THE CROFTER - Scottish Crofting Federation · THE CROFTER, AUGUST 2008 3 Committee of Inquiry on Crofting final report Averting future food crises Three-year crofting land use programme

THE CROFTERrooted in our community

AUGUST 2008 Number 80

InsIde thIs Issue

• Woodland crofts• make the most of SRDP• Croft tourism• Local food production

Centre page feature on the Shucksmith Inquiry–• the SCF response• frequently-asked questions• regulation• rights and responsibilities

And much more …

Committee of Inquir y on Crofting final reportNo-oNe iN the crofting

counties will have failed to notice that the Committee

of Inquiry on Crofting has finished its work and has produced a final report – known as the Shucksmith Report, after the chair of the committee Professor Mark Shucksmith. This important event has received wide coverage in the media.

The report presents evidence gathered over a year from relevant sources, particularly from crofters themselves, it puts forward a vision based on the evidence and it makes recommendations on how that vision may be achieved.

The main principles of the recommendations are that:

• the crofting community should take a greater role in crofting regulation and development;

• measures need to be taken to help new entrants, especially younger people, into crofting;

• measures need to be taken to ensure that croft land is used productively;

• the balance between ‘crofter vs crofting’ (individual gain vs wider gain) must shift for the greater good of crofting.

The report has been greeted with a range of reactions from “scrap the whole thing” to “this is the best thing to happen for crofting since 1886”. of course there must be a happy medium somewhere in that range. What

is important to note is that this is just a report on the inquiry and we have the power to influence the course the Scottish Government takes. But we must have an agreed position on how we would like reforms to go.

The SCF has made it clear that the report is welcome, as it is the culmination of a lot of hard lobbying to get a full inquiry into crofting following the rejection of the unwelcome draft crofting reform bill that was foisted upon crofters three years ago. We also welcomed it as the inquiry was conducted in a full and proper manner – there was ample opportunity for all to participate and the number of people who turned out for meetings is testament to how much crofters do care about the future of crofting. We feel that the report does reflect what participants said.

However, welcoming the report does not mean that the SCF sanctions all the recommendations.

This is the opinion of the committee in response to what they heard and it is up to us to now say whether we are happy with the recommendations. There are certainly rough edges; there will need to be modifications if some of the recommendations

C r o f t i n g B o u n d a r y E x t e n d s

ARRAN, Bute, Cumbrae and parts of Moray and Highland Council

look likely to be designated areas for crofting, following an announcement from environment Minister Michael Russell in May.

This would allow landowners to create crofts or those renting land under the Small Landholders Act 1911 to apply to have their holding declared a croft.

Speaking during a debate on the Shucksmith committee report Michael Russell said, “Last winter, we consulted on powers under the existing crofting legislation to designate new areas where crofting tenure could apply.

“The consultation proposed that Arran, Bute, Great Cumbrae island and Little Cumbrae island, as well as areas within Moray Council and Highland Council that are not already within the crofting counties – an historical anomaly – be so designated.

“Responses to the consultation, which closed in March, broadly support the proposal for an alignment with the Hie boundaries. Accordingly, i am minded to designate those areas for crofting tenure, and i expect to move to implement that measure in the coming year.

“obviously, i wish to ensure a level playing field for all crofting areas, so i will take forward the future of financial support for them in light of Shucksmith’s recommendations.”

Averting future food crises“THe TRiPLe GLoBAL

crisis which has affected us – the financial crisis,

the energy crisis and the food crisis – is the red light flashing a clear warning: something is rotten in the global economy. it is warning us that the structural upsets due to past trade and financial practices are too serious and too deep for sustaining the current state for a long time.”

Croatian President Stjepan MesićThis ‘perfect storm’ is hurting

poor people everywhere and is fuelling inflation, but speculators and those controlling the food system have been making a killing. Profits of the major

agribusiness corporations have nearly doubled this year while the right to food of ordinary citizens is being trampled.

The almost endemic hunger of 850 million people is now increasing dramatically and thousands are dying daily. There have been food riots in dozens of countries; in Haiti, the senate dismissed the Prime Minister.

These are desperate and tragic times for poor people. The crises could cause major political crises globally. Yet governments are seemingly unwilling and unable to address the underlying causes of the long-term food emergency and implement the radical changes necessary to avert future crises.

As a recent UN assessment confirmed, business as usual is not an option – agriculture needs to move towards smaller-scale, more organic production and fairer trade if hunger is to be eradicated, social equity achieved and environmental stability secured.

At the United Nations Food Summit in June, heads of state would not admit that the crisis is the result of dominant policies nor did they call for fundamental changes of the failing globalisation project. instead, they proffered rhetorical blandishments about reducing hunger and then recycled commitments and

Continued on page 3

Continued on page 3

THE CROFTER, AUGUST 20082

Message from the chair...

THe oLd AdAGe “a year is a long time in politics” is surely a misnomer.Just after succeeding Norman, what

would have normally been a period of bedding in and consolidation suddenly became a hotbed of controversy and recrimination largely due to the eagerly awaited Shucksmith Report.

