Untidy mess and leylandii spoiling the view. The chair suggested that the only solution would be for the community to purchase the field and noted that the law had changed to strengthen the community’s right to buy.
There was a discussion on the latest right to buy legislation and MSP Pam Gosal suggested use of the levelling up fund from Westminster. KCT are monitoring the situation.
AS to follow up with KCT DSP suggested that we engage with the Hunter Foundation to see if they can revisit their sewage treatment plans to treat on site rather than pump a long way uphill to the Gartocharn Treatment Plant and use up a significant part of the capacity at the works. JM suggested we wait until we get an update on the development plans.
DSP asked about registration with the Information Commission. JM agreed to be our Data Protection Officer. DSP to follow up and register.
MSP Pam Gosal had a chat with everyone on a variety of topics raised tonight. JM thanked everyone and closed the meeting 21:00h
Community Council Report
Name of Community Council:- Kilmaronock
Date of Report:- 07/03/2020
Submitting / officer:- PC Michael Williams
Crimes/Offences that have occurred in community area since last meeting
Police Report covering the period 04/02/22 – 07/03/22
There was 1 reported crime during this period.
Vehicle driving whilst in poor condition and license plate offence -
Detected
The above excludes fixed penalty notices issued in respect of antisocial
behaviour, non-endorsable and endorsable offences (Road
Traffic).
Updates on previous actions Incidents of note or crime trends Forthcoming events / Initiatives
This month – Issues
raised at the meeting
Contact Us
I would urge the community to continue to use Crimestoppers if wishing to leave anonymous information regarding incidents which are happening within the community. The telephone phone number is 0800 555 111 and is operated 24hrs a day.
It should be noted that due to a recent restructure within Argyll & West Dunbartonshire Division we no longer have a dedicated Community Policing Officer for your area. Information contained on this form has been gathered by an officer from the Community Engagement Team. Any issues raised at the meeting will be disseminated to either Local Policing or Problem Solving Team officers.
If you wish to contact us direct with any specific complaints or concerns, please contact the following based at Dumbarton Police Office;
Community Engagement Team Sergeant – Brian Simpson
Tel: 101
Appendix 2 – Correspondence from Stirling Council
Dear Mr. Sinnott,
I have spoken with my team leader and she is waiting for further updates so that she can inform several community councils. I am hoping she will manage to get back to you before your meeting on 7th March but in case she is unable to, the latest update is:
Bridge Engineer and Road Officers (Officers) undertake the inspections of the roads and structures on the adopted road network every 2 years in accordance with adopted specifications and procedures. Our immediate priority is to keep the road network as safe as possible and we do not wish to close roads unless there is a real need to do so. Unfortunately, the partial collapse on 30th September, 2021 of the masonry arch necessitated the full closure of the road, even to emergency vehicles. Prior to the partial collapse of the downstream parapet, Stirling Council had been risk managing the structure by keeping the road open to single lane traffic since summer, 2017 and had
instructed external consultants to progress a design solution to repair the leaning parapets.
Stirling Council is very aware of the impact upon the various communities with the diversions at B818 Branshogle and A809 CatterBurn, Croftamie. It remains one of Stirling Council's priorities to progress the solution to repair these structures as expediently as possible and reopen the B818 and A809 roads. Thereafter, we will be able to focus our resources upon maintaining other structures across our adopted road network, including structures such as at Blane Water on B834.
Once the emergency closure and diversion route were in place, Stirling Council immediately prioritised determining and progressing a design solution for the structure. To date, much of the work has been ‘behind the scenes’ and little on site but we are now nearing the end of the design phase.
Such work also included securing funding to progress the repair of the structure, liaising with multiple internal and external organisations and the communities involved. Re-routing council services such as winter maintenance, waste services and transport (for education). The feasibility of alternative proposals has also been considered and the solutions to progress the solution with most efficient, balanced with minimal community impact (across the board), has been and is being progressed. Stirling Council has also considered alternative options such as installing a temporary bridge. Due to road alignment and also the need to ensure that the load path does not impose undue loads on the existing structure, is was not deemed feasible to pursue this route. Furthermore, the installation of the temporary structure could have an adverse environmental impact upon the community or conflict with the remedial solution for the bridge repairs with respect to programme or feasibility. In order to limit
the impact to the community, Stirling Council has been perusing the option for repair of Catterburn Bridge as quickly as possible and with an efficient programme.
It has been determined that the existing arch remains fit for use and therefore the preferred route will be a traditional take down to arch and rebuild. Design for repair work including compilation of design drawings and tender package is ongoing and we anticipate to have a complete design by midmonth.
Once the design phase is completed, the tender documents will be issued as part of the Tender Process. Contractors will be requested to submit construction programmes along with their tender submissions and a tender review process will be undertaken. Shortly after this, Stirling Council hopes to award the contract to the successful contractor.
We are now nearing the end of the design phase for Catterburn Bridge. We have undertaken survey and ground investigation work and engaged with several external organisations in order to progress the design, including speaking with the Public Utility organisations. Trial pits have also been undertaken to help progress the design solution. We have also been engaging with SEPA, Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Authority and sought early contractor engagement with contractors who have expressed an interest in the project. Ongoing discussions are still underway with Nature Scot and Loch Lomond and Trossachs Planning Team. Our preference would be to
commission works which would not trigger a planning application.
Unfortunately, these processes do take time but this also allows Stirling Council and the other parties to work as professionally and diligently as possible to provide a considered feasible solution and we have been striving to progress matters as quickly as possible, employing measures such as early contractor engagement, issuing prompt instructions to our external consultants (who were already on board) to progress feasible design solutions, etc. We have immediately engaged with multiple
stakeholder organisations such as SEPA, LLTNPA, PU’s Forth Fisheries and commissioned various surveys in order to progress the design solution.
My apologies that I am unable to give you any firm dates for completion; this is because we do not, at this particular time, have any finalised construction programmes. But Stirling Council is applying pressure (and will continue to do so) to progress the solution across all parties to reopen the A809 at the earliest opportunity, once it is safe to do so.
Yours Sincerely,
Lorna Cooper BEng (Hons) MSc
Bridge Engineer
Bridges Flooding and Drainage
Stirling Council
Endrick House
Stirling, FK7 7SZ
KCC : Jim Morrison (JM/Chair), Andrew Sinnott (AS/Sec), Anita Anderson (AA/Treasurer)
and David Scott-Park (DSP).
Plus 2 other members of the public.
Gavin MacLellan (GM/vice chair), Sally Page.
One of the planning applications is for a neighbour of AS.
Proposed as accurate by DSP, seconded by AA.
DSP followed up on the registration process for the Information Commissioner’s Office
(ICO).
DSP & AA to follow up and complete the registration process.
Following the AGM we can now apply for the annual admin grant from WDC.
JM asked AA to request additional funds to cover the costs of consultations and fees expected in the coming year relating to the Local Place Plan.
AS to forward the budget template from previous years to AA and assist with
compiling it.
Kilmaronock Community Council
2
Ref. No: 2022/0005/ENF | Received: Mon 11 Apr 2022 | Status: Notice Served
New
Ref. No: 2022/0129/DET | Received: Tue 26 Apr 2022 | Validated: Mon 02 May 2022 | Status: Current
KCC has no comment.
Ref. No: 2022/0122/DET | Received: Thu 14 Apr 2022 | Validated: Fri 22 Apr 2022 | Status: Current
KCC cannot comment due to lack of information. There is no supporting evidence for need or on choice of location. KCC (AS) will write to Planning Authority to ask for more information.
Ref. No: 2022/0104/HAE | Received: Mon 04 Apr 2022 | Validated: Mon 11 Apr
2022 | Status: Current
KCC has no comment.
Ref. No: 2022/0096/LBC | Received: Tue 29 Mar 2022 | Validated: Tue 29 Mar
2022 | Status: Current
KCC has no comment.
Ref. No: 2022/0066/DET | Received: Wed 09 Mar 2022 | Validated: Thu 17 Mar
2022 | Status: Current
KCC has no comment.
In reference to the recently refused application for a house at Aber Mill (021/0280/DET) the applicant informed us by mail that their new agent recommended submitting a new application rather than appeal the refused one.
Kilmaronock Community Council
3
LPP
We need to progress this from the next meeting onwards. AS noted that we had a new community rep from the NP (Hannah Robinson) who previously was not attending meetings but now as restrictions are lifting, AS will invite her to the next meeting in July.
We have a few ideas to start consultations rolling, the NP previously indicated that assistance was available for facilitating public consultations including funds. WDC also have a role as local service provider.
AS to follow up with LLTNP and WDC regarding starting the public consultation
process.
- Queen’s Platinum Jubilee/KMH 21st anniversary
A village celebration/street party at KMH is planned for 3rd June to mark the occasion. Events and entertainment for children, games, races, bouncy castles and disco plus teas and cakes, BBQ, a hog roast for all. DSP has agreed to pipe at the opening ceremony.
AS helping the organisers. AA due to help on the day.
Donations for tombola etc can be handed in at Friday coffee mornings.
For the Diamond Jubilee, KCC donated £300 from the Benevolent Fund.
AS proposed that we donate again albeit we don’t have as much money as last time. Unanimous agreement to donate £100 from our main account which is in surplus this year rather than the Benevolent Fund.
AS to liaise with AA regarding the donation.
