Thank you, convener. I have with me Eileen Stuart, who is head of policy and advice at Scottish Natural Heritage, and Andrew Taylor from the Scottish Government, who advises me on matters such as geomanagement and goose management.
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to address the committee and describe some of the work that the Government is doing in relation to supporting protected goose populations and managing the impact of geese on crofting and agriculture, which is often felt on islands and in coastal areas.
First, I emphasise the conservation success that goose management has achieved over the years. Populations of some species have recovered from dangerously low levels. Goose management is a complex and sometimes contentious issue, which is why we seek to maintain dialogue and consensus through stakeholder groups, in particular the national goose management review group or NGMRG. The group is chaired by the Scottish Government and supported by SNH, and its members include farming, crofting, sporting and conservation interests.
I recognise that, in certain areas and at certain times, geese can cause serious agricultural damage. Serious impacts tend to be localised and found in particular areas, such as on Islay, but there is also a general level of goose impact associated with the movement of migratory species, such as in parts of Caithness.
Local goose management schemes are the principal mechanism to support geese and agriculture. The Islay scheme was the first scheme and it is by far the largest, but there are others at the Solway, Kintyre, Strathbeg and South Walls on Orkney, which are funded by SNH.
From 2010 until this year, the two schemes on the Uists and Tiree and Coll have been funded under the machair life project. It has wider objectives that relate to the preservation of traditional cereal production, which helps to support the biodiversity of other bird species. Goose management has been an important aspect of that, to prevent damage to those cereals. Those two goose control schemes continue as adaptive management trials, which I will come to shortly.
There was some discussion about whether the Scotland rural development programme could be used to help fund goose management schemes. The national goose management review group considered that, and stakeholders were pretty unanimous in feeling that the SRDP would not be a suitable vehicle to deliver that funding because of the competitive nature of the scheme, the existing budgetary pressures and the localised nature of goose impacts. I will be happy to discuss that issue further, as I know that the convener is interested in it.
Goose management continues to be funded directly via SNH, and £1.2 million per annum is directed at supporting farmers and crofters in managing geese. Goose management policy has evolved over the years and the national group has had a dual role in overseeing local schemes and advising ministers on national policy. The policy is reviewed periodically; it was most recently reviewed in 2010. For some time, goose management policy has been guided by three high-level objectives: to meet the United Kingdom’s nature conservation obligations, to minimise the economic loss to farmers and to maximise the value for money of public expenditure.
In its response to the 2010 review, the Government welcomed the report, particularly the recognition that goose management schemes had been a conservation success and the recommendation that the local approach should be continued. We also recognised the challenges that existed in relation to a few vulnerable species such as Greenland white-fronted geese on Islay, the coverage of the schemes in certain areas and the issues around rising costs. In addition, we undertook to pursue an adaptive management approach in relation to geese, and I will now describe some of that work.
Over the past two years, SNH has been developing adaptive management pilots that are designed to prevent serious agricultural damage on Scottish islands from resident greylag geese. Pilots are running on Orkney, the Uists and Tiree and Coll, and a Lewis and Harris scheme is due to start this year. The development of the pilots has involved local input, and they have generally been welcomed by local crofters and farmers. They differ in design because of local conditions.
SNH has used the powers that are available to it in legislation to license the limited sale of wild goose carcases that have arisen from the pilots. The general prohibition on the sale of meat from wild geese was introduced for conservation reasons, and we recognise the concerns of certain stakeholders about the weakening of those controls. However, we believe that sufficient safeguards are in place to allow the sale of meat from wild geese in those cases, and the move has been a success.
In 2012, ministers announced that SNH would examine how to develop an adaptive management approach to goose management on Islay. That is a highly controversial step, and I have assured stakeholders that we would proceed with those measures only if we were certain that it could be done in a manner that was compliant with domestic and European legal obligations. The Islay project is on-going and SNH is consulting interested parties on the draft strategy. Part of that work includes consulting European Union member states on international aspects of managing migratory goose populations.
I think that we can agree that we are dealing with a complex and contentious issue and that there is no one-size-fits-all solution for managing geese. We value discussion and consultation, and we seek to maintain a consensus when we can. This has been a necessarily brief description of the work that we are involved in, but I will be happy to take any questions that the committee has.