Having at the same time taken up a lifestyle choice, after thirty eight years in the harrowing world of business, i soon realised my choice of career as a weaver was not to be the one of my dreams.

it is incumbent on me to pay tribute to Norman Leask – so ably supported by his wife evelyn. Big in stature, he has become an even larger figure at Holyrood where he enjoys a fruitful relationship with politicians of all persuasions. in his poor crofter guise he has brought the issues most pressing to the attention of ministers and civil servants. each crusade he has embarked on has been

fought with vigour, native courtesy and even-handedness, always playing down his vast knowledge of crofting and his lucid business acumen. in this world of sportsmen changing clubs at grossly inflated sums, we can safely say that Norman is not for sale or transfer!

i am fortunate to work with such a supportive board. We speak regularly as individuals and through numerous teleconferences. Their understanding of what is happening on the ground allied to a wealth of experience make my task so much lighter. The office staff so ably led by Patrick form as good a team as i have ever worked with in all my business years. Becky and donald are always able to guide me through the morass of legislation which can almost engulf one. They are an oasis in difficult times. We are indeed fortunate with the personnel we employ.

in the last year we have had a lot of discussion with the board members and officials of the Crofters Commission as we

endeavour to tease out the difficulties which confront crofting. i am on record as having said that the present members are probably the best i have worked with in over thirty years, but change is inevitable and crofters should have the confidence to control their own future destiny without the shackles of a minority who cannot countenance change and seem to forget what would have happened if the last Crofting Bill had gone unchallenged by SCF.

on the Shucksmith Report, our work has been hampered largely by people who did not attend meetings or have not read the report in detail, picking on parts of it while ignoring the many definite advantages that are suggested.

i can vouch that SCF has no agenda and take this opportunity to remind crofters that it is not binding legislation, but only a report. our views can still impact on any legislation brought forward. We have been rolling out a series of meetings through the crofting counties. do we want the destiny of crofting in our own hands, ensuring that we are able to leave a heritage to succeeding generations, unfettered by bureaucracy but with a continuing role for the many able people that at present constitute the Crofters Commission?

Surely we have the vision, as shown by the undoubted success of the land buy-outs, to assume the mantle, safeguard land tenure and work towards a vibrant economy through, for example, the crofting produce mark, stability in the price of crofts, affordable housing on marginal land, an increase in housing grants with loans being guaranteed by government and a more equitable LFASS that reflects the disadvantages we face.

To this end we will continue to lobby on your behalf. our voice will not be muted but will be a clarion call that will ensure that crofting continues to be supported and plays a huge part in modern-day Scotland. Accepting that different areas have different needs and aspirations, i will endeavour to represent your views in my tenure as chair of the voice of crofting.

A ground-breaking new group, appointed by Scottish ministers to help develop a national strategy for rural Scotland, met for the first time recently. The remit of the group is to consider how best rural Scotland can contribute to the creation of a more successful country, through increasing sustainable economic growth.

The council includes people from various walks of life including the farming sector, environment interests, housing, tourism and the economy, as well as those focused on rural society and young people. As well as SCF chairman Neil MacLeod, the group also includes NFUS president Jim McLaren, dame Barbara Kelly, RSPB Scotland director Stuart Housden and Professor donald MacRae.

S c o t t i s h C r o f t i n g F o u n d a t i o n c h a i r a p p o i n t e d t o R u r a l Development Council

find us on-line at www.crofting.org

Neil (right) and Patrick chat with the Minister for Crofting at the Highland Show.

THE CROFTER, AUGUST 2008 3

Committee of Inquiry on Crofting final report

Averting future food crises

T h r e e - y e a r c r o f t i n g l a n d u s e p r o g r a m m e d r a w s t o a c l o s e

THe SCF Sustainable Crofting Land Use Programme came to an end

in May 2008 and a final report has been submitted to funders.

A three year funding package which included assistance from the esmée Fairbairn Foundation, the Carnegie UK Trust, the Highland Council and the SCF’s own resources allowed the SCF to focus on many land use issues, including changes to the CAP and other support regimes, the development of horticulture, crofting skills training and forest crofts as well crofting tourism and access.

Some key achievements of the programme were summarised in the final report:• increasing availability of local

food produced and marketed within the Highlands and islands area – in keeping with widespread awareness of the need to reduce the carbon footprint of food production and consumption. The development, through this programme, of the Crofting Mark (with the support of the Scottish Government) will provide increasing opportunities for purchase of locally-grown, wholesome food, grown in accordance with environmental

and quality standards, within the crofting system. excellent media and consumer interest in the mark bodes well for the formal public launch of croft-marked produce this autumn. The development of horticultural skills and producer networks through this programme has aided and supported the increasing availability of healthy local food.

• The involvement of children and young people with crofting land use, through the Planting to Plate initiative and the development of crofting skills courses in the school curriculum. These initiatives were carried out in conjunction with other organisations.

• The multi-organisational commitment to the Crofter and Small Landholder Training Programme, devised by programme staff. This new initiative has grown from the successful and popular SCF training run via the programme. A range of one-day events, induction courses and training needs analysis is being developed as a project bid, in order to provide subsidised crofter-relevant training. The commitment of programme

training manager John Bannister to crofter training was recognised in a LANTRA award ceremony at the Royal Highland Show in 2007.

• The focus on management of crofter forestry, for timber, biodiversity, woodfuel and local building materials is a success of the programme, augmented by the political commitment to the creation of woodland crofts, a process supported and developed by programme staff throughout the duration of the programme. The multi-organisation handbook on Crofter and Small-scale Woodland Management will be published shortly as a hard-copy and online reference guide. The first new woodland croft was created in the final days of the programme, following help and advice from programme staff. The Scottish Government commitment to woodland croft creation saw a post created and filled in the last months of the SCLUP, with the aim of encouraging and assisting the development of woodland crofting communities.Many thanks to all funders

for their assistance with this programme.

technological props, such as the promotion of GM crops, that would consolidate and strengthen commodity production and the industrial agricultural system that lies at the heart of the crisis.

There was, though, an honourable exception. The Croatian President said that those in power must accept responsibility for this hunger. He argued that society has reached the present situation because of decades of mistaken understanding of global development; a truly brazen imposition of unacceptable models on other communities and ways of life; unfair rules of international trade and the hypocrisy of international financial institutions; favouring big business at the expense of ordinary people.