The Community Trust held their AGM on 23rd March. Of the six trustees, two stood down but one agreed to be co-opted for a further year to facilitate a smooth handover of duties.
Some new members joined but there is always room for more, especially any that wish to be more active in the management and delivery of local projects.
Once the LPP consultations commence there will likely be plenty to do.
The purpose of the Trust is to progress and deliver local projects for Community
Benefit, particularly sustainable development and related to recreation, citizenship development, education, heritage and the natural environment. If anyone would like become involved please contact any of the trustees (details on Gartocharn.org).
KCC among others have been invited to and will participate in a meeting to discuss the review of the By-laws. This will be held in the NP HQ, Balloch on 26th May.
DSP brought up the issue with the ‘temporary’ navigation buoys deployed last year to keep vessels away from where the Sea Eagles were observed. These buoys are flashing away all night contributing to visual and light pollution in contradiction to other policies.
Kilmaronock Community Council
4
KCC agreed that DSP draft a letter to the NP for the secretary to send.
Still no response to request for an update on a scope of works for various sections of A811 footway.
KCC (AS) to send request again adding a suggestion by GM to ask for budget plan.
The recent local elections resulted in a change of councillor for our ward. KCC thanks outgoing councillor Sally Page and hope that the work Sally was championing e.g. water safety and Balloch Park regeneration will continue and that the new councillor is as regular an attendee to our meetings as Sally was.
KCC (AS) to invite the new councillors for Lomond ward to attend future meetings.
Police crime report appended. Four crimes recorded – 1 x various road traffic offences, 1 x possession of drugs, 1 x vandalism and 1 x traffic (speeding and under influence of drugs).
Coriolis Energy offered to visit us to show their Vale of Leven wind farm proposal for Auchincarroch/Nobleston area. The proposal is for 19 turbines each of which is 200m tall – the hills they will sit on are approx. 300m above sea level. Visibility maps from their website show that all of the turbines will be visible from most of Loch Lomond and The Trossachs.
For easy reference, Duncryne Hill is 100m from road level so imagine a 200m turbine on the top of that. The previous application for Merkins Wind Farm was rejected on visual impact and they had fewer turbines of half the height.
A negative visual impact is guaranteed, wind power is not. The river Leven once powered the industries of the Vale – why is no one suggesting harnessing Hydro power instead?
Please send in any agenda items in good time to secretary@kilmaronockcc.org
Pavement parking in Church St. is blocking access for disabled users and parent’s with prams forcing them in to the street. The state of the street is still bad. Legislation prohibiting pavement parking is delayed (due to COVID). Causing an obstruction has always been an offence and should be reported via 101.
AA brought up speed limits within the village. WDC are not interested in changing them, preferring to leave the police to enforce existing limits. Other CC areas have “pop up policemen” which are periodically deployed to discourage bad behaviour.
AS suggested dummy cameras and signs. JM mentioned private companies provide camera technology to local councils and take a percentage of fines as payment.
Kilmaronock Community Council
5
KCC (AS) to ask for advice on the above from Police Scotland and WDC.
JM thanked everyone and closed the meeting 21:00h.
CC : Jim Morrison (Chair/JM), Andrew Sinnott (Secretary/AS), Anita Anderson (Treasurer/AA), David Scott Park (DSP).
Plus 2 members of the public.
Gavin MacLellan (Vice-chair), Sally Page.
The minutes were proposed as accurate by AA and seconded by AS.
It has been a quiet year with most meetings until recently being held online.
The main challenge has been trying to get LLTNPA to listen to local voices without too much success. Other CC’s within the NP have reported the same concern. Although some board members are elected by communities, they do not represent their electorate. New elections are coming soon.
Thanks to all who took part in CC business and attended the meetings.
Thanks to Sally Page who lost her seat at the recent election.
Hopefully the new councillors will take as great an interest in the local issues.
Our highest profile planning issue over the last 2 years has been resolved by the applicant, The Hunter Foundation, withdrawing their application for a development on the shores at Ross Priory.
The Fiscal Year (FY) ran from 1st March 2021 to 28th February 2022.
KCC hold two accounts, the first of which is the main account which is the official business account of the KCC.
The second account is the KCC Benevolent Fund which is the modern incarnation of the Kilmaronock Poor Fund.
During the Fiscal Year, the office of Treasurer was borne by Anita Anderson. The account signatories are Andrew Sinnott & Anita Anderson.
Main items of expenditure:
Comment : There was one meeting in KMH, all others were held using the Zoom or 3T Verify platforms. Zoom subscriptions were monthly independent of number of meetings and 3T Verify was provided free, courtesy of Jim Morrison.
Website : Maintenance (£120.00) and hosting (£120.00)
The account ran a surplus of £218.82 primarily due to Zoom meetings being cheaper than hall rental and 3T Verify being free.
Kilmaronock Community Council
The only rural parish in West Dunbartonshire
The accounts were examined and approved by David S. Taylor and are presented tonight. See Appendix 1.
Andrew Sinnott (AS) held position of secretary for this term and attended all KCC meetings.
Main themes this year :
- WDC Community Council Scheme of Establishment (SoE)
The SoE has been under review for 2 years and KCC has had an active role in consultations along the way. The aim is to make CC’s more relevant to communities by improving their engagement with strategic elements of
the local authority.
The process, along with the pandemic, has resulted in a 2 year delay to CC elections. These are planned for Q3 2022 and all members of the community are invited to engage and stand for election.
KCC has 8 elected positions to fill. If less than 8 candidates stand then those candidates will be appointed without an election process.
- Community Council Forum
Related to the above review, AS is part of the steering group to regenerate the Community Council Forum as a more practical body to communicate with WDC at more strategic level on behalf of all existing CC’s and to assist establishment of new CC’s.
- Development Management (Planning)
KCC has had several engagements with the planning department as a statutory consultee. Recent focus has been towards the development of a “Local Place Plan” to bring the community voice into the next “Local Development Plan”. This will be of vital importance to the community as it will affect development management for the next 10 years.
As statutory consultees, the CC is expected to take the lead but success will depend on all local anchor bodies taking an active stake in the process e.g. KCT, KOKT, KMHA, School and Parent groups etc.
- West Dunbartonshire Council
Most of our council engagement has been with the Roads department. Not only on the general condition of roads and gulley drains but also on re-establishment of a safer and more useable footway along the A811 from Balloch to Gartocharn.
KCC, and myself in particular, acknowledge the active assistance of outgoing councillor Sally Page.
Until the new elections are completed the office bearers will remain as:
Chair : Jim Morrison
Vice chair : Gavin MacLellan
Secretary : Andrew Sinnott
Treasurer : Anita Anderson
Prior to elections, new potential CC candidates will be sought. We encourage anyone over the age of 18 to come forward.
Kilmaronock Community Council
The only rural parish in West Dunbartonshire
Andrew Sinnott will continue to represent KCC as a trustee for the Kilmaronock Community Trust.
David S. Taylor is re-nominated for this position pending his acceptance.
None raised
KCC : Jim Morrison (JM/Chair), Gavin MacLellan (GM/Vice-chair), Andrew Sinnott (AS/Sec), Anita Anderson (AA/Treasurer) and David Scott-Park (DSP).
Plus 9 other members of the public.
GM opened the meeting as JM was delayed en route.
None.
None.
Proposed as accurate by DSP, seconded by AA.
Since the last meeting, we completed our registration with the Information Commissioner and now propose to collect the email addresses of anyone interested in receiving a copy of the agenda and minutes directly. A registration form was circulated and everyone signed up. Anyone interested can send their mail to secretary@kilmaronockcc.org.
AS to follow up and compile a distribution list.
a. Outgoings : ICO annual fee, Monthly web hosting, Kilmaronock Hall hire.
b. WDC grant of £662.88 received as per formula rather than as per our application.
b. Current account balance : £1343.17
c. Benevolent fund balance : £424.01
No invoice received for Jubilee/KMH Party as the donations on the day covered costs.
Lawfulness of erection of rear extension
Kilmaronock Community Council
2
Claddoch Cottage Gartocharn Alexandria G83 8NQ
Ref. No: 2022/0198/LAW | Received: Mon 27 Jun 2022 | Validated: Mon 27 Jun 2022 | Status: Current
We discussed Permitted Development regulations and decided that the planning team are best placed to check stated compliance figures. One concern was raised that there is no mention of sewage handling as the number of bedrooms is increased significantly and thus the expected Population Equivalent. Again, we expect the planning officer to do the due diligence in this respect as the existing facility may well be sufficient.
KCC has no comment.
Chimes Cottage School Road Gartocharn Alexandria G83 8RT
Ref. No: 2022/0195/LBC | Received: Fri 24 Jun 2022 | Validated: Fri 24 Jun 2022 | Status: Current
KCC has no comment.
Land At East Cambusmoon Gartocharn G83 8RZ
Ref. No: 2022/0180/DET | Received: Wed 08 Jun 2022 | Validated: Fri 10 Jun 2022 | Status: Current
Applicants were present and KCC recognised that this was discussed a couple of years ago as the final step in the process of establishing a new working farm for a local young couple. The planning team are working with the applicant to site the house appropriately.
KCC has no comment.
There followed a discussion on drainage handling and boundary fences not being respected. Also, the council not allowing an official address as the house has not yet been built. This materially affects the business. WDC are also claiming the naming rights of the farm rather than the owner.
