Rural businesses praised for ‘extraordinary' help with wildfires, report says
Scottish Land & Estates (SLE) published the report on Thursday, which examines the wildfires near Carrbridge and Dava in the Scottish Highlands.
The report says 11,827 hectares of moorland were ravaged by the fires in late June.
Prepared at the request of Scottish Government officials, the report says extensive resources, manpower and expertise were contributed by at least 33 businesses, including 27 estates.
The collective value of specialist firefighting equipment deployed by private land managers is conservatively estimated at £3.1m, with more than 100 employees engaged in the containment effort. PA Media
Ross Ewing, director of moorland at SLE, said: 'The Carrbridge and Dava wildfires represent the largest such event in Scotland's history and without the extraordinary intervention of rural businesses, the scale of devastation would have been even greater.
'These land managers brought not only equipment and personnel, but also essential knowledge of the terrain and fire behaviour, much of it honed through generations of safe muirburn practice. Their contribution should be commended, supported and learned from.'
The report also says there are gaps in the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service's (SFRS) wildfire response capability, and makes a series of recommendations.
They include investment in a fleet of at least 50 SFRS all-terrain vehicles equipped with fogging units, enhanced authority for SFRS commanders to deploy aerial support quickly, urgent improvements in wildfire training and communications for frontline crews, and the establishment of a Scotland-wide integrated fire management strategy.
The report also highlights that the licensing framework for muirburn, as introduced through the Wildlife Management and Muirburn Act 2024, could reduce the ability of land managers to conduct fuel load management – a key factor in wildfire prevention.
Mr Ewing said: 'If we make it harder for skilled land managers to carry out preventative muirburn, we risk losing the very infrastructure and capability that helped contain these fires.
'Under the recent legislation, there is a 'necessity' test regarding use of muirburn on peatland, and a presumption in favour of other vegetation control methods.
'By amending this to an appropriateness test, it would allow this vital practice of muirburn to be carried out more freely while simultaneously retaining licensed regulatory oversight by government agencies.'
Mr Ewing added: 'The Scottish Government must treat these wildfires as a watershed moment.
'That means urgent investment in firefighting infrastructure, better co-ordination between public agencies and rural communities, and a policy environment that empowers land managers, rather than penalising them, for playing their part.
'Without the courage and commitment of those who stepped up during this crisis, the outcome would have been far worse. We owe them our thanks and we owe them action.'
Agriculture and connectivity minister Jim Fairlie said: 'We fully understand the concerns over wildfires. Keepers were a massive help to the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service in bringing the recent wildfires under control, and we know estates used their own equipment to help in those efforts.
'That practical help and experience is greatly appreciated by the Scottish Government, as are the views of the wider stakeholder groups who helped to inform our policy decisions as we progressed the Wildlife Management and Muirburn (Scotland) Act 2024.
'During the passage of that Act, we recognised the importance of muirburn in creating firebreaks to help tackle wildfires in some circumstances and the new muirburn licensing scheme allows muirburn for that purpose.
'The Scottish Government is working with SFRS to support full implementation of its wildfire strategy, which will see the continued rollout this year of new equipment, vehicles and personal protective equipment.
'I am grateful to SFRS, the Scottish Gamekeepers Association, and others for their outstanding efforts to keep property and people safe and for taking the time to meet with me this week to reflect on lessons we can learn for future incidents.'
SFRS was approached for comment.
Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News
Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Newcastle left with uncomfortable feeling that Isak wants more and romance is dead
Football is a market. It has always been a market and it is more of a market now than it has ever been before. Everybody is constantly looking for a better deal, and everybody has a price. Every club has its place in the ecosystem and those higher up the chain will always take from those below them, who in turn will take from those below them. All a club can ever hope to do is to inch their way higher and higher in the structure, to increase the number of clubs they can feed on while reducing the number of predators who can feed on them. It may be reassuring to think of the legendary servants, the one-club men of the past, but even the term 'servants' betrays an uncomfortable truth. From 1885, when professionalism was legalised and the great clubs of the industrial north and Midlands began to acquire talent from Scotland, footballers have been a product to be traded. From 1963, when the retain-and-transfer system was scrapped, and increasingly after the Bosman ruling of 1995, players have had agency, although even before that there were cases such as that of Wilf Mannion, who went on strike to try to force a move from Middlesbrough to Oldham. Since financial fair play rules began to be introduced 15 years ago, preventing an owner splurging a fortune on elevating his side, the clubs climbing the ladder most successfully are those who have accepted their position within the hierarchy and traded accordingly. Brighton's ascent to become a top-10 Premier League side has been based almost entirely on their ability to identify talent early and sell it at an enormous profit to Chelsea. There remains a reluctance to be seen as a selling club, but other than Real Madrid everybody is a selling club now. Far better to be a selling club than a letting-a-player-run-down-his-contract-and-leave-on-a-free club. Clubs who will have regarded themselves as the elite, as destination clubs, have to accept that almost everybody is a stepping stone . Perhaps for those who are battling to return to the elite, who are not confident in their status, that is a difficult adjustment to make. Which brings us to Alexander Isak. The dance of briefing and counter-briefing that has played out over the past couple of weeks has been fascinating and, frankly, a little baffling. If Isak wanted to leave Newcastle – and he was considering his future in the final weeks of last season – why wait until after Liverpool signed Hugo Ekitiké and Chelsea acquired Liam Delap and João Pedro, as well as for Arsenal's move for Viktor Gyökeres to be at an extremely advanced stage, to make that public? Does the scarcity of centre-forwards on the market push his price up? Or does the fact that potential suitors have no burning need for a striker reduce it? Understandably, Newcastle fans are reluctant to see the Swede go. He is, after all, probably the club's best player since Alan Shearer. He is only 25; once upon a time it would have been possible to dream of him staying for the best part of a decade, scoring 200 goalsb. Last season was the best Newcastle have known since the first Kevin Keegan era. They won the Carabao Cup, their first domestic silverware in 70 years, qualified for the Champions League and their line was led by one of the world's most coveted strikers. It was possible to imagine a future when Isak was joined by players of similar stature. But that is not how modern football works. Isak wants more: more money (and his £120,000-a-week salary does seem below the market rate) and a more consistent chance of winning trophies. Newcastle could hang on to him, hope he does not succumb to bitterness and try to add further stars. Or they could take £140m and invest it in strengthening the squad as a whole, accumulating more assets who can be sold at a profit so more can be bought, driving their ascent. It is cold and mercantile, it is far from the romance many would like to see in the game, but it is also the reality. Sign up to Football Daily Kick off your evenings with the Guardian's take on the world of football after newsletter promotion There are two problems. First, the sense of loss if Isak goes, which is particularly acute for a fanbase that still carries the collective memory of the departures of Chris Waddle, Peter Beardsley and Paul Gascoigne in the 80s and the fear that the Saudi Public Investment Fund may essentially turn out to be the habitually beleaguered Stan Seymour in disguise. Isak is not the only Newcastle player pondering his future and there is a danger his departure is the start of a mini-exodus. Second, there is a lack of faith that the club is equipped to make the most of such a windfall. Paul Mitchell left this summer after a year as sporting director and although Jack Ross has been appointed as head of football strategy and Sudarshan Gopaladesikan as technical director, with Ross Wilson likely to be named as sporting director soon, it is unreasonable to expect anybody taking up a role in July to coordinate a coherent transfer strategy for a window that closes on 1 September, particularly with Darren Eales stepping down as chief executive because of illness. There has already been disquiet about a lack of incoming players, with Anthony Elanga the only senior signing to date as Newcastle have missed out on a number of targets, most recently James Trafford, who preferred to rejoin Manchester City. Although plans are being drawn up for a new stadium, there were fears last season that Newcastle might be the victims of a more general Saudi retrenchment. Meeting profitability and sustainability rules remains a check on expenditure, but with Champions League football this season there were reasons to expect the budget to be a little more generous. Instead, there is a sense of drift. In part that is misfortune, given the illnesses suffered by Eales and Amanda Staveley, who sold her stake in the club last summer. But the appointment of Mitchell never seemed a comfortable fit and the result is a vacuum. Last season was supposed to be the beginning of a glorious future for Newcastle; the fear within the frustrations of the past few weeks is that it was actually a summit.