Maybe the collapse of the world trade talks in July will force other industrialised country governments to reflect on what is rotten in the global economy and commit to implementing fundamental changes.

in contrast, civil society organisations and especially the small-scale farmers’ movement,

La Via Campesina, recognise this is a long-term emergency requiring long-term solutions. They are promoting alternatives that will feed people and will never compromise the right to food and will strengthen local markets and biodiverse local food production that is more resilient to climate and price shocks.

in addition they urge governments to re-establish publicly-controlled strategic grain reserves and supply management policies that will beat speculation; to stop industrial agrofuel production that feeds gas-guzzling cars rather than people; and to implement comprehensive agrarian reforms that will ensure small-scale food producers can control the land and other resources they need to ensure sustainable food production for local communities.

in short, civil society is calling for locally-controlled food sovereignty that would avert future food crises and ensure a healthy and productive planet.

our thanks to Patrick Mulvany, Practical Action; Chair, UK Food Group for this article.

can come to being acceptable; there are genuine concerns that need to be addressed; there are recommendations that will not be acceptable.

But one thing is clear: there are many good recommendations and outright rejection of the whole report is not an option if we want a viable future for crofting. Maintaining the status quo or losing the protection of regulation will surely be the death of crofting as we know it.

SCF is holding area meetings to provide information and to gather the initial views of members. ex-members of the CoioC have very generously provided their time for no charge to attend our meetings. Please read the report and attend meetings. Please write to us with your views on the recommendations (a summary is enclosed) in order to help form the SCF position. There is still a long road to anything becoming crofting legislation and it is essential that we are prepared for the journey.

You will find a six page feature on Shucksmith and crofting reform in the centre of this issue

A NeW streamlined service launched at the Royal Highland Show aims to

reduce the bureaucratic burden on land managers by cutting the number of on-farm inspections.

Scotland’s environmental and Rural Services (SeARS) brings together nine public sector bodies: Animal Health, Cairngorms National Park Authority, Crofters Commission, deer Commission for Scotland, Forestry Commission Scotland, Loch Lomond and The Trossachs National Park Authority, Scottish environment Protection Agency, Scottish Government Rural Payments and inspections directorate and Scottish Natural Heritage.

Through SeARS the organisations aim to provide a more streamlined, consistent service and easier access to information and advice.

For further information about SeARS visit www.sears.scotland.gov.uk.

Single rural service

Continued from page 1

Continued from page 1


CROFTING MARK

Às a’ chroit anns a’ Ghàidhealtachd ‘s na h-Eileanan

In this section we focus on some users of the new Crofting Mark.

THe TWo WoRdS Fair isle are known the world over.

For some it is a generic term for coloured, stranded knitting. others know it as a bird-watching paradise. in crofting terms, it is a very successful, diverse, small island community with crofting skills at its heart.

Kathy Coull has been crofting on Fair isle for the past 15 years, hand-spinning for 30 years, knitting (on and off) since the age of five. Previously a member of the Scottish Crofters Union and a member of the SCF since its inception, she has always looked for ways forward to keep her croft sustainable.

“i was delighted to see a distinctive ‘mark’ to highlight croft produce. in many ways, our small, non-intensive enterprises can seem fragmented and their value is not properly appreciated. Widespread use of an identifiable mark will bring our quality produce to people’s attention and give crofting a more cohesive brand. i have registered my wool produce under the mark and a special limited edition of Home-Grown Fair isle oo has been mill-spun to give folk a taste of the qualities of our wool.

“The sheep are reared in the unspoilt environment of Fair isle and are the traditional source of fibres for the yarns used in the original Fair isle designs. These are a source of inspiration and have been emulated for over a century. A natural white, light Aran weight yarn has been spun so that it can be used for any medium weight pattern by altering needle size to achieve the correct tension.”

More details about the special edition yarn can be found at www.KathyCoull.com

More information about Fair isle at www.fairisle.org.uk/

Kylerhea crofts market garden and nursery

CRoFTeRS, the original in-habitants of rural Scotland, live in some of the harsh-

est and most beautiful parts of the Scottish Highlands and islands.

Known as ‘the original environmentalists’, crofters have a rich culture which reflects self-reliance and a close affinity with the land and the sea. This is found in their music and stories and in the colours of their weaving and knitting.

This tartan reflects the crofting identity and its concern for nature, these colours being some of the original natural dyes. Crofters say “it is about the people” and this is shown in their renowned hospitality and in developing a tartan that anyone with empathy for crofting can wear with pride.

Norman and Evelyn Leask

Scottish Crofting t a r t a nMARKeT GARdeNiNG,

horticulture? Nah! that’s not what we do in Skye,

get yourself some sheep and cattle, that’s what folk do up here. And similar expressions of dismay by many fellow crofters we met way back in 1992.

A lot has happened since then. Market gardening has become a legitimate crofting activity and the word horticulture increasingly used in crofting’s vocabulary. That’s not to say that it’s easy and the methods we find successful here would amuse gardeners in other parts of the country. But perseverance and learning by mistakes sees us at an acceptable level of know-how for what we want to do here.

So, back in the early 90s while we were getting established on our bare land, poorly drained mix of peat and raised beach, what we grew for our own pot gave us encouragement for a growing business. My own early experience as a market gardener has stood me in good stead. The principles of horticulture are the same wherever but the methods can be quite different. our search for instructional books, specifically on the subject of crofting horticulture, did not come

up with anything useful … now there’s a thought.

The Skye and Lochalsh Horticultural development Association came into being in 1993. Today, the organisation runs a seasonal market (July – october) in the Portree square where its members are able to sell produce at comparable prices to supermarkets. This, however, does not prevent us from also selling directly to our own customers.

over the course of the year our business diversifies in three phases. Between october and the end of February we collect seed and grow native broadleaf trees. From February until the end of April we grow tomato and vegetable transplants to order and sell an increasing amount to private customers and at local shows. That leaves the busiest phase of the year, May to the end of September, when we produce and sell the finished crops of our fruit and vegetables.

