Earba consultation results

We recently asked for your opinion on the proposed Earba pumped storage hydro scheme south of Loch Laggan. Over 300 of you responded, so thank you very much for taking the time to read, consider and provide your reasons for voting the way you did.

Given the outline of the proposal, we asked if you were in favour or not of this large dam proposal going ahead. And those who responded are almost equally split in opinion: 43% in favour, 44% against it. Meanwhile, 13% couldn’t bring themselves to decide one way or the other.

The comments you provided are very illuminating on how you view this controversial proposal, and helpful in guiding how Mountaineering Scotland responds to any future planning application.

Many of you said that that this type of development was needed, and essential for grid stability and decarbonising electricity production in light of climate change. It was noted that dams and tracks are already landscape features in Scotland’s hill country.

Equally, a number of respondents were firmly against the intrusion into a large area of wild land, with it being of inappropriate scale/extent; the reason being that there are very few areas left free from obvious or significant human development. The effectiveness or cost/benefit ratio for overall carbon reduction in its construction and use was questioned.

However, there is a notable section of opinion that is conflicted by this proposal, seeing the national need for this type of project, but equally concerned with loss of land with wild qualities. This is a difficult issue for many: within this sector of opinion there were those who expressed pragmatism and accepted that some impact would be necessary and should be mitigated in some way.

There were suggestions for some kind of landscape and wildlife compensation to be part of the scheme; a biodiversity gain through rewilding, and careful management and restoration of construction tracks to limit the visual impact on the landscape.

Others would rather it was elsewhere, in less sensitive areas – a national strategy for such development was needed. There were comments asking why Loch Laggan isn’t used as the lower reservoir rather than Lochan na h-Earba, with the loss of the sandy lochside which appears to be an important recreational feature.

Maintaining recreational access was a strong theme of concern for both yes and no opinions – guarantees are needed, if approved, to maintain safe access routes during construction for climbing and for the Munro summits. There was also comment for new path provision pre-construction and reinstatement and restoration of existing routes after construction work.

The point of this consultation was to indicate a course of action for Mountaineering Scotland to take if a full planning application is submitted to the Scottish Government. Your comments have made it clear that we are unable to be supportive of this proposal as views are evenly split, nor can we object to it on loss of the wild qualities of landscape as there are other wider environmental considerations to take into account. 

But that doesn’t mean there is nothing we can do: recreational access was a concern that came through strongly. Guarantees are needed, if approved, to maintain safe access routes during construction and for landscape and biodiversity improvements post-construction.

These aspects are normally specified on what are known as ‘planning conditions’ for which approval depends, and also for regular monitoring and reporting of compliance to the planning authority. Our Access and Conservation Officer, Davie Black, is expected to play a role in scrutinising the proposal as it develops, and the environmental management of it if it is approved.

Thank you to all who participated and helped make clear how Mountaineering Scotland should engage with this proposal as it goes forward through the planning process.  We will be watching out for, and updating our members on, any new developments.