News today

« Scottish Government snubbed by Westminster on UN poverty summit | Main | Fishing boat raided for electrocuting clams in government crackdown »


Jeannette Ellwood - Spokespeson - Carrick Residents Group

With a site hearing and second planning committee meeting on Monday for the controversial development at Carrick Castle we are waiting to see whether once again whether it is money or the park's community and environment that are more important to The Park. With the Arrochar torpedo site we have already seen a case where the fundamentals of a business proposal were not given due attention, this time even a lay person can examine the submitted development plan and see the basic problem, while the supporting bio-diversity proposal does not stand up to basic bio-diversity arguments.

So far the planning office have dismissed these points raised by the Community, our Community Council objection and the objections of our MSP. A formal complaint has been issued by the Community Group to Gordon Watson, CEO of the Park. No response to date, so we will see whether anything anything has improved on Monday.

Carrick Castle Residents Group

David Long, Carrick Castle.Argyll

It appears to me that Loch Lomond and Trossachs National Park is only interested in commercial ventures from which they can profit. Objecting to any such scheme, even in numbers seems to be totally ignored and the outsider always seems to win. I though the reason for National Parks existence was to look after the natural beauty of the terrain it has been put in place to protect, not a license to build without consideration, deface and scar the countryside and put in danger or kill the natural flora and fauna that is indigenous to specific areas.
Surely it should be for the people who live in the parks who should be making the decisions as it is they who are most affected.
David Long residen of Loch Lomond and Trossachs National Park

Peter J G Jack - Chairman, Loch Lomond Association

The Loch Lomond Association (LLA) is a representative elected community group of 36 years standing. It defends and supports all kinds of outdoor recreation and water-based sporting activities on and around the Loch, not only camping freedoms enjoyed by our membership. The LLA also refutes the Park (NPA)spindoctor's untrue comments in the article which are pathetic in the light of the wall of wide public opposition submitted both to the consultation itself, and to the Scottish Ministers later, at the laughably manipulative way the public consultation was misinterpreted . The sad truth is the NPA's grand plans for the Park centre on brutal uncaring commercialism, and wringing NPA income from all forms of past cultural public freedoms. It is no wonder the Park Management is almost unanimously locally despised, except by their nimbyist coterie of business pals who feed at the same troughs of self-interest. Keep at your tasks of long-overdue Park exposure Messrs Kempe and Morris. The silent public majority who love the freedoms conferred by the Land Reform Act 2003 and SOAC, fully support and admire your attempts to bring some proper regulatory discipline to this out-of-control largely-unelected quango. They listen to no-one, are a law unto themselves, and their own small supporting cabal. As may be read above, they thrive on self-delusion, and on believing their own nonsensical propoganda.

Helen Todd

The criticisms the park has received over the proposed camping ban cannot be categorised as just being from a couple of individuals with concerns. Considered objections were voiced by national recreation bodies including sportscotland, the Scottish Sports Association, Scottish Canoe Association, Royal Yachting Association, Ramblers Scotland and the Mountaineering Council of Scotland, who all raised valid concerns as to the appropriateness and effectiveness of any camping byelaws.

The proposed byelaws are now awaiting a decision by the Scottish Ministers.

The comments to this entry are closed.