Suffice it to say that our self-grown business is time consuming but satisfying nevertheless. We find it worthwhile and, most importantly, we enjoy doing it, too.

John and Beryl Bannister

Fair Isle yarns

If you want to join up for the crofting mark, please get in touch with HQ.


LOCAL FOOD PRODUCTION

Some pitfalls experienced by Alasdair MacMhaoirn

FoR A NUMBeR of years we have fattened our own Highland stots which we sell to order.

it was noticeable how little a Highland would make through the normal channels, and we thought we could do better. We certainly do much better, but there have been problems. Perhaps our story could benefit those of you considering a similar step. We encountered difficulties not with finding a market, but rather with the butchering.

At first, we dealt with a Ross-shire firm. They did the killing, they were pleased to hang the carcass for at least three weeks and they butchered the meat as requested. Their idea of packaging was poor, but we did not know of any other option at the time.

our last order there was wanting in all respects. We had to argue for appropriate hanging time; the meat was poorly packaged and running with blood and juice; there was no labelling. Similar cuts were just tossed into a single bag with the name of the cut scribbled on the outside of the larger bag. even worse, 22kg of sirloin had been condemned as unfit by their vet, nothing else, just the sirloin!

They claimed our animal must have been damaged on the croft. if it had been hurt in transport or in handling there would have been damage on the skin and they said there was none. The animal left us in top condition. He was taken straight off our common grazings and showed no sign of discomfort. As regards the poor packaging and lack of labelling, we were told: “We don’t do that,” even though they had agreed to.

All the butchering instructions were stated in pounds, but the cuts came back in the same number of kilos, so instead of a 3-4lb joint, we got 3-4kg joints. When questioned about this they said they always work in kg – but could they not convert? We had to take our business elsewhere.

We sent our next animal to Speyside. We were delighted with the service. everything went smoothly, the meat was packaged and labelled beautifully. We had no complaints and thought we had found a solution.

Direct marketing of croft-produced beefLater we sent another beast and everything

went smoothly. The meat was packaged and labelled perfectly. The problem was that there was so little of it. our Highland stot, whose hanging weight was 185kg, only resulted in 69kg of packaged meat, with an obvious scarcity of the expensive cuts. For instance, one box claimed to hold an entire hip but only weighed 17kg. The next box, which said it held half of a hip weighed 15kg – and there was no other matching box with the other half hip. our stot did not look that lopsided when he left us!

The butcher was incensed that we thought there was a problem. We should know that there is a certain amount of waste from butchering and that this was well within the limits of normal. When pushed, he agreed to look around to see if anything had been missed. Then he called to apologise – he had found another box with our name on it. He was so apologetic he would even come and deliver it to us. When he arrived, he had a box containing 10 kg of mince!

This represents a 63% loss (waste) from the point of hanging to the point of saleable meat. No producers/butchers/supermarkets would consider such a huge amount of waste as normal.

To find out what level of waste should be expected during the butchering process, we contacted the Highland Cattle Society and Quality Meat Scotland. They both agreed on

two things. Firstly, a Highland of about 185kg should result in 110-130kg of meat, not 69kg. Secondly, they both reported hearing similar stories, as the QMS man stated, from one end of the country to the other. He didn’t offer any solution. There the matter stood. We could see no way forward, as nothing could really be proven so we could only, as before, take our business elsewhere.

Throughout the whole process we naturally mentioned our experiences to people, many of whom had experienced similar problems – for example sheep or pigs with only three legs. Apparently the problem is widespread.

We recently had another beast to sell and we thought we would try once more rather than just put the animal to the mart. This time we sent the beast to Wick, and i’m happy to say that the service was excellent in all respects. The packaging and labelling was exactly as we asked, they were pleasant to deal with and all the meat was there. The butchered weight was 124kg, from the 180kg hanging weight, a 31% loss just as it should have been.

To conclude, i still think that direct marketing can be a good way to boost profits and to provide quality produce. As far as butchering goes, honesty seems to be less than common and it is difficult to recommend the best way to protect yourself. QMS wasn’t much interested.

A major review of the response to the 2007 Foot and Mouth disease outbreak in england provides a

good basis for further discussion. The review, led by Professor Jim

Scudamore, looked at the ways in which the government and the industry responded to the outbreak of FMd in Surrey and made recommendations to try and minimise the impact of any future outbreaks.

The report found that actions taken by the Scottish Government were in the best interests of the Scottish industry to ensure the return to normal conditions as quickly as possible. Key industry

Thorough review of FMD response welcomedstakeholders and the agricultural sector as a whole were commended for their role in reducing the risk of disease incursion and spread.

Commenting on the report SCF chairman Neil MacLeod said: “The work put in by the Scottish Government to minimise disruption during the FMd outbreak last year has been recognised in this review, which also highlights the good communication throughout the crisis. The review recommends how the response could be improved further at a Scottish, UK and european level in the event of another outbreak.

“We are particularly pleased to see

considerable discussion of the possibility for further regionalisation of the response and look forward to contributing to discussions on how this might work. We would like to see more investigation on how to ensure that islands and remote mainland areas have and can benefit from high standards of biosecurity that would allow considerably more freedom to move, in the event of an outbreak occurring hundreds of miles away.

As the report stresses, measures must be put in place on a robust scientific basis and we look forward to working with experts in government to develop the best scenarios for the future.”

