HOLYROOD is to hear calls for Scotland's third national park to be created in Galloway.
SNP MSP Emma Harper said the move could boost physical and mental health as well as benefitting the environment and economy.
Campaigners have long called for the creation of more national parks in Scotland to better protect and enhance key rural and coastal areas.
The UK boasts 15 national parks but just two – Loch Lomond and The Trossachs and the Cairngorms – are located north of the border.
The Scottish Campaign for National Parks (SCNP) and the Association for the Protection of Rural Scotland previously identified seven areas for future consideration.
These are Galloway, the Scottish Borders, the area around Ben Nevis and Glen Coe, a coastal and marine national park centred on Mull, Glen Affric, Harris and Wester Ross.
However the Scottish Government has so far resisted such calls, insisting it has no plans to create more parks.
The Galloway National Park Association (GNPA) argues the region "possesses natural and cultural heritage resources of outstanding national importance, and a distinctive character and coherent identity".
In a 2019 paper, it said national park status "would raise the profile of the area and contribute both directly and indirectly to its economic and social development and future prosperity".
The suggested boundary would extend from Dumfries and Galloway into South Ayrshire and East Ayrshire, with all the local councils expressing support.
GNPA chair Rob Lucas said: “A national park in Galloway would bring huge benefits to the people of our region and the whole of Scotland.
“There is a great deal of support for the idea and the contribution it could make to building a sustainable economy and improving wellbeing."
Ms Harper will bring forward a motion on the issue in Holyrood on Thursday.
She said: “The importance of our physical and mental health, particularly during the current Covid-19 pandemic, is crucial.
"We know from numerous studies and research that one of the best ways to maintain positive health and well-being is through accessing the natural environment and through engaging in and trying new activities.
"Galloway is very well placed to do this and there is already fantastic resources such as the UNESCO Biosphere, 7Stanes and Galloway Forest Park."
She added: “There is, as always, the possibility to further expand the potential of our area and to use it smartly to mitigate climate change, to conserve nature and to allow people access to protected space which promotes positive health and well-being.
"To this end, I have been working with the Galloway National Park Association and this motion asks the Scottish Government to set out, in principle, its position on a national park for Galloway with the potential benefits it could bring."
Ms Harper said increasing the number of national parks would also help the Government meet its commitment to protect at least 30 per cent of Scotland’s land for nature by 2030.
Mr Lucas called on MSPs of all parties to support the motion "as a key action to help us recover from the pandemic".
Campaigners say the two existing national parks cost the Scottish Government about £13 million a year.
The SCNP argues creating more would be "a highly effective investment of public funds".
It says the US national parks "return over $10 for every $1 invested by central government in the National Park Service".
John Mayhew from the Scottish National Parks Strategy Project said: "We've been campaigning for more national parks for the last ten years, as they are just what Scotland needs to address the climate emergency, tackle the nature crisis and lead rural Scotland out of the pandemic.
"We're therefore delighted that the Scottish Parliament will be debating this on Thursday.
"It's particularly significant that MSPs from all five parties signed the motion, showing clear support across the Parliament. We look forward to a positive response from the Scottish Government."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel