THE former leader of Highland Council has accused a wealthy landowner of breaching outdoor access legislation by locking gates on walking routes, which it’s claimed have been used by locals and visitors for generations.
Dr Michael Foxley and fellow residents of the Ardnamurchan peninsula in the west Highlands argue that by doing so, Donald Houston and his estate are breaching the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 and the Scottish Outdoor Access Code.
According to Scottish Land and Estates, Houston bought the 30,000 acre Ardnamurchan Estate, which makes up much of the peninsula, in 1996. The wealthy landowner also owns the Ardnamurchan distillery, built with the help of a £1.7 million Scottish Government grant and is reportedly the second largest donor to the pro-Union Better Together campaign.
But now a bitter row has broken out with local over access to the land.
A report compiled by Ardnamurchan locals, including Foxley, says 17 locked gates were counted on paths on estate land in January 2020. They claim locked gates on paths long-featured on local maps, Google Maps and walking guides, have breached council planning and commercial forestry grant conditions, setting ”a dangerous precedent” for Scottish land rights.
READ MORE: Better Together website now a pro-independence page after Yes hijack
Blocking access presents a “direct challenge to the democratic authority of the Scottish Parliament”, and risks making land reform laws “unenforceable”, they argue. Houston reported a retired couple for aggravated trespass, which walking charity Ramblers Scotland called “unprecedented” and “worrying”.
It is claimed that the hill tracks, which link the community of Glenborrodale on the peninsula’s southside to 11 destinations in the north, have been regularly used by the public for decades.
Foxley, a former Ardnamurchan Liberal Democrat councillor of 26 years who still sits on the Lochaber Access Forum, which he helped set up, said one well-established local walking route is now obstructed by locked deer gates.
“It’s in walk leaflets, it’s on old maps,” said Foxley.
Local resident Dr David Kime told The Ferret Houston reported him and his wife for aggravated trespass in 2019 after walking a path they had enjoyed without issue for over 40 years. He said Houston confronted the retired couple after they passed through a yard on the route containing biomass woodchip sheds, which the estate built in recent years to heat its properties.
Police Scotland confirmed a report was submitted to the Procurator Fiscal, who decided no action should be taken. A spokesperson added: “This is now the subject of an appeal, and therefore it would be inappropriate for us to comment while the case is still live.”
Kime said the police had not informed him that Houston had appealed the case and only became aware when informed by The Ferret.
Ramblers Scotland stressed the public “have a right of responsible access at Glenborrodale” under the land reform act, “just as they do on other private estates in Scotland”.
“We are particularly concerned that two experienced members of Ramblers Scotland were challenged while walking peacefully near their Glenborrodale home on the beautiful Ardnamurchan peninsula,” said director, Brendan Paddy.
“The subsequent decision by Police Scotland to refer them to the Procurator Fiscal for Aggravated Trespass is unprecedented in our experience – and worrying.”
Former Ramblers director Dave Morris claimed Scotland’s land rights “are under continuous threat”.
Morris called for the chief constable to make clear officers were “not compliant” with the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 through their “misuse” of aggravated trespass provision.
Outdoor organisations should lobby the Scottish Parliament to remove aggravated trespass from the statute books if the police take no action, he urged.
“The Scottish Government needs to sort out this shambles immediately before chaos arrives with the end of the Covid-19 lockdown and hundreds more visitors arrive in Ardnamurchan.”
The Scottish Rights of Way and Access Society (ScotWays) echoed his points and had never come across a case of aggravated trespass in Scotland.
“It’s a civil matter,” said Richard Barron, ScotWays’ chief operating officer. “That’s where access rights sit. There’s no locus for police action to determine where access rights apply.
“There’s a specific clause in the [1994 act] that says if you are exercising your access rights responsibly you can’t be causing aggravated trespass. The owner would have to demonstrate that they were doing something to cause the aggravation.”
When locals consulted the council’s then-access officer, Donald Kennedy, about the issue, Kennedy claimed Houston threatened legal action.
Minutes from a March 2019 West Ardnamurchan Community Council meeting record that Houston demanded Kennedy write to Houston stating no public right of way existed from Glenborrodale to areas north, east and west, or face legal action.