Phot

o: S

kye

Imag

es


West H

ighland Free Press, 18 January 2

008

H I G H L A N D S & I S L A N D SM E D I A A W A R D S

Newspaper of the YearE V E R Y F R I D A Y



THe eWeS at Tong barn, where i’d been mucking in and playing night watch-

man/midwife during the lambing, had decided to take a break from proceedings and i managed to es-cape the poo, pens and placenta for a few shifts.

Having seen how crofting was embracing technology through adopting new tagging techniques, ultrasound scanning and internet e-commerce i was now able to see how crofters on the island were coping with the challenges of maintaining their way of life.

A tour of KM Harris tweed mill, with its newly invested machines and admittedly controversial marketing plans, marked out the commitment and belief restored to this once threatened industry. The reopening of another local mill at Shawbost compounded this further. one crofter i worked with had recently completed a six week training course in the age-old art and, with a little help from the enterprise board, had purchased a double-width loom and was preparing to embark on his first beam.

Where once a croft may have been the main source of income, the modern crofter was

a multi-tasker. The other men i worked with did various other jobs to supplement their income and way of life with employers ranging from the local ferry company to the local university. As they worked according to the demands of their crofting year and incomes, it seemed the ultimate in flexi-time.

These many and varied jobs provided a steadier income, while the less-certain economy of livestock rearing filled the gaps as well as the freezers. And where there was meat there was veg. And soft fruits. And herbs and anything else that could be grown in polytunnels. Their opaque, grey skins clung on for dear life as the Hebridean southwest prevailing blew cold across them, hiding box schemes worth of homegrown produce. The local farmers market established in Stornoway’s town centre of a weekend reported demand outstripping the growers’ supply. Such low-impact, low road miles, field-to-plate possibilities could only be a good thing in

F r o m c l u b b i n g t o c r o f t i n g – p a r t 2

I’m continuing to work towards the goal of becoming part of the crofting community.

Bluetongue update

these times of impending food crisis. With peak oil now past, aviation’s days numbered and markets in China and india hungry for the lion’s share of the global larder, it’s reassuring to know that some people can still provide the security of food.

And yet with all this positivity, it was apparent that life was far from

easy. Tales of the last foot and mouth outbreak, rising fuel and feed costs, a b s e n t e e i s m and lack of good croft land, over-regulation and

rising cost of housing all brought home the realities of the pursuit.

But as I finish writing this, we have Mark Shucksmith’s report published, an expression of hope and vision for the future of crofting that Holyrood seems to be in agreement with. Nothing i have seen or read has suggested that this lifestyle will do other than flourish with the belief and passion of its adherents behind it. Crofting is not only as relevant today as it has ever been, it is more so. i’m convinced that in the very near future, as awareness and

respect for crofting grows, it will become an attractive proposition for many other young people too. If the financial implications of the undertaking can be met and supported by workable grants and loan schemes and an effective way is found to join new crofters with old, then we can ensure stewardship of the land and the skills to do so are passed down for generations to come.

i’m continuing to work towards the goal of becoming part of the crofting community. After a year of research, a week of lambing and a lifetime of conviction, i’m convinced it’s for me and my partner Jane. it’s still a couple of years away from fruition however; there are nightclubs to be run and money to be saved away before i can return to the island and my home. But there will be more lambing to do next year, and i’ll be back again without a doubt. After all i’ve got a hundred ewes and three crofters who need their beauty sleep relying on me now...

Mike Donald

THe THReAT of bluetongue to Scotland’s livestock is of foremost concern to live-

stock keepers and the Scottish Government alike.

At the time of writing (3rd July), no new cases of bluetongue virus type 8 have been recorded in europe in 2008. However, disease is likely to re-emerge later in the summer, with cases in Great Britain expected to be concentrated in south and east england where the disease was present last year. in an attempt to get ahead of the disease, in May deFRA started rolling out a vaccination programme across england.

Scotland remains at a low risk for the present, but maintenance of Scotland’s disease-free status is reliant on the vigilance and co-operation of all livestock keepers. All movement restrictions must be complied with and everyone who keeps ruminant or camelid species must report any suspicion of disease to their local Animal Health Office.

The Scottish rules on bluetongue are laid out in The

Bluetongue (Scotland) order 2008. This has been amended in light of the development of a vaccine. The changes, which came into force in June, provide the additional legal framework required for a compulsory vaccination campaign in Scotland and also tighten the protection for Scotland’s livestock in light of the animal movements allowed by the vaccination campaign south of the border.

Key changes to the rules are: • Clarification that susceptible

animals include camelids as well as ruminants.

• The Scottish Government can declare a vaccination zone and make vaccination of sheep and cattle in Scotland compulsory.

• Animals entering areas of Scotland free from bluetongue on the condition that they have been vaccinated must be accompanied by a veterinary certificate confirming that the animals have been vaccinated.

• Keepers must notify Scottish Government within three days of receiving any animals that have been within a restricted

zone in the last 60 days. Because Scotland currently

enjoys disease-free status and vaccination can only be carried out in a protection zone, the Scottish Government industry stakeholder group agreed to wait until the next vector-free period (winter midge-free period) before vaccinating in Scotland. To declare a protection zone now would dramatically increase the risk to Scottish livestock as free movement of potentially infected animals is allowed both within and between protection zones. Vaccinating over the winter would allow Scottish livestock to develop immunity before midges become active enough in the following spring to be able to spread disease.

Vaccination will be compulsory for sheep and cattle and voluntary for other ruminant and camelid species kept in Scotland. Further details are still being discussed, and additional information will be released when available. The Scottish Government has secured a supply of 12 million doses of vaccine from Merial, enough to cover all susceptible animals.

Part of the order is due to arrive in August as a reserve in case of disease this summer.

To minimise the financial burden on farmers, the Scottish Government is subsidising the cost of the vaccine, paying half the manufacturing costs for the order for this year only.

