The SRPBA has responded to the programme and Doug McAdam has asked that I make the response that was circulated to SRPBA members available more widely; it can be viewed here. A letter from Doug was also published in the Scotland on Sunday paper on 22 May.
Doug's comments highlight the dangers of getting involved in TV, however I feel the programme was fascinating and well balanced. If everyone agreed on everything it would have been very dull!
ReplyDeleteIt's good to get the debate out in the open in the raw, but unfortunate that Doug and Duncan in particular were presented as being completely at odds. Had they been interviewed side by side I’m sure it would have come across very differently and much more positively.
The great rays of hope came from Langholm and the likes of Steve Redpath advocating a middle ground that aims to work within the law to allow all species to flourish. Don’t forget the goodwill that has been generated by the partnership approach to projects like Langholm and don’t let the media get in the way of a good argument!
Will,
ReplyDeleteTake a gold star for providing the first comment on the Blog! Other comments welcome!
The programme raised an issue that definately needs addressing within Scottish landscapes however I felt that there was an opposition to larger estates in the programme. There was little effort made to really get into the isses facing estates such as sustainability, viability, conservation and so on.
ReplyDeleteThere is a feeling surrounding the aesthetics of rural areas that are just natural wildernesses and not actually carefully managed wild areas.
I would have liked to see a more rounded debate concerning rural areas as opposed to simply discussing 'alleged' offences with minimal hard evidence.