The Independent
3 hours ago
- The Independent
The government must ensure the promise of free childcare is delivered
Takeup of the government's offer of free childcare has been one-quarter higher than predicted, which has prompted some voices in the sector to warn of its imminent 'collapse', because it is unclear how the planned expansion of the scheme in September will be funded. Bridget Phillipson, the education secretary, in an exclusive interview with The Independent, says the unexpectedly high numbers signing up for the scheme is a 'good problem to have'. There is no doubt that there is a problem, however. The higher takeup meant that the Department for Education spent £2bn on the scheme in the last financial year, covering most of the first year of the Labour government, rather than the planned £1.6bn. That gap was covered by additional funding announced in the spending review in March, but as we report today, the Institute for Fiscal Studies estimates that the gap will continue to widen as the scheme expands. The next expansion will happen in September, when working parents with children aged nine months and older will be offered 30 hours a week of 'free' childcare. Of course, the care is not 'free' in that it has to be paid for by taxpayers generally – on the grounds that helping the parents of young children to work is a public good. As Ms Phillipson puts it: 'If people are able to work, or work a few more hours, that helps us all as a society as well and it gets economic growth going.' The funding of the scheme will continue to be under pressure, but the most important fact about the scheme so far is that it has not collapsed. The Independent was among those voices warning that it had been underfunded by the Conservative government, but to its credit the new government has increased the money available. The finances of the scheme may be stretched, and many childcare providers continue to say that they cannot recruit enough staff at the wages they can afford, but the gloomier warnings of chaos and thousands of parents left without places have not yet been borne out. It is crucial to remain vigilant as the scheme expands so that remains the case. At the insistence of Jeremy Hunt, the chancellor in the previous government, the scheme was designed to start small, with a limited offer of free hours to older children, before expanding gradually to provide full coverage. This September's expansion is the final stage of that planned rollout, which so far has gone more smoothly than we expected. If the last stage is a stretch too far and some parents cannot immediately find the places they want, that would be a blow to the government's ambitions. Ms Phillipson is right that the problem facing the scheme in its final phase is the problem of success. The higher-than-expected demand means additional pressure on the public finances in the later years of this parliament – pressure that coincides with other increased demands on Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, from slow growth, higher interest rates and a government U-turn on disability benefits spending. Providing greater access to free childcare is a good policy that will help working families. Its success and ambition should be applauded. The government must now make sure that its expansion is a success.
Reuters
3 hours ago
- Reuters
EU chief von der Leyen heads to Scotland for trade talks with Trump
BRUSSELS/EDINBURGH, July 26 (Reuters) - EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen headed to Scotland on Saturday ahead of a meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump on Sunday afternoon, commission spokespeople said, as EU officials said the two sides were nearing a trade agreement. Trump, in Scotland for a few days of golfing and bilateral meetings, told reporters upon his arrival on Friday evening that he was looking forward to meeting with von der Leyen, calling her a "highly respected" leader. He repeated his view that there was a 50-50 chance that the U.S. and the 27-member European Union could reach a framework trade pact, adding that Brussels wanted to "make a deal very badly". If it happened, he said it would be the biggest trade agreement reached yet by his administration, surpassing the $550 billion accord agreed with Japan earlier this week. The White House has released no details about the planned meeting or the terms of the emerging agreement. The European Commission on Thursday said a negotiated trade solution with the United States was within reach, even as EU members voted to approve counter-tariffs on 93 billion euros ($109 billion) of U.S. goods in case the talks collapse. To get a deal, Trump said the EU would have to "buy down" that tariff rate, although he gave no specifics. EU diplomats say a possible deal between Washington and Brussels would likely include a broad 15% tariff on EU goods imported into the U.S., mirroring the U.S.-Japan deal, along with a 50% tariff on European steel and aluminum. The broad tariff rate would be half the 30% duties that Trump has threatened to slap on EU goods from August 1. It remains unclear if Washington will agree to exempt the EU from sectoral tariffs on automobiles, pharmaceuticals and other goods that have already been announced or are pending. Combining goods, services and investment, the EU and the United States are each other's largest trading partners by far. The American Chamber of Commerce in Brussels warned in March that any conflict jeopardized $9.5 trillion of business in the world's most important commercial relationship.