All livestock keepers are reminded that illegal use of vaccine outside a protection zone would risk Scotland’s free area status, and is subject to penalties of up to £5,000 and/or six months in jail. Further information on bluetongue can be found at www.scotland.gov.uk/bluetongue.

Phot

o: S

kye

Imag

es


Meatlinc success in SutherlandLOCAL FOOD PRODUCTION

George Fell reports

NeW BReedeRS Murdo and Jason Ballantyne have just sold their

first homebred Meatlinc rams from Clynelish Farm at Brora, Sutherland.

The decision to start producing Meatlinc rams was based on a change in farming policy, away from producing Cheviot mule shearlings to producing finished lambs from the 500 north country Cheviot ewes. Through consultation with dr John Vipond of the SAC, it was considered that the Meatlinc ram would suit their new outdoor lambing, grass-based system. Believing it was the way to go, the Ballantynes also joined up as a Meatlinc ram producer with a flock of 50 ewes.

The Meatlinc is a breed originally created by Henry Fell in North Lincolnshire in 1965 from five breeds. The breeding programme was developed due to frustration with buying unrecorded, over-fat rams that did not perform. over forty years of selection for growth, muscle and fat has led to the development of a market leader in sheep performance and genetics.

Today the Meatlinc Sheep Company consists of six breeders from around the UK. All the breeders operate to the same high standards with the same breeding objectives. The geographical spread has enhanced the hardiness of the breed. Rams that have performed in the harsher Scottish environments have been used for the last 20 years across the rest of the flocks. Likewise, high performance rams from the south of england have also had to prove their worth in Scotland.

The aim of the Meatlinc breeding programme is to produce a commercially reared ram for commercial lamb producers which will enable them to finish lambs quickly off grass at high market specifications.

The Clynelish flock of Meatlincs start lambing on 1st April and are turned out to grass. They are not fed any concentrates and their growth is monitored at birth, eight weeks and 21 weeks, when they are scanned for backfat and eye muscle depth. The previous forty years of data and their own actual measurements enable estimated breeding values to be

produced, along with an index which rates them against the rest of the Meatlinc production flocks. it is this system of monitoring growth from grass which has led to the development of a breed suited to today’s commercial lamb producer.

The Ballantynes have switched to an outdoor lambing system, for which the Meatlinc is very well suited. The Meatlinc has a natural ease of lambing due to its narrow shoulders and excellent get-up-

and-go at birth. A strict selection policy that identifies and culls ewes with lambing difficulties or poor vigour has enhanced these traits at birth.

The Ballantynes sold ten rams last year, purchased from other breeders and the feedback from customers has been very encouraging.

For more information please contact Jason on 01408 622010 or visit the website at www.meatlinc.co.uk

Cheviot ewes with Meatlinc and lambs at foot

Threat to future of fox clubsCoNTRoL oF FoxeS in the

mountainous and forested terrain of the crofting areas

of the Highlands and islands is considered by most, especially by hard-pressed crofters and farmers, to be an essential requisite for the economical and marginally profitable production of free range lamb.

However, it has recently come to our notice that the profitability of this marginal industry may be at risk due to the imminent withdrawal of support funding to

local fox clubs. Contrary to public perception, these clubs are most definitely not the same as those frequented by some of the more well-heeled members of our society in pursuit of an afternoon’s sport chasing a doomed animal through the countryside. Fox clubs in the crofting areas of the Highlands and (some) of the islands were set up and exist purely to control the numbers of this voracious predator in order to lessen losses of newborn lambs. Another side-effect of this control

– and one which is not widely recognised – is that by controlling fox numbers in these areas, ground-nesting birds and other species have thrived and thus created a special habitat where balance is the order of the day.

Throughout the Highlands and islands these local clubs are in grave danger of going out of existence because of the axing – without any warning or consultation – of the small match funding which was provided by the government. Those of us who are members of these clubs are well aware of their benefit in controlling fox populations – and controlling the numbers is all that can be done given the terrain and expanses of land involved.

The lack of foresight shown by this intention on the part of the government is in stark opposition to the recent declaration by the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and the environment of his desire to work with stakeholders to maintain and increase stock numbers in the hills and glens. if his way of doing this is to allow one of the biggest predators of stock in the hills and glens to

flourish, it questions both his knowledge of the industry he claims to represent as well as his commitment to the crofters and farms of highland Scotland.

The reason given for the withdrawal of funding is that SGRPid wishes to put the monies saved in to schemes that are more environmentally friendly. does environmentally friendly now equate to lessening stock welfare? in a crofting context what could be more environmentally friendly than a hill with a good balance of stock and birds? There will not be many of either if the fox is given free reign to devour the dwindling income of crofters already struggling with burdens of increasing fuel, fertiliser and feed, not to mention food for the family table.

if you have a fox club in your area and you are concerned about the effects its demise will have on livestock and wildlife numbers, it is not too late to write and lobby your MSP extolling the benefits of these organisations. Hopefully this will be sufficient to reverse this ludicrous decision.

Donald Macdonald Pho

to: B

en C

oope

r


RSPB delight as corn bunting numbers rise

iiRiSH LAdY’S-TReSSeS oRCHid is a fascinating and nationally scarce plant.

The plant is only found on each side of the Atlantic. Far more frequent in North America, in Scotland it is found on the west coast and in the Hebrides. New populations have been found in Wigtownshire and Kintyre. is this orchid native to the British isles or an introduction from North America? i believe it is an introduction from North America and the seed crossed the Atlantic via American vagrant wader birds.

Unless the orchid is in flower it is extremely difficult to find because its leaves are grass-like. it grows in marshy meadows, often close to streams, rivers and lakes, subject to inundation in winter. The orchid flowers in Scotland in August and September.