In a February 2019 email to the community council seen by The Ferret, Kennedy said the route was covered by “a right of responsible public access”. He believed “all reasonable access routes have to pass through the immediate vicinity of the [woodchip] sheds”.
“I hope to find a solution with Ardnamurchan Estate that manages the public through this area, although the Estate have recently threatened legal action,” wrote Kennedy. “Whilst I am of the view that general access rights remain since the building of the wood chip plant, until these issues are resolved I cannot advocate members of the public taking access through the area between the sheds for reasons of health and safety.”
In 2019, the council proposed a core path which bypasses the sheds. Core paths “facilitate, promote and manage the exercise of access rights” under the land reform act, according to. The estate objected to the proposals, which went to the council’s local access committee and some two years on, is due for to a Scottish Government inquiry.
“I don’t understand the council’s attitude to this,” said Kime. “There shouldn’t be a need for a core path. If the access code was followed, then there should be a right of way through there. The council, the government, no one is raising a prosecution for blocking the path.
“We, and others, have been denied access to a vast area of countryside to the north for over two years.”
Locals are calling for the historic route to be reopened and the gate locks removed. They called the locks “illegal and dangerous”, forcing people to either climb them or face a four-hour walk back.
The estate’s objection to the path proposals claimed the woodchip site had been “a working yard” for “over 30 years”. But Houston said the site was unused when he applied for planning permission to erect a “general agricultural shed” in 2013. He also stated it would not impact on public access.
The estate opposes the core path for health and safety reasons, mainly due to heavy vehicle use by the sheds. Locals claim the estate did not put up any warning signs until the council referred the core path proposal to the Scottish Government.
The estate also warned of an impact “on the local community and economy”. It argues the proposal is “unlawful as being contrary to the principles and provisions” of the land reform act and “proceeds on a misunderstanding of rights of way and the historical use of paths in the area”.
It also deemed the core path “unnecessary”, said alternative routes were available, and claimed it restricts access to just 27 of its 27,318 acres. Kime said the estate had proposed an alternative path through the nearby RSPB reserve, but claimed the route is on rough terrain and leads to a small area confined by locked gates.
THE council told The Ferret it had “received reports of several public access issues in Ardnamurchan which will be investigated.”
“One concerns the route linking Glenborrodale, Acharacle and Arivegaig. The council has proposed this become a core path; a proposal that Ardnamurchan Estates and others have objected to,” said a spokesman. “Once the council’s proposals are formally submitted with outstanding objections to Scottish ministers that issue and others are likely to be addressed by the planning and environmental appeals division of the Scottish Government by a local inquiry.”
Locals claimed the estate has locked gates preventing access to publicly-funded commercial woodland, which could breach the grant conditions.
READ MORE: Former Better Together head says indyref2 will come, if Scots want it
Scottish Forestry’s application guide for woodland creation grants states applicants “must make provision for public access, where it has been customary or where there is local interest, and management of public access to woodland must be in line with the Scottish Outdoor Access Code”.
In a proposal for the creation of new woodland, the estate promised to “avoid fencing across main access routes” and “provide appropriate means of access through fences”. It added: “There is an open access policy over the whole estate.”
Morris said he encountered a locked gate on a route passing through such commercial forestry on estate land on May 27. He said this breached the land reform act and called for authorities to remove any locks. “If the landowner does not comply, Scottish Forestry should be seeking a reimbursement of all or part of the grant aid [Houston] received for his forestry schemes,” he argued.
Scottish Forestry confirmed it funded woodland creation and associated works at the estate. “This has included deer fencing but we have ensured that the main access points have gates in place to allow the public to continue on their journey through these fences,” said a spokesman.
“We are satisfied that on the works we have funded, provision has been made for continued public access on the main access points.”
Ardnamurchan Estate did not respond to our requests to comment.
The Ferret is an editorially independent, not-for-profit co-operative run by its journalists and subscribers. You can find it at https://theferret.scot/ and can subscribe for £3 a month here: https://theferret.scot/subscribe/
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel