Accidental Designation

Designations ought to depend on comprehensive data. They do not. The agencies use the data they have. So if a site has been studied, because there has been some industrial development, it is more likely to be designated than a wild remote site that has not.

An absolutely classic case of the problem is that of Sullom Voe in Shetland, which is proposed for designation as a SAC. The local authority (and the port, which is one of the key oil terminals in the UK) argue that, just up the coast there are bigger and better voes in much more pristine condition, probably with even more vigorous habitat and wildlife, Without doubt, these alternative sites are in a much more natural state. But Scottish Natural Heritage argues that they have data on Sullum Voe because of the monitoring of the environment done around the oil terminal, but they don’t have data on the other voes. So an oil terminal will be designated as a Special Area of Conservation, while a wonderful, natural area with a similar ecology, that could easily be nurtured into the distant future “for our children’s children” will be ignored.

Common sense seems to have migrated with the birds!