Crofters rather than farmers are more likely to be involved with this orchid in the west of Scotland. it will not always be practicable to implement the grazing régimes suggested below, but as this is such an interesting plant (only a few of its points of interest have been touched upon here), the co-operation of crofters in its conservation is keenly sought.

How should habitats be beneficially grazed for this orchid, whether or not it is known to be present?

in the period November to April very heavy grazing by cattle (and/or horses) is important – and periodically during the rest of the year, a feature of traditionally managed crofts. Some years ago a new population was found at precisely the spot where cattle had been fed during the winter.

The roots of the orchid can also be broken by hooves, possibly facilitating multiplication and dispersal. Moderate levels of disturbance can be a very important feature of the plant’s habitat.

From May to June light to medium grazing is appropriate. An absence of grazing in June will result in more ungrazed plants of the orchid, but it is likely to favour the growth of potentially competitive species. Continuous light grazing will remove flowering stems.

A summer grazing break from July to mid-September, as practiced on some common grazings, is ideal. Without this, flowering would be greatly reduced.

Absence of grazing results in major changes in the sward which may crowd out the orchid. it is not known if continuous heavy grazing has long-term adverse affects.

More details are available in the Western isles irish Lady’s Tresses orchid Species Action Plan, written by Richard Gulliver .The action plan can be viewed at http://www.cne-siar.gov.uk/biodiversity/localactionplans.htm.

Dr Frank Horsman, Isle of Benbecula

Beneficial grazing for Irish lady’s-tresses orchid

Adrian Miller reports

THe PHRASe ‘the grass is greener on the other side’ is becoming very true of the Greylag goose.

orkney has, over the past decade or so, gradually had a rapidly growing resident flock which is becoming a major concern to crofters and farmers. Going back 15 years, during the shooting season it was looked upon as something of a thrill to shoot a greylag. Nowadays nobody bats an eyelid, they are everywhere!

It is not only the resident flock which is causing concern but larger flocks of migrating birds are stopping over, indeed stopping over for longer as well, probably attracted by the residents already on the ground. These last few years they have become a particular problem, not only content with foraging on crops in the traditional back end and turn of the year, but grazing fields in spring as well, sometimes right through June.

it is a particular problem with areas of crop, barley and oats grazed to the ground in spring, leaving a stunted half-crop, then they return in August to flatten it and eat the grain. Grass is particularly badly affected, making the dream of an early bite an impossible one. Anyone unfortunate enough to have land running down to a loch which they frequent can have a few attempts before getting a reseed to be successful.

This extra cost to the food producer is just another one which we can ill afford. it’s a thought to pay £450 per tonne to fertilise your grass for 600 greylags to come along and hoover it up.

One resident flock on Orkney, usually congregating off Rothiesholm Head on Stronsay, must total 500-600. The young geese can be seen swimming close to the head, sometimes so thick it looks like a thick black mat from the distance. over the years the change in their behaviour has been so obvious. each year they become tamer, gradually creeping closer to dwellings and settlements as their wild instinct evolves closer to that of a tame goose. instead of ‘GM’ we have ‘MG’, a modified goose! This is a problem that has to be addressed immediately before the fields are left with just the greylag in them.

The photo shows the green rolling orkney landscape which geese find so attractive. The little island to the left is Linga Holm, a breeding ground where they can make the short flight over to graze on Stronsay.

Paying hundreds o f p o u n d s t o feed wild geese

Pho

to: R

icha

rd G

ulliv

er

AFTeR A steady decline of as much as 70% since the early 1990s, RSPB Scotland is delighted that the corn

bunting population increased last year for the first time in twenty years.

The isolated and vulnerable Uist population (the last island population and the only ones now found in the west of Scotland) has shown a remarkable u-turn as the population has been plummeting towards extinction. The tiny island population of just over 100 territorial male birds showed the first signs of recovery last year and rose to over 130 territorial males. This year’s count has not been finalised yet but appears again to be good news for the buntings. The extra winter food provided by the Arable Stack Scheme is helping the birds survive the long Uist winter.

RSPB Scotland and Scottish Crofting Foundation will again be offering crofters in Uist and Barra payments for the extra time and effort needed to stack a small part of their crop. The scheme is designed to help crofters using traditional harvesting techniques, which provide a winter food source for the corn bunting population. The scheme will not only help save the corn buntings but will also help save a local skill that has disappeared from the rest of the UK. Thirty-five crofters entered over 80 arable stacks into the scheme last year.

The Arable Stack Scheme has received funding from the Scottish executive’s Biodiversity Action Grants Scheme and Scottish Natural Heritage.

if you would like further information on the Arable Stack Scheme contact:Jamie Boyle (RSPB Scotland) 01876 560287 or 07768042547ena Macdonald (Scottish Crofting Foundation) 01876 510268 or 07776064785.




Alastair Nicolson reports

BoRVe and Annishader Township near Portree on Skye was selected as the first monitor crofting township by QMS

and the Scottish Government during May 2007, joining an existing network of 10 moni-tor farms across Scotland.

A monitor farm/township is a normal agricultural business that is representative of its particular local area and participates in the network for a three-year period, with the aim of seeking improvements in physical and financial performance through the implementation of ideas from a community group of local like-minded farmers and crofters. All meetings are facilitated by an agricultural consultant, who has access to technical and business specialists. in the case of Borve and Annishader this role is undertaken by the Scottish Agricultural College.

The 30 breeding cattle and 750 sheep run by the eight crofters in the township who agreed to actively participate in the project

M o n i t o r c r o f t i n g t o w n s h i pare individually owned – with around 500 of the sheep, mainly blackface and cross cheviots, run on the 1430ha common grazings and managed communally. All participating crofters and the common grazings are in the Rural Stewardship Scheme with prescriptions that include stock reduction and a range of grassland management options. The common grazings also manage around 210ha of crofter forestry woodland.

