“Something is very wrong at the heart of NatureScot” – opinion piece by farmer & conservationist Tom Bowser

A couple of weeks ago I published a press statement from Scottish charity Trees for Life about NatureScot’s ‘mystifying lack of backbone’ in relation to a delayed licensing decision on the release of beavers in Glen Affric.

I also mentioned concerns about NatureScot’s recent decisions and behaviour in recent months relating to grouse moor licensing and the monitoring of Schedule 1 raptor species.

Criticism of NatureScot continues, this time with an opinion piece by farmer and conservationist Tom Bowser from the excellent Argaty, a rewilding estate in Doune, Perthshire, which was published in The National yesterday.

It’s reproduced below.

SOMETIMES I wonder what sort of democracy Scotland really is.

We have a government policy designed to grow our small beaver population by translocating these biodiversity-boosting animals to new parts of the country. Repeated surveys show that most Scots wish this to happen. We have the world’s most thorough official guidance, leading applicants through how to attempt such wildlife relocations.

Yet when Forestry and Land Scotland and Trees for Life followed this guidance, conducting a gold-standard two-year consultation on proposals to relocate beavers to Glen Affric, the national nature agency, NatureScot, stalled on granting a licence, citing concern among the local community.

Yet two-thirds of the Glen Affric community supported the proposals, and NatureScot itself had previously called the consultations “exemplary”. What is going on?

Since submitting their plans, the applicants have already been made to wait three long months to hear from NatureScot. Now they face a whole summer in the wilderness as the agency demands further consultation. But with community support already demonstrated after two years of engagement, what else can there possibly be to consult on?

NatureScot’s decision is stranger still given that Strathglass, where the proposal’s opponents reside, already has an established beaver population. If this application is too controversial to proceed, what hope have we of assisting the spread of beavers and allowing them to help us fight biodiversity loss and climate breakdown?

Something is very wrong at the heart of NatureScot. This is but the latest in a string of examples where it has acted against the interests of wildlife and communities.

Reaction to its controversial Glen Affric indecision has been brutal. The BBC, Herald and Scotsman wrote stories of “beaver betrayal”. Wild Justice’s Ruth Tingay detailed NatureScot’s “glaring disregard” for conservationists and “pandering” to landowners.

Springwatch presenter Iolo Williams summed the mood up: “NatureScot = not fit for purpose”.

They are right to be angry. Scotland is one of the world’s most nature-depleted countries, ranking 212th of 240 surveyed for intactness of biodiversity. Where is the leadership from those charged with restoring nature?

Let’s return to beavers. Their deadwood-filled wetlands are scientifically proven to boost biodiversity. Their dams store water in times of deluge and drought. The environmental crisis is the greatest threat humankind faces. Scotland’s nature agency ought to be encouraging the spread of beavers. Right?

Unfortunately, the opposite seems true. Every beaver translocation applicant has faced bureaucratic burdens and legislative inconsistency. I know this because I’ve been through it.

Despite having beavers living in the wild just five miles away, it took me many months to obtain a licence to translocate other families to my farm, Argaty. Time and time again I was told that our proposal to move these much-needed animals from areas where they were destined to be shot was “novel and contentious”. At that time, NatureScot was dispensing licences in less than 24 hours to farmers wishing to kill beavers.

As if stalling other applicants wasn’t bad enough, NatureScot refuses to even consider relocating beavers to any of its own, highly suitable National Nature Reserves. That it won’t jump its own bureaucratic hurdles tells you all you need to know about NatureScot and its nightmarish processes. This is not a nature agency Scots can be proud of; it is one we should be embarrassed by.

Why the lack of interest in helping Scotland’s beavers?

Part of the answer lies at the political level. By changing Inheritance Tax rules, the UK Government has alienated the farming community. Seeing the opportunity to win rural votes ahead of an election year, John Swinney seems hell-bent on throwing the farmers every bone he can. Even if that means throwing biodiversity under the bus.

We’ve seen a refusal to countenance lynx reintroduction, a commitment to maintain basic subsidy payments to farmers (paying them per farmable acre owned, rather than properly rewarding environmentally sensitive food production). The list goes on.

Is the stalling of beaver translocations another SNP gift to National Farmers’ Union lobbyists?

Much of the blame surely lies with Holyrood. NatureScot lives in fear of its SNP paymasters, who have cut the agency’s funding by 40% in the last decade. It’s a brave civil servant who defies the politicians, angers the farmers and brings further cuts.

But NatureScot is not exempt from criticism. For years they handed out beaver cull licences as though they were sweeties. The annual slaughter of one in 10 of these animals only came to an end when Trees for Life took NatureScot to judicial review and shamed it into change.

NatureScot’s cowardice over the Glen Affric beaver proposal may have triggered conservationists’ anger, but this storm has been brewing for years. NatureScot is riven with problems. Grouse shooting industry lobbyists have infiltrated its boardroom; traditional “kill everything” attitudes dominate its directorship.

There are good people within the agency, but they are too few and the enemies within are too many. As an organisation, it does not know whether it exists to stand up for nature or to simply serve the whims of its masters.

In 2021, when Trees for Life had proved the illegality of NatureScot’s beaver cull policy, celebrated Scottish writer Jim Crumley called for a “new nature-first agency”. Perhaps it’s time to make the idea a reality.

As climate breakdown and biodiversity loss ravage Scotland, we need an agency properly funded by, but independent from, government. One that is led by evidence and is willing to speak truth to power.

We need an agency willing to champion co-existence with wildlife, brave enough to overcome resistance to vital change, humane enough to support everyone through that difficult process. The only people in this agency’s boardroom and upper echelons would be those with a proven record of defending nature. This is the agency Scotland needs.

The politicians we require are those willing to make that change. If John Swinney and his heir apparent, Kate Forbes, think that the opponents of nature restoration are the only rural voters he needs to win over, he has made a grave mistake.

Tom Bowser is the owner of Argaty, a working farm based on the Braes of Doune in central Scotland, which aims to produce food in an environmentally sensitive manner and to make a home for nature. Tom is author of A Sky Full Of Kites: A Rewilding Story and the forthcoming Waters Of Life: Fighting For Scotland’s Beavers.

ENDS

Tom’s latest book is due out 1st May 2025. It is available for pre-order from the publisher here.