KCC can only recommend dialogue with elected representatives, Jackie Baillie MSP is soon holding a surgery at KMH.
It was also suggested that they approach the Post Office to get the address registered as that worked in a similar situation where a named postal address was needed prior to the house being built.
Ross Priory Gartocharn Alexandria G83 8NL
Ref. No: 2022/0122/DET | Received: Thu 14 Apr 2022 | Validated: Fri 22 Apr 2022 | Status: Withdrawn
Kilmaronock Community Council
3
LPP
Following our last meeting, AS wrote to the LLTNP regarding the public consultation process. Hannah Robinson was invited to this meeting to advise on a few topics to get us going. However, instead we got a long list of references to research. All of which we had done.
It was suggested that we bypass the process but after discussion we decided there were a few ideas we could contribute towards the next Local Development Plan otherwise we have no say for next 10 years. We could put together a few bullet points for consideration at a future meeting based on inputs from previous meetings.
AS to follow up with WDC to see if we can utilise their experience compared to NP.
Queen’s Platinum Jubilee/KMH 21st anniversary
A village celebration for the dual event at KMH was held on June 3. The weather was fantastic and the day was enjoyed by 2-300 people. Mostly it was for the children but every age was catered for. Games, races, bouncy castles and some music plus teas and cakes, BBQ and a hog roast for all. DSP piped at the opening ceremony with a rousing speech from KMH Chairman James Macrae.
The whole day was a success due mainly to the preparations and organisation on the day by many locals. The Newall family opened their garden for the children’s races and bouncy castles.
Fiona Wyllie marshalled all the volunteer organisers (too many to mention). So big thank you to all of them for their work.
The event was free but donation buckets were filled and ended up paying for the day hence the Benevolent Fund was untapped.
Since the Aber Bridge project was cancelled there are no active projects. Hopefully, some ideas will come from any LPP consultations. See WDC section below.
As mentioned last time, the board would like more trustees to join up so perhaps those with good ideas will be the ones to help get them implemented. Contact KCT@gartocharn.org if interested.
FOLLAT were in contact with KCC & KCT trying to resurrect the Aber Bridge project using the NP funds to pay the landowner direct. However, the funds were never transferred to KCT as the deadline to spend them passed due to lack of final agreement from the NP and the refusal to allow the work to take place by the landowner.
KCT therefore had nothing material to offer FOLLAT so maybe they will deal with the NP and landowner directly.
KCC attended a meeting to discuss the review of the By-laws. This was a pre-consultation consultation so we will see how it feeds through to the next stage and follow up.
The ‘temporary’ navigation buoys, discussed last meeting, have been assessed as no longer necessary and are in the process of being removed.
AS to check if there is a date for completion of removal process.
Kilmaronock Community Council
4
JM highlighted the upcoming NP board elections and that he was a candidate. After discussion on a board role in relation to the ‘electorate’ it was agreed that we invite the successful candidate to our next meeting.
KCC (AS) to invite new board member once known.
There has been no response, still, from Gail Macfarlane to our request for a scope of works for the various sections of A811 footway. However, AS did not rewrite as planned in last meeting. AS asked if GM could help draft a letter and will follow up this time. GM suggested we need to see the Roads Asset Management Plan (RAMP) including financials.
KCC (GM & AS) to send updated request to Gail Macfarlane.
Overgrowth at the corner of School Rd and the A811 has affected sightlines significantly. Discussion on landowners responsibility versus local authority. Needs attention in any case.
KCC to discuss with Roads dept.
Questions were raised about safe crossing of the A811 at Duncryne Rd. Particularly of children going to the play park and parents with children in buggies. Drop kerbs would be beneficial.
Pavement parking was brought up again. Worst times for A811 and Duncryne Rd are during football matches as there is no official parking for away teams, in particular.
It was suggested that we alert the football team organiser and discuss solutions with him e.g. using KMH car park. The neighbouring car park development at the duck ponds will kindly be made available for this use once complete.
This is something that is ideal for inclusion in a LPP if consulted on properly. A layby could be created on WDC land eating a small portion of the field next to the play park.
There is adequate street lighting within the 30 mph zone to allow for a proper pedestrian crossing. A sheltered bus stop could also be added.
KCC to discuss proposed solutions with WDC roads dept. as it ought to align with their Active Travel strategy.
KCC to write to Gartocharn FC regarding on road parking.
Presumably due to proximity to elections, new councillors did not have email addresses on the WDC site. They have started to appear now, so AS can follow up on action held over from last meeting.
KCC (AS) to invite all 3 new councillors for Lomond ward to attend future meetings.
No police crime report received. Normally we don’t need to ask. If one comes before the minutes are published it will be added as an appendix.
Kilmaronock Community Council
5
Also this time, I had requested a police visit to this meeting, with a specific request to talk to us about road traffic speed control and enforcement. As we discussed in the last meeting, I asked them about private companies that provide cameras, the Community Speedwatch initiative and even “pop-up” policemen. No response so I resent it a week or so ago as a reminder. Still no response. I will keep trying.
JM will forward info on private speed camera operations to AS after the meeting
AS will resend request for crime report and new invite to next meeting.
Coriolis Energy agreed to attend the September meeting to showcase their proposal for a wind farm in the Vale of Leven. Plenty of info on their website which is : https://valeoflevenwindfarm.com/
AS to send them a reminder, get confirmation and advertise accordingly.
Special Meeting regarding Translocation of Beavers to Loch Lomond NNR on Monday 5 September 2022 at 19:30 in KMH.
Ordinary KCC meeting on Monday 12 September 2022 at 19:30 in KMH.
Please send in any agenda items in good time to secretary@kilmaronockcc.org.
JM thanked everyone and closed the meeting 21:10h.
1. Welcome
2. Reason for Meeting
3. Conduct of Meeting
4. Desired outcome of meeting
5. National Beaver Strategy
6. Statements of concern
7. Recommendations from professional bodies
8. NatureScot Response
Continued… PTO
9. Questions and Answers
10. Summary from the Chair
11. Vote of public support
Chairman : Jim Morrison (JM) from Kilmaronock Community Council (KCC)
JM introduced Andy McClay (Luss & Arden CC rep) and Brian Crook (Advocate, Terra Firma Chambers) who were overseeing the conduct of the meeting as independent parties.
The purpose of the meeting is to hear the pros and cons associated with the translocation of unwanted Tayside beavers to the Endrick catchment system in south Loch Lomond. Thus residents of the wider community in the Endrick catchment are represented tonight, not just Kilmaronock.
There were four presentations by an agent on behalf of the release Licence applicant, the RSPB. KCC felt that the subject matter had need of a wider consultation, that there may be conflict with other social and environmental activity and that many questions remained without answer. No minutes from those events are available.
The minutes from this meeting will record the information given tonight and the comments from the local communities represented.
Attendees included representatives from: LLTNPA, Nature Scotland, RSPB, Loch Lomond Fisheries Trust, Stirling Council, Montrose Estates, Drymen community council and other interests. Approximately 65 attended.
Apologies for absence were received from Jackie Baillie MSP, Councillor Jonathan McColl, Ruth White & Karen Ramoo from Scottish Land and Estates and Kate Maitland (National Farmers Union).
Statements of concern
Malcolm showed pictures of tree damage from River Earn caused by Beavers – mature trees felled.
Comparison of Pros & Cons of beavers (see accompanying presentation)
Beavers are here and here to stay but should the population expand naturally or be accelerated by translocations
The Trust will not consider supporting the acceleration of this range extension, as proposed by the RSPB, without the following conditions being met:
Loch Lomond & Trossachs are part of a Victorian drinking water system designed and built when no beavers were around to influence the designs.
LLTNP actively promote, through their Outdoor Recreation Plan and its successor, open water swimming for both leisure and sport but this may be at risk. Some high-profile races are staged on Loch Lomond bringing economic benefits – the selling point is clean water and this is at risk
There is a potential risk which needs to be assessed and addressed regarding the introduction of an effectively new species.
There is likely to be interference to infrastructure either directly or indirectly by the animals themselves to both the natural and the built environment.
Beavers, along with other animals, are known to carry zoonotic diseases such as Giardiasis, which is transmitted via water – infections have occurred in Tayside and throughout the world, the chance of incurring in Scotland are significant based on evidence from other countries. No studies done in Scotland to enable an informed decision. While not fatal, it is very unpleasant and would have a negative impact on water-born outdoor recreation. Studies are available from Canada and USA by governmental agencies.
Areas of LLTNP are designated and regulated as drinking water protected areas and the current Licence assessment plan required under the Beaver Strategy does not require consultation with these responsible agencies or infrastructure operators. The cost of mitigation of the introduction of Beavers to the built environment has not been considered by Nature Scotland but should be in the interest of the Scottish Economy.
There is concern that the responsible agencies such as SEPA do not have sufficient funds and expertise to make valid assessment.
Trials in Knapdale where conditions are significantly different to Loch Lomond & Trossachs where critical infrastructure is installed, affecting over 1 million people, do not provide good guidance.
Responsible party for consequential losses – but who is it? RSPB will be releasing but not responsible for where the beavers migrate to. NatureScot seem to be the ones to pick up the bill but don’t have the resources to do so.
Will the true cost to the taxpayer ever be quantified?
Sally discovered that SEPA hadn’t been informed about the RSPB’s application. As the body regulating watercourses and septic tanks which may well be affected, this was surprising.
Sally, like the other residents of the low lying area around Aber, are concerned for the flooding of residential septic tanks and that servicing the neighbouring caravan park.
KCC contacted SEPA as did Sally via MSP Pam Gosal. The gist of both replies being that if there are problems in the future, the owners of septic tanks would be responsible for alerting SEPA and/or the local authority and that NatureScot would advise on the implementation of any necessary mitigations.
There was no direct answer on who would take care of any detrimental effects of damming the Aber burn downstream of the Gartocharn Sewage works.
KCC are keen to get a SEPA rep to a CC meeting for general talks on the current and future regulations on sewage treatment.
The water quality for south Loch Lomond is rated as “Moderate” and the overall water quality within the NP is lower than out-with the NP which should be a cause of concern to both SEPA and LLTNPA as much as residents.
The, as yet, unpublished Scottish Beaver Strategy says the following :
“Environmental legislation will need to be considered when planning for future translocations. For example, if beaver releases are proposed in or in the vicinity of Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) or Special Protection Areas (SPAs), additional steps will be needed to ensure the sites are not compromised, including a Habitats Regulations Appraisal, as described in the Scottish Code for Conservation Translocations.”
Recommendations from Prof. R. Wheater OBE, FRSE
The release area is not necessarily the potential settlement area
Impacts on fish and fisheries
Costs
Effects on sewage treatment/septic tanks on the Aber flood plain
Summary :
Management of the entire watershed and not just a small part of it is essential.
Management plans should be clear and be based on scientific and other professional understanding.
There should be no release of beavers in Loch Lomond until the National Beaver Strategy is available for examination and its requirements for all aspects of beaver reintroduction are being followed by all concerned.
Professor Wheater has no problem with the reintroduction of beavers but does have serious concerns that the management criteria are not yet clearly stated in respect of control both now and in the future. The maintenance of wild species is essential but given the amount of land available as a result of man's advancement, the long-term future of species large and small will call for research to ensure that we manage the land and species in the most efficient way possible. This will include population control when it is deemed essential.
National Beaver Strategy / The Scottish Code for Conservation Translocations
Key speaker Kieren Jones (NatureScot) is a relatively new recruit to the Beaver team in NS.
The NS role in assessing applications is neutral, each application is assessed on its merits.
No application has been submitted so assessment has not been started.
Some of the points already raised can be addressed tonight, others have been noted and a response will be forwarded post meeting to KCC secretary for distribution.
The publication of the NBS is delayed as some work is still ongoing. The result will be an overarching strategy for Scotland covering the next 20 years and does not contain area by area analysis.
There are many contributors to the strategy document and the accompanying Action Plan will list actions for the different stakeholders to follow up.
JM asked if there was a list of stakeholders who had been consulted.
KJ - This will appear in the published document which is currently scheduled for mid-September.
There will be a new Beaver Advisory Group
Licences will be needed and only NS will be issuing them.
Applications must follow the guidance of The Scottish Code for Conservation Translocations which included consultation with the local communities and a HRA (Habitat Risk Assessment) if any designated sites are potentially affected.
The RSPB are taking the lead in this application for translocation with partnership from LLTNPA.
Any concerns should be directed via their consultation process in order to be properly captured – if concerns go straight to NS or elsewhere, they may well be addressed but they will not be included in the application submission.
Whatever issues arise there are going to be measures to mitigate available, it is not the case that once released then that is that and they can’t be touched.
Tonight has highlighted common concerns which hopefully can be allayed as we speak.
The Beaver team has been put together with mitigation in mind – designed to help landowners address any issues arising. Should further translocation be needed NS would fund it, however before that becomes necessary there are other solutions to try – the “beaver deceiver” device allows dams to be bypassed rather than demolished (and subsequently rebuilt). There are tree protection measures such as a substance that can be painted on that the beavers don’t like the taste of. Fencing of individual or groups of trees to keep beavers away. Other innovations are being tested – as well as learning from other countries.
Licences will be needed for any activities relating to disturbance of beavers or their habitat. Although free, there are criteria needing to be satisfied before being issued. The three tests are :
Monitoring of beaver populations is done by a variety of ways from drones inspecting river banks to boots on the ground via volunteers and landowners. NS engage a consultant from The Beaver Trust also and even anecdotal evidence is taken of sightings.
NS engage regularly with landowners in Tayside now and will continue to do so elsewhere.
The steer from ScotGov is to lean more toward translocations than lethal control.
Beaver group created for that purpose with the aim to get beavers regarded as native species such as deer. There will be problems on the way hence the mitigation plans and beaver group set up.
Liability – applicants will have to demonstrate commitment and ability to deliver what they say they will. Once the beavers are released they become like any other wild animal – deer, badgers, bats etc and do not belong to anyone. However, should issues arise, licenses to kill with beavers would be available following the 3 tests outlined above.
In terms of costs, the landowner with the issues would be responsible but there is currently a limited budget within NS. Engagement and advice should be sought as early as possible.
Regarding Giardia – NS have not seen any evidence of Giardia in beavers in tests done so far. The increased risk from beavers specifically over other species that carry the disease is regarded as low. Before any translocations occur, animals will be screened for this and other health issues of risk to public.
Regarding LL&T area, assessments show that a natural migration of beavers is likely and that there are beavers known to be present on the NNR and in Glen Falloch.
JM to NatureScot: How long for a licence to be granted?
KJ : Approx 3 weeks at the moment
JM : Is an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) needed as part of a translocation licence application?
KJ : A Habitat Regulation Assessment (HRA) is needed which is a kind of EIA. NatureScot would do that as part of the assessment of the licence application.
Colin Liddell (Loch Lomond Angling Improvement Association) : Is a Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment the same as an EIA?
Ian Bray (NatureScot) : While a HRA is needed wherever special designations exist, SEA’s are done for new catchments not previously applied for. SEA’s cover social and economic impacts not just environmental impacts. An EIA is different again and is triggered by conditions specified in the legislation e.g. scale of project. A translocation does not need an EIA but it does need a Strategic Impact Assessment in the form of an SEA.
In terms of consultation, a HRA is developed by inhouse expertise of NS without consultation with other expert bodies.
Malcolm McCormick (Loch Lomond Fisheries Trust) : Even if an EIA is not compulsory could one be done voluntarily and why are subject matter experts such as LLFT not consulted as they hold more data than any other body?
IB : Certainly, for SEA consultations, bodies like LLFT will be contacted but for assessment of Regulations it is not necessary to go out-with NS.
Sally Page recommended NS consult with the Scottish Centre for Ecology and the Natural Environment (SCENE) at Rowardennan for a similar wealth of knowledge of local biodiversity.
JM to RSPB : Why do you want beavers?
Paula Baker (RSPB) : They are good habitat engineers and will improve the fen, they will bring benefits to almost all species on NNR and increase biodiversity. Fen in degraded condition – water level inconsistent – the Aber bog has being drying out since the Aber burn was diverted years ago – manmade interventions could be improved by natural beaver activity. Various members of the community suggested that these desired changes to water level could be achieved by other means.
JM to LLTNPA : Will beaver residency have an effect on planning or people who have houses near beavers? i.e. how far away from a ‘lodge’ is untouchable?
Simon Jones (LLTNPA) : Simon introduced himself - Background in beaver ecology. Beavers already within NP and increasing naturally. LLTNPA are not part of the translocation application but have supported RSPB financially for their consultations. Don’t have definitive answer on planning restrictions as a result of beaver residency.
KJ : Usually 100m but could be 30m – will follow up and send the info later. The point is whether a development will disturb the animal and if so, a licence would be needed to do anything.
David Scott-Park (Local Farmer & KCC) : While there are mitigations such as fences, water level monitors etc, is it true that there is no compensation available for damage to crops etc.?
KJ : That is correct at the moment unless Scot Gov decide to do something along those lines. There is no compensation for crop damage by other wild animals.
DSP : When planning reintroductions – consideration should be given on expected population numbers and when culling might be required before they run away beyond control.
KJ : There is a direction of travel from ScotGov to increase translocations and decrease lethal control but this does not take lethal control off the table.
Anita Anderson (KCC) : As a resident of Aber bog, flooding is a concern can anything be done to divert extra water.
PB (RSPB) : This is something that could be discussed separately as it is not related to beaver activity. Flooding that occurs when the river is in spate will remain, the beaver activity would only even out the normal fluctuations and retain water in the bog.
Gavin MacLellan (KCC) : A lot of talk about impact on the natural environment but equal focus should be on the built environment. Not only the previously mentioned Victorian water infrastructure but there are other critical infrastructures of national importance including a strategic fuel oil pipeline running through the area.
KJ : Will confirm post-meeting but expects that owners/regulators of such structures will be identified and consulted with.
JM to RSPB : How much has RSPB spent on this so far?
PB : Mostly staff time but LLTNPA funded the consultations to the tune of £5k
Colin Liddell (LLAIA) : Where is the empirical evidence that the introduction of beavers to a system such as ours will not have a detrimental effect on migratory fish? Why are we placing the influence of one species against some that are already threatened? The stakeholder engagement seems to be lacking – where are SEPA, where are Fisheries Management Scotland or Marine Scotland in this process?
KJ : No empirical evidence for LL area as no application has been received. Will check for info on similar areas if any and report back.
Bodies such as SEPA would be consulted by NS if they held information necessary to determine the application in hand. They are not automatically invited nor do they have to come forward to NS if not asked.
Eddie Edmonstone (Duntreath Estates) : Did not receive any minutes or info from July meeting. Back then the application was due to be submitted end of August. What is the time line for application and publication of consultation documents for all to see?
PB : Four Stakeholder Engagement Sessions were held and the consultation period extended to 21st August. The paperwork has not been fully processed as yet. Probably another 2-3 weeks until submission.
KJ : Typical backlog now is 3 weeks, so application might get to top of list 3 weeks after submission. The work would start on the assessment HRA, SEA etc. It could be around New Year before anything decided.
DSP to RSPB : Given that the consultation period is over but the application not yet submitted, would the meeting tonight form part of the consultation.
PB : That is why we are here tonight, to listen. Although what is needed for the application is ready, we are still keen to hear the public views
JM : Is there a part of the year where you can catch the beavers?
PB : You can’t capture them between April - August
Willie Roxburgh (resident) : Is there any way that beavers can be described as indigenous to this area or any other part of Scotland? If so, when and why did they disappear?
KJ : Officially they are now treated as ‘former native’ species. They were naturally abundant until 1700’s and were eventually lost to persecution by man for fur and meat rather than as a pest.
Donald MacDonald (resident) : If a beaver built a dam on my land would I get a licence to remove the dam and kill the beaver. Yes or no.
KJ : You would likely get a licence to deal with the dam but unlikely to get a licence to kill the animal.
DM : With great respect to the RSPB, if the beavers are already here why bring more only to have to kill their progeny down the line same as we do the deer nowadays.
KJ : Culling being avoided by translocations now was due to clash of behaviours with man (negative effects on agriculture) rather than over population.
PB (RSPB) : Slow breeders that spread out as they populate, density does not necessarily rise in one place.
David Young : Effects on built environment – shared his experience from Canada where culverts were blocked leading to road collapses. Locally the council budgets here struggle to maintain or repair infrastructure as it is.
Sheelagh McAllister (Beaver Trust) : Confirmed that beavers are slow breeders, take 2 years to maturity before offspring can then breed.
Mary Gray (resident) : How do the beavers travel from place to place?
SMc : The primarily use the watercourses to swim along. Including underground cundies.
Mark Hedgcoe (resident) : To Nature Scot - What proportion of licences have been turned down in last 5 years? To RSPB – what is your understanding of what happened at Kinnordy Loch when beavers dammed up a river and had to be culled?
PB : The were no beavers killed on the RSPB site. There may have been issues elsewhere that other landowners dealt with. Prior to the translocation option, lethal control was the ultimate resolution.
KJ : The number of licences for lethal action are low because it was a last resort until now and other options would be explored first. The actual statistics of applications successful or otherwise is not to hand so will have to be looked up and supplied after the meeting. Probably in the region of 1-10 rejected compared to the 100-200 granted.
Translocations – 2 applications (Knapdale & Argatty), both granted.
John Willis (resident) : How many beavers are to be released?
PB : One family, so minimum of 2. If when captured, they had dependent young then they would be brought too.
JW : Is there a target number (population) for the site? Should an issue occur down the line and a mitigation licence be needed, who pays for the remedial action the licence allows for?
KJ : Currently, the cost would depend on the remedy, translocations would fall to NS, lethal control would more than likely be the landowner. Flow devices would depend on the scale and budget within NS. No target numbers have been set. Project to project it will vary – in Knapdale the translocation was to help widen the gene pool of the existing population.
Charlotte Hunt, Farmer : Are beavers being taken away from Knapdale because there are too many of the same strain?
KJ : No information on that. Currently Tayside is the only known donor location and being used to supplement the population at Knapdale.
Colin Liddell (LLAIA) : On mitigations, currently the fisheries groups organise volunteer groups to clear blockages from migratory routes, if beavers are reintroduced who is going to be responsible for keeping these routes clear?
KJ : Don’t know.
Gavin MacLellan : Culling is inevitable. Shouldn’t the people responsible for releasing beavers be responsible for culling when it is needed?
KJ : Yes. Culling may well be necessary at times. No one is taking it off the table. Questions have been asked about the accreditation scheme (to be allowed to kill) and how often courses/accreditation are available. This will be looked into and included in the post meeting information pack to be sent to KCC once collated.
RSPB are going to apply for a licence within the next month
NS will examine the application and in Chair’s opinion based on the evidence tonight, grant it.
(KJ from NS pointed out that this was not implicit to any of his contributions this evening)
JM suggested that those against granting a licence to release share their views in the consultation by RSPB.
JM requested an unofficial show of hands to show whether you would or would not like beavers to be introduced. About 80% of attendees were against, less than 10% were in favour.
JM thanked everyone for coming out and taking part and wished everyone a good night.
Meeting closed at 21:40
Her Majesty the Late Queen Elizabeth – a minutes silence was held in respect for the death of Queen Elizabeth.
Jim Morrison, Chair, (JM)
Gavin MacLellan, Vice Chair (GM)
David Scott-Park (DSP)
Anita Anderson, Treasurer (AA)
In attendance: Martin Rooney, WDC; David Mackie, LLNP
Andy Sinnott, Secretary
PC Glen Roberts, Police Scotland
(GM took the minutes)
None.
Approved by DSP
Seconded by GM
WDC Roads have made available a document “Asset Management Plan Roads Infrastructure 2018-23” Rev 2 just before the meeting. This was requested to verify the agreement with WDC to make progress on the repair and upgrade of the roadside path from Gartocharn to Balloch and other road repairs such as School Road and Church Road. The CC has not had time to review and action this document.
RSPB meetings were held during the period since the last KCC concerning an intended application for a beaver release licence, leaving many questions unanswered. KCC held a Special Meeting on 5 September, separate minutes, which will be further discussed today.
The following deaths were recorded since the last meeting:
Sir Raymond Johnston CBE, past owner of the Wards
Morag Bennie
Walter Colquhoun
Billy Maxwell
GM noted the contribution that Sir Raymond Johnstone had made to the KCC in previous years.
• Crime report - not received
• Speed enforcement - report n/a
A presentation was made by representatives of Coriolis Energy Ltd, copy on KCC’s Website,
Coriolis is a planning contractor and developer (17 past projects) in partnership with ESB – Irish Energy Company and future operator.
Coriolis withdraw from the project if and when Planning is approved by Scottish Exec – community member Steve Macken advised he has an association with Coriolis.
A presentation will be made by ESB on 11 October 22
Application to Scottish gov is scheduled for Q1/23
£5k/MW will be paid to the community -index linked – installed capacity 100 MW
(No indication of a community tariff reduction was provided but Coriolis later clarified this is an option).
Turbines will be 250 Metres high, 19 sets
Contact details:
sam.mcmillan@mcmillan.scot
james.baird@coriolis-energy.com
AA advised the recent bank balances:
Current account £911.91
Benefit fund £424.01
During the period the KCC agreed and purchased a projector to enhance meetings and presentations. Cost £367.98
• Current applications
Ref No 2022/0194/HAE Proposal Extension to existing single storey outbuilding and change of use to ancillary residential accommodation within the curtilage of existing dwellinghouse Location Chimes Cottage School Road Gartocharn Owner/Agricultural Tenant Notification
Ref No 2022/0198/LAW Officer Proposal Lawfulness of erection of rear extension Location Claddoch Cottage Gartocharn Application Type Certificate of Lawfulness Date Decision Issued 10 August 2022 Decision Certificate Issued
Ref No 2022/0170/DET Proposal Provision of 2 No holiday chalets and 4 No parking spaces, with new access track and bellmouth off Old School Road and new bio-disc Location Gartenwall Old School Road Gartocharn Advertisement Type Neighbour Notification. This application is associated with an Enforcement Notice from LLNP.
Ref No 2022/0215/DET Proposal Erection of dwellinghouse Location Glencairn Farm Old Military Road Gartocharn Applicant Application Type Detailed Planning Permission Expected Decision Level DEL Advertisement Type Neighbour Notification
Ref No 2022/0196/DET Proposal Erection of dwellinghouse with detached garage and waste water treatment plant Location Aber Mill Ross And Aber Road Gartocharn Applicant Mr William Macpherson Aber Mill Mill Ross And Aber Road Gartocharn G83 8NQ Advertisement Type Neighbour Notification
The Agent provided an update of this application, a flood risk assessment had been submitted, the applicant is continuing to pursue the application.
Ref No 2022/0210/DET Erection of dwellinghouse Location Land Adjacent (W/NW) To Kerrknowe Badshalloch Road Gartocharn Advertisement Type Neighbour Notification
WITHDRAWN
The above applications were discussed, an opportunity for Applicants and Neighbours to offer comment was provided. KCC have no actions arising.
Lomond Banks – Councillor Rooney provided and update, WDC are a statutory consultee, the Planning decision sits with LLNP. KCC have concerns over the negative impact on local infrastructure including parking at Balloch Station. KCC asked Councillor Rooney to reflect this in any WDC comments.
Key points
RSPB claimed there was a need for Beavers since water level of ponds could only be raised by Beaver dams, members of the public with knowledge felt this objective could be met by other means.
Representation from Angling and River Endrick, Malcolm MacCormick gave a presentation outlining the challenges being worked on to preserve salmon in the river. Conclusion was that Beavers are a new protected species that are being set to challenge the existing species at risk and this creates another risk to the outcome of work to protect and improve salmon habitation in the river.
Representative from KCC, Gavin MacLellan presented a presentation on the potential impacts to the infrastructure, “built environment”, tourism and public health. He also noted that a number of regulatory agencies are not listed as consultees in the Beaver Licence application and Guidance process. SNH agreed to consider this.
SEPA – a number of members of the community expressed concern with the limited response by SEPA and the general lack of familiarity of local issues demonstrated in past applications.
Presentation by Sally Page based on correspondence with Prof. R. Wheater OBE, FRSE
The release area is not necessarily the potential settlement area, control measures should be set out with the licence.
An informal vote was taken with a substantial majority of the room against the issue of a Licence.
Full meeting Minutes are issued.
No report
The public consultation on the review of the Loch Lomond Byelaws is open from Wednesday 27th July 2022 until 5pm on Wednesday 19th October 2022. These bylaws mostly concern the users of craft on loch Lomond. Members of the Public are encouraged to respond directly. Members of the KCC have participated in workshops during the development stages.
Link to consultation:
https://www.lochlomond-trossachs.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/LL-Byelaws-Consultation-2022-V2.1.pdf
Link to survey:
https://www.smartsurvey.co.uk/s/byelawreview/
none
none
7 November at 7.30 pm, KM Hall, Gartocharn, check KCC website
Chairman : Jim Morrison (JM) from Kilmaronock Community Council (KCC)
JM introduced Andy McClay (Luss & Arden CC rep) and Brian Crook (Advocate, Terra Firma Chambers) who were overseeing the conduct of the meeting as independent parties.
The purpose of the meeting is to hear the pros and cons associated with the translocation of unwanted Tayside beavers to the Endrick catchment system in south Loch Lomond. Thus residents of the wider community in the Endrick catchment are represented tonight, not just Kilmaronock.
There were four presentations by an agent on behalf of the release Licence applicant, the RSPB.
KCC felt that the subject matter had need of a wider consultation, that there may be conflict with other social and environmental activity and that many questions remained without answer. No minutes from those events are available.
The minutes from this meeting will record the information given tonight and the comments from the local communities represented.
Attendees included representatives from:
LLTNPA, Nature Scotland, RSPB, Loch Lomond Fisheries Trust, Stirling Council, Montrose Estates, Drymen community council and other interests. Approximately 65 attended.
Received from Jackie Baillie MSP, Councillor Jonathan McColl, Ruth White & Karen Ramoo from Scottish Land and Estates and Kate Maitland (National Farmers Union).
Statements of concern Presentation from Malcolm MacCormick (Loch Lomond Fisheries Trust)
Malcolm showed pictures of tree damage from River Earn caused by Beavers – mature trees felled.
Comparison of Pros & Cons of beavers (see accompanying presentation):
Beavers are here and here to stay but should the population expand naturally or be accelerated by translocations.
1. The RSPB commission an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) on the release of beavers in the lower Endrick. This EIA should include input from the Trust relative to the current state of fish populations on the Endrick and its tributaries, as well as the wider Lomond catchment.
2. Upon receipt of the EIA the RSPB / NatureScot should other undertake a meaningful consultation exercise that seeks to engage all stakeholders, including the angling community need to generate trust within the wider community / stakeholder population.
3. The RSPB / NatureScot should also confirm what funds will be made available to compensate for mature riparian tree protection, riverbank repairs and crop destruction after all, with rights come responsibilities!
Lack of tree cover on embankments and the shade provided has an impact on salmon stocks due to the increased water temperature. Are we introducing one iconic species to the detriment of another?
Remember the beavers will go where the beavers want to go. Monitoring and management will be needed.
Presentation from Gavin MacLellan (resident) on Public health risks Loch Lomond & Trossachs are part of a Victorian drinking water system designed and built when no beavers were around to influence the designs.
LLTNP actively promote, through their Outdoor Recreation Plan and its successor, open water swimming for both leisure and sport but this may be at risk. Some high-profile races are staged on Loch Lomond bringing economic benefits – the selling point is clean water and this is at risk
There is a potential risk which needs to be assessed and addressed regarding the introduction of an effectively new species.
There is likely to be interference to infrastructure either directly or indirectly by the animals themselves to both the natural and the built environment.
Beavers, along with other animals, are known to carry zoonotic diseases such as Giardiasis, which is transmitted via water – infections have occurred in Tayside and throughout the world, the chance of incurring in Scotland are significant based on evidence from other countries. No studies done in Scotland to enable an informed decision. While not fatal, it is very unpleasant and would have a negative impact on water-born outdoor recreation. Studies are available from Canada and USA by governmental agencies.
Areas of LLTNP are designated and regulated as drinking water protected areas and the current Licence assessment plan required under the Beaver Strategy does not require consultation with these responsible agencies or infrastructure operators. The cost of mitigation of the introduction of Beavers to the built environment has not been considered by Nature Scotland but should be in the interest of the Scottish Economy.
There is concern that the responsible agencies such as SEPA do not have sufficient funds and expertise to make valid assessment.
Trials in Knapdale where conditions are significantly different to Loch Lomond & Trossachs where critical infrastructure is installed, affecting over 1 million people, do not provide good guidance.
Responsible party for consequential losses – but who is it? RSPB will be releasing but not responsible for where the beavers migrate to. NatureScot seem to be the ones to pick up the bill but don’t have the resources to do so.
Will the true cost to the taxpayer ever be quantified?
Talk by Sally Page (resident) on SEPA response and their resources Sally discovered that SEPA hadn’t been informed about the RSPB’s application. As the body regulating watercourses and septic tanks which may well be affected, this was surprising.
Sally, like the other residents of the low lying area around Aber, are concerned for the flooding of residential septic tanks and that servicing the neighbouring caravan park.
KCC contacted SEPA as did Sally via MSP Pam Gosal. The gist of both replies being that if there are problems in the future, the owners of septic tanks would be responsible for alerting SEPA and/or the local authority and that NatureScot would advise on the implementation of any necessary mitigations.
There was no direct answer on who would take care of any detrimental effects of damming the Aber burn downstream of the Gartocharn Sewage works.
KCC are keen to get a SEPA rep to a CC meeting for general talks on the current and future regulations on sewage treatment.
The water quality for south Loch Lomond is rated as “Moderate” and the overall water quality within the NP is lower than out-with the NP which should be a cause of concern to both SEPA and LLTNPA as much as residents.
The, as yet, unpublished Scottish Beaver Strategy says the following:
“Environmental legislation will need to be considered when planning for future translocations. For example, if beaver releases are proposed in or in the vicinity of Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) or Special Protection Areas (SPAs), additional steps will be needed to ensure the sites are not compromised, including a Habitats Regulations Appraisal, as described in the Scottish Code for Conservation Translocations.”
Recommendations from Prof. R. Wheater OBE, FRSE Presentation by Sally Page based on correspondence with Prof. R. Wheater OBE, FRSE. The release area is not necessarily the potential settlement area.
Costs
Effects on sewage treatment/septic tanks on the Aber flood plain
Summary:
Management of the entire watershed and not just a small part of it is essential. Management plans should be clear and be based on scientific and other professional understanding. There should be no release of beavers in Loch Lomond until the National Beaver Strategy is available for examination and its requirements for all aspects of beaver reintroduction are being followed by all concerned.
Professor Wheater has no problem with the reintroduction of beavers but does have serious concerns that the management criteria are not yet clearly stated in respect of control both now and in the future. The maintenance of wild species is essential but given the amount of land available as a result of man's advancement, the long-term future of species large and small will call for research to ensure that we manage the land and species in the most efficient way possible. This will include population control when it is deemed essential.
National Beaver Strategy / The Scottish Code for Conservation Translocations Key speaker Kieren Jones (NatureScot) is a relatively new recruit to the Beaver team in NS.
The NS role in assessing applications is neutral, each application is assessed on its merits.
No application has been submitted so assessment has not been started.
Some of the points already raised can be addressed tonight, others have been noted and a response will be forwarded post meeting to KCC secretary for distribution.
The NBS, why it was created, who owns the document, who was consulted. The publication of the NBS is delayed as some work is still ongoing. The result will be an overarching strategy for Scotland covering the next 20 years and does not contain area by area analysis.
There are many contributors to the strategy document and the accompanying Action Plan will list actions for the different stakeholders to follow up.
JM asked if there was a list of stakeholders who had been consulted.
KJ - This will appear in the published document which is currently scheduled for mid-September.
There will be a new Beaver Advisory Group Licensee responsibilities under the Scottish Code for Conservation Translocation / Licensing conditions. Licences will be needed and only NS will be issuing them.
Applications must follow the guidance of The Scottish Code for Conservation Translocations which included consultation with the local communities and a HRA (Habitat Risk Assessment) if any designated sites are potentially affected.
The RSPB are taking the lead in this application for translocation with partnership from LLTNPA.
Any concerns should be directed via their consultation process in order to be properly captured – if concerns go straight to NS or elsewhere, they may well be addressed but they will not be included in the application submission.
Whatever issues arise there are going to be measures to mitigate available, it is not the case that once released then that is that and they can’t be touched.
Tonight has highlighted common concerns which hopefully can be allayed as we speak.
The Beaver team has been put together with mitigation in mind – designed to help landowners address any issues arising. Should further translocation be needed NS would fund it, however before that becomes necessary there are other solutions to try – the “beaver deceiver” device allows dams to be bypassed rather than demolished (and subsequently rebuilt). There are tree protection measures such as a substance that can be painted on that the beavers don’t like the taste of. Fencing of individual or groups of trees to keep beavers away. Other innovations are being tested – as well as learning from other countries.
1. Action is needed related to the conditions in the legislation e.g. public health, causing serious damage, if that test is passed then,
2. Is there a satisfactory alternative to the action proposed? If ‘No’ then,
3. Will it have a detrimental effect on that species in the long term? If ‘No’ then,
a licence can be issued.
Monitoring of beaver populations is done by a variety of ways from drones inspecting river banks to boots on the ground via volunteers and landowners. NS engage a consultant from The Beaver Trust also and even anecdotal evidence is taken of sightings.
NS engage regularly with landowners in Tayside now and will continue to do so elsewhere.
The steer from ScotGov is to lean more toward translocations than lethal control.
Beaver group created for that purpose with the aim to get beavers regarded as native species such as deer. There will be problems on the way hence the mitigation plans and beaver group set up.
Liability – applicants will have to demonstrate commitment and ability to deliver what they say they will. Once the beavers are released they become like any other wild animal – deer, badgers, bats etc and do not belong to anyone. However, should issues arise, licenses to kill with beavers would be available following the 3 tests outlined above.
In terms of costs, the landowner with the issues would be responsible but there is currently a limited budget within NS. Engagement and advice should be sought as early as possible.
Regarding Giardia – NS have not seen any evidence of Giardia in beavers in tests done so far. The increased risk from beavers specifically over other species that carry the disease is regarded as low. Before any translocations occur, animals will be screened for this and other health issues of risk to public.
Regarding LL&T area, assessments show that a natural migration of beavers is likely and that there are beavers known to be present on the NNR and in Glen Falloch.
- JM to NatureScot: How long for a licence to be granted?
- KJ : Approx 3 weeks at the moment
- JM : Is an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) needed as part of a translocation licence application?
- KJ : A Habitat Regulation Assessment (HRA) is needed which is a kind of EIA. NatureScot would do that as part of the assessment of the licence application.
- Colin Liddell (Loch Lomond Angling Improvement Association) : Is a Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment the same as an EIA?
- Ian Bray (NatureScot) : While a HRA is needed wherever special designations exist, SEA’s are done for new catchments not previously applied for. SEA’s cover social and economic impacts not just
environmental impacts. An EIA is different again and is triggered by conditions specified in the legislation e.g. scale of project. A translocation does not need an EIA but it does need a Strategic Impact Assessment in the form of an SEA.
In terms of consultation, a HRA is developed by inhouse expertise of NS without consultation with other expert bodies.
- Malcolm McCormick (Loch Lomond Fisheries Trust) : Even if an EIA is not compulsory could one be done voluntarily and why are subject matter experts such as LLFT not consulted as they hold more data than any other body?
- IB : Certainly, for SEA consultations, bodies like LLFT will be contacted but for assessment of Regulations it is not necessary to go out-with NS.
Sally Page recommended NS consult with the Scottish Centre for Ecology and the Natural Environment (SCENE) at Rowardennan for a similar wealth of knowledge of local biodiversity.
- JM to RSPB : Why do you want beavers?
- Paula Baker (RSPB) : They are good habitat engineers and will improve the fen, they will bring benefits to almost all species on NNR and increase biodiversity. Fen in degraded condition – water level inconsistent – the Aber bog has being drying out since the Aber burn was diverted years ago – manmade interventions could be improved by natural beaver activity. Various members of the community suggested that these desired changes to water level could be achieved by other means.
- JM to LLTNPA : Will beaver residency have an effect on planning or people who have houses near beavers? i.e. how far away from a ‘lodge’ is untouchable?
Simon Jones (LLTNPA) : Simon introduced himself - Background in beaver ecology. Beavers already within NP and increasing naturally. LLTNPA are not part of the translocation application but have supported RSPB financially for their consultations. Don’t have definitive answer on planning restrictions as a result of beaver residency.
- KJ : Usually 100m but could be 30m – will follow up and send the info later. The point is whether a development will disturb the animal and if so, a licence would be needed to do anything.
David Scott-Park (Local Farmer & KCC) : While there are mitigations such as fences, water level monitors etc, is it true that there is no compensation available for damage to crops etc.?
- KJ : That is correct at the moment unless Scot Gov decide to do something along those lines. There is no compensation for crop damage by other wild animals.
DSP : When planning reintroductions – consideration should be given on expected population numbers and when culling might be required before they run away beyond control.
- KJ : There is a direction of travel from ScotGov to increase translocations and decrease lethal control but this does not take lethal control off the table.
Anita Anderson (KCC) : As a resident of Aber bog, flooding is a concern can anything be done to divert extra water.
- PB (RSPB) : This is something that could be discussed separately as it is not related to beaver activity. Flooding that occurs when the river is in spate will remain, the beaver activity would only even out the normal fluctuations and retain water in the bog.
- Gavin MacLellan (KCC) : A lot of talk about impact on the natural environment but equal focus should be on the built environment. Not only the previously mentioned Victorian water infrastructure but there are other critical infrastructures of national importance including a strategic fuel oil pipeline running through the area.
- KJ : Will confirm post-meeting but expects that owners/regulators of such structures will be identified and consulted with.
JM to RSPB : How much has RSPB spent on this so far?
- PB : Mostly staff time but LLTNPA funded the consultations to the tune of £5k
- Colin Liddell (LLAIA) : Where is the empirical evidence that the introduction of beavers to a system such as ours will not have a detrimental effect on migratory fish? Why are we placing the influence of one species against some that are already threatened? The stakeholder engagement seems to be lacking – where are SEPA, where are Fisheries Management Scotland or Marine Scotland in this process?
- KJ : No empirical evidence for LL area as no application has been received. Will check for info on similar areas if any and report back.
Bodies such as SEPA would be consulted by NS if they held information necessary to determine the application in hand. They are not automatically invited nor do they have to come forward to NS if not asked.
- Eddie Edmonstone (Duntreath Estates) : Did not receive any minutes or info from July meeting. Back then the application was due to be submitted end of August. What is the time line for application and publication of consultation documents for all to see?
PB : Four Stakeholder Engagement Sessions were held and the consultation period extended to 21st August. The paperwork has not been fully processed as yet. Probably another 2-3 weeks until submission.
- KJ : Typical backlog now is 3 weeks, so application might get to top of list 3 weeks after submission. The work would start on the assessment HRA, SEA etc. It could be around New Year before anything decided.
DSP to RSPB : Given that the consultation period is over but the application not yet submitted, would the meeting tonight form part of the consultation.
PB : That is why we are here tonight, to listen. Although what is needed for the application is ready, we are still keen to hear the public views
- JM : Is there a part of the year where you can catch the beavers?
- PB : You can’t capture them between April - August
Willie Roxburgh (resident) : Is there any way that beavers can be described as indigenous to this area or any other part of Scotland? If so, when and why did they disappear?
- KJ : Officially they are now treated as ‘former native’ species. They were naturally abundant until 1700’s and were eventually lost to persecution by man for fur and meat rather than as a pest.
Donald MacDonald (resident) : If a beaver built a dam on my land would I get a licence to remove the dam and kill the beaver. Yes or no.
- KJ : You would likely get a licence to deal with the dam but unlikely to get a licence to kill the animal.
DM : With great respect to the RSPB, if the beavers are already here why bring more only to have to kill their progeny down the line same as we do the deer nowadays.
- KJ : Culling being avoided by translocations now was due to clash of behaviours with man (negative effects on agriculture) rather than over population.
PB (RSPB) : Slow breeders that spread out as they populate, density does not necessarily rise in one place.
- David Young : Effects on built environment – shared his experience from Canada where culverts were blocked leading to road collapses. Locally the council budgets here struggle to maintain or repair infrastructure as it is.
- Sheelagh McAllister (Beaver Trust) : Confirmed that beavers are slow breeders, take 2 years to maturity before offspring can then breed.
- Mary Gray (resident) : How do the beavers travel from place to place?
SMc : The primarily use the watercourses to swim along. Including underground cundies.
- Mark Hedgcoe (resident) : To Nature Scot - What proportion of licences have been turned down in last 5 years? To RSPB – what is your understanding of what happened at Kinnordy Loch when beavers dammed up a river and had to be culled?
- PB : The were no beavers killed on the RSPB site. There may have been issues elsewhere that other landowners dealt with. Prior to the translocation option, lethal control was the ultimate resolution.
- KJ : The number of licences for lethal action are low because it was a last resort until now and other options would be explored first. The actual statistics of applications successful or otherwise is not to hand so will have to be looked up and supplied after the meeting. Probably in the region of 1-10 rejected compared to the 100-200 granted.
Translocations – 2 applications (Knapdale & Argatty), both granted.
- John Willis (resident) : How many beavers are to be released?
- PB : One family, so minimum of 2. If when captured, they had dependent young then they would be brought too.
- JW : Is there a target number (population) for the site? Should an issue occur down the line and a mitigation licence be needed, who pays for the remedial action the licence allows for?
- KJ : Currently, the cost would depend on the remedy, translocations would fall to NS, lethal control would more than likely be the landowner. Flow devices would depend on the scale and budget within NS. No target numbers have been set. Project to project it will vary – in Knapdale the translocation was to help widen the gene pool of the existing population.
Charlotte Hunt, Farmer : Are beavers being taken away from Knapdale because there are too many of the same strain?
- KJ : No information on that. Currently Tayside is the only known donor location and being used to supplement the population at Knapdale.
Colin Liddell (LLAIA) : On mitigations, currently the fisheries groups organise volunteer groups to clear blockages from migratory routes, if beavers are reintroduced who is going to be responsible for keeping these routes clear?
- KJ : Don’t know.
Gavin MacLellan : Culling is inevitable. Shouldn’t the people responsible for releasing beavers be responsible for culling when it is needed?
- KJ : Yes. Culling may well be necessary at times. No one is taking it off the table. Questions have been asked about the accreditation scheme (to be allowed to kill) and how often courses/accreditation are available. This will be looked into and included in the post meeting information pack to be sent to KCC once collated.
RSPB are going to apply for a licence within the next month NS will examine the application and in Chair’s opinion based on the evidence tonight, grant it.
(KJ from NS pointed out that this was not implicit to any of his contributions this evening)
JM suggested that those against granting a licence to release share their views in the consultation by RSPB.
JM requested an unofficial show of hands to show whether you would or would not like beavers to be introduced. About 80% of attendees were against, less than 10% were in favour.
JM thanked everyone for coming out and taking part and wished everyone a good night.
Meeting closed at 21:40
Chairman;
Community councillors;
Independent attendees
1. Welcome
2. Reason for Meeting
3. Conduct of Meeting
4. Desired outcome of meeting
5. National Beaver Strategy
6. Statements of concern
7. Recommendations from professional bodies
8. NatureScot Response
Continued… PTO
9. Questions and Answers
10. Summary from the Chair
11. Vote of public support
KCC : Gavin MacLellan (GM), Andrew Sinnott (AS), Anita Anderson (AA) and David Scott-Park (DSP).
WDC Communities Team : Geraldine MacDonald
Police Scotland : PC Glen Roberts
Plus 4 other members of the public
Sally Page, David Mackie (LLTNPA) & WDC Cllr. Hazel Sorrell.
At the recent election, four candidates stood for 8 places on the community council.
The previous chair, Jim Morrison stood down. KCC expressed thanks to Jim for his service to the community council over the last term as vice chair then chair.
Gavin MacLellan was appointed interim chair for the next 2 meetings while we look for more community councillors. Andrew Sinnott was reappointed as Secretary, Anita Anderson as Treasurer and David Scott-Park as vice-chair.
Following discussion with all present, KCC will try to recruit more to join. Of particular interest are younger people. The role of a CC is not too onerous. Hopefully the upcoming community engagement with the Local Place Plan will give people a chance to see how their voice can be heard. WDC Communities Team will assist.
Geraldine MacDonald of the WDC Communities Team introduced herself and described her role as project worker assigned to Kilmaronock. Geraldine also outlined the next round of Participatory Budgeting and will assist GM in obtaining a copy of the electoral roll.
None.
Proposed as accurate by GM, seconded by AA.
None.
Kilmaronock Community Council
PC Glen Roberts attended and took us through the Crime Report and how it is generated. See appendix 1.
Glen has been in discussions with WDC regarding speeding issues raised by KCC. They are reluctant to install fixed cameras. Mobile resources have been provided periodically with the use of hand held Unipar speed detectors. Intermittent and unscheduled speed monitoring often has more effect than a fixed camera that drivers slow down for until passed.
GM asked if there was a log of hours that we could report to reassure the community of the work being done.
Other measures such as Community Speedwatch (community trained to use the speed detectors), spoof camera signs & pop-up policemen were discussed. Glen could not find any info on private speed camera providers.
GM talked about fly tipping and suspicious damage to locked gates.
Glen then advised that as the dark nights are coming, he anticipates a rise in acquisitive crime so be vigilant and report suspicious behaviour of people or vehicles to 101 or email ArgyllDunbartonshireCommunityEngagementTeam@scotland.police.uk
As Glen is about to move regions and no longer represent Gartocharn, KCC thanked him for the good cooperation over recent years.
a. Outgoings : Kilmaronock Hall hire.
b. Current account balance : £874.41
c. Benevolent fund balance : £424.01
AA is investigating why the monthly web hosting fee (direct debit) has not been paid since August.
No new applications submitted since July meeting.
Previous Provision of 2 No holiday chalets and 4 No parking spaces, with new access track and bellmouth off Old School Road and new bio-disc
Gartenwall Old School Road Gartocharn Alexandria G83 8SD
Ref. No: 2022/0170/DET | Received: Thu 26 May 2022 | Validated: Tue 19 Jul 2022 | Status: Decided
Withdrawn
Lomond Banks
Kilmaronock Community Council
There was an excellent summary of the depositions made in favour and against. This will be added as an appendix (#2) for interest.
The main issue for KCC community is access to parking at the railway station. Most residents have to drive to catch the train as the bus service is inadequate and more active travel routes e.g. footway along A811 are hazardous.
KCC will submit a formal objection until parking provision is resolved satisfactorily.
AS to compose and sent a letter to the planning department
LPP
Following best practice, a steering committee consisting of representatives from all the main village interest groups was set up to oversee the development of a LPP.
A rough timeline is to begin public consultations in February 2023. Prior to that a basic information gathering round will be conducted by mail and online and in person. Depending on interest and feedback there will be at least two rounds of consultation, the second one being around summertime.
The first steering committee planning meeting is on 28 November and an update will be provided in January’s KCC meeting and on social media prior to that.
Wind Farm
The promoter, Coriolis, held events in Gartocharn and Balloch. Should the project be approved, compensation is given to the local communities based on power generated. While not all beneficiaries are defined, Gartocharn is considered to be eligible. GM has been in discussions on how the compensation could come in the form of reduced energy costs direct to households rather than a lump sum of cash to be handed out for ‘projects’. Coriolis will provide their cost models once available.
GM noted that no written objections have been received by KCC although one or two meeting attendees have expressed objections in meetings.
Once again there were discussions on the viability of hydro power on the Leven but this has been looked into and not enough power would be generated versus the cost.
Since the Aber Bridge project was cancelled there are no active projects. Hopefully, some ideas will come from the LPP consultations. KCT will be an active participant in the LPP process.
As mentioned last time, the board would like more trustees to join up so perhaps those with good ideas will be the ones to help get them implemented. Contact KCT@gartocharn.org if interested.
Kilmaronock Community Council
KCC replied to the consultation regarding the review of the bye-laws. A copy will be placed on our website. In summary, we tend to favour education over regulation/prohibition but realise that not everyone can be educated. We prefer not to have a proliferation of markers that need to be lit at night.
AS to upload consultation response to KCC website
(https://kilmaronockcc.org/consultations)
There has been no response, still, from Gail Macfarlane to our request for a scope of works for the various sections of A811 footway. We did receive the Roads Asset Management Plan (RAMP) courtesy of Cllr Rooney. However, we do not have a timetable for works or report of what if anything has been undertaken.
KCC (AS) to follow up with a new letter to Gail Macfarlane.
Seasonal rainfall has once again flooded our streets including A811 in places, this will also be discussed with the roads dept. We will see if they survey the pipe network for blockages as sucking leaves out of gullies doesn’t seem to have much effect.
KCC to include this in letter to Gail Church Road still a mess.
KCC to include this in letter to Gail
After a year or more of consultations on the effectiveness and promotion of Community Councils, elections were held. Kilmaronock returned 4 community councillors which is the minimum to form a CC. Several others did not receive the required number of nominations so effectively folded. Locally, Balloch & Haldane CC folded but Alexandria was brought into existence. Overall in WD area, there are fewer CC’s than there were before.
KCC will now actively seek new additional members, we can co-opt one more but if we want and can get more than one, then we will arrange for a mini-election with WDC assistance.
Balloch Castle Country Park Regeneration Support our Riverwoods Pioneers Proposal Don’t Let Balloch Castle Country Park Sink.
Vote NOW for our Riverwoods Pioneer Proposal to help Balloch Park win funding for nature restoration. Voting closes on November 30 2022.
For voting information, go to our:
Website: https://ballochparkregen.co.uk/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Ballochcastlecountrypark
Kilmaronock Community Council
Balloch Castle Country Park – Mountain Biking Project launch
A new mountain bike trail network and skills area is being proposed for Balloch Park. The ambition is to develop a free mountain bike skills area and small mountain bike trail network in Balloch Park for residents to enjoy and benefit from both physically and mentally.
Your opinion matters and we’d encourage you to take a look at the detailed proposal which can be found here: Balloch Castle CP MTB Project Presentation.
8 for 800
To celebrate Dumbarton's Octocentenary there will be some short free talks focusing on objects from West Dunbartonshire Council's Museum and Archives Collections relating to the history of the town. See village FB page for more info.
NatureScot SEA consultation
The Nature.Scot consultation is live until 18 November.
The NatureScot Strategic Environmental Assessment of the effects of beavers on the River Leven and Forth catchments is available here :
www.nature.scot/beaver-sea-consultation-have-your-say
Geraldine handed out some posters and application forms for the next round of community budgeting.
AA to ask Mary to display the poster in the local shop.
Monday 16 January 2023 at 19:30 in KMH
Please send in any agenda items in good time to secretary@kilmaronockcc.org
GM thanked everyone and closed the meeting 22:00h