The first monitor township meeting took the form of an open day on 16 June 2007, with the main purpose being to introduce the project in more detail to both the monitor township and to the local crofting community group.

Key objectives for the first year of the project were agreed following the open day:• obtain true costs for individual crofting

businesses• improve marketing of sheep and cattle• reduce variable costs such as feed• improve grassland management• ensure agricultural systems are suited to

part-time crofting businessesThe five meetings held since then have

covered the following topics:• lamb marketing (foot and mouth restrictions

were in place at this time)• ewe condition scoring and winter feed

rations• health planning and cattle/sheep policy• grassland management including rush

cutting demonstration• Skye lamb and SRdP overview

While the focus of the first year has been the collection and collation of baseline data, several direct benefits have already been achieved following the presentations and discussions at the local meetings. These can be summarised as follows:• reduction in the use of worm drenches

(wormscans undertaken)

• following analysis of baled silage, reduction in feeding of concentrates

• more stringent culling and breeding retention policy for sheep

• cattle and sheep sub-groups reviewed current operation and provided recommendations for a future policy for the township

• review of grasslands and requirement to actively manage to maximise return from fertiliser

Highland cow with whitbred shorthorn and calf

iT WAS ToP honours at this year’s Chelsea Flower Show for Motor Neurone disease Association’s Shetland croft house garden. A gold medal from the Royal Horticultural

Society’s judges and the Radio Times People’s Award were both fabulous prizes for the garden’s creators, but the most exciting honour of all was a double royal visit, from Queen elizabeth and from the Princess Royal, patron of MNdA Scotland.

The Queen and Princess Anne had both independently requested a visit to the croft-house garden, but their touring schedule meant both royal parties arrived at the Shetland exhibit together.

“it was a little unnerving having both royal visitors coming at us from different directions at exactly the same time,” organiser Martin Anderson said, “but it was a double delight for everyone to be presented to them both and a great pleasure for me to show off the garden to them. The Queen and Princess Ann both know Shetland from royal visits there and they were very complimentary about our Shetland garden”.

Among the plants the royal visitors took

interest in was the Shetland Mousear, formerly know as edmondston’s Chickweed, unique to the island of Unst and carefully protected. it is illegal to take specimens of the endangered plant from wild, but the Scotland’s botanic garden has examples in cultivation and generously offered to lend one for the Chelsea display. Martin Anderson was delighted and made the trip personally from Chelsea to edinburgh to collect it and return it after the show.

Among many celebrity visitors to the garden was the urban fox that has chosen the grounds of Chelsea Hospital as its private territory. Normally seen only by the hospital’s other red-coated residents – those military veterans the Chelsea Pensioners – the fox paid several visits to the garden during build-up week, cheekily checking out sandwich packets and empty cartons for any spare rations.

The award-winning garden will now enjoy two new lives. The croft house will be re-erected in Cambridgeshire as a special exhibit at a landscaping material supplier. The plants are now back in Shetland, replanted in native

soil as a second, but rather well-travelled charity garden.

The full story of the Shetland croft house that moved to London comes out on dVd in November. Readers of The Crofter can obtain copies at a special early-bird price of £14.99 each including postage. To reserve one, send name and delivery address with a cheque or postal order to:

Shetland Croft Project, 15 Kirkidale, Walls, Shetland Ze2 9Qx.

Shetland croft house garden takes Chelsea gold

The Foster scrub cutter is put through its paces on Borve rushes

i have to say that when the township was first selected many were a bit wary of participation, but these initial fears have long since evaporated. All participants benefit from both the technical experts attending and – even more relevant – the sharing of knowledge and local practical experiences with neighbouring crofters/farmers in the community group. Key to success so far has been the facilitation by Janette Sutherland and Colin MacPhail of SAC and the fact that all meetings relate to specific local crofting issues.

During the final two years of the project we hope to see further progress towards meeting the agreed objectives.


CROFTING REFORM

iT HAS LoNG been felt that crofting is in decline, for many reasons, and this has led to a series of reforms and subsequent

Crofting Acts.The last reform process led to the launch

of the draft Crofting Reform Bill in June 2005. Until its eventual passing through parliament in a drastically cut version, the SCF gathered vast amounts of information from its members and formed its position to take on the bill.

When distilled down, the essence of the discussions was that lack of effective regulation was the main cause of the problems faced by crofting. it was felt that the Crofters Commission had not been effective, had often not carried out what was expected to be its duty, was not being directed by ministers appropriately – and so on. it was therefore concluded that if this were fixed it would go a long way to getting crofting back to a healthy state. This formed the core of the SCF response to the Bill and subsequently its contribution to the Committee of inquiry on Crofting (CoioC) led by Professor Mark Shucksmith.

This was also the strong message received by the CoioC from those who participated in the inquiry. Following their analysis, the committee concluded that a fundamental change in how crofting is regulated was needed and so recommended replacing the Crofters

The regulation of croftingCommission with a more democratic and de-centralised structure.

This has been one of the major areas of concern as we have been gathering views from our members regarding the CoioC recommendations. There is widespread support for keeping the Commission, as it is recognised as being an invaluable link with the Scottish Government and as having a wealth of experience in its support staff that must not be wasted. However, it is still recognised that the Commission does need reform, it needs to be made more democratic, more accountable and given a clear remit – it needs to be made fit for purpose.

The idea of Local Crofting Boards (LCBs) does not sit comfortably, even though it is recognised that the present CC board of seven appointed commissioners is too centralised and not democratic – the tail wagging the dog. The present Commission regime is moving towards a less centralised approach with the reinstatement of the area assessors, commissioners being more area based and local CC offices opening in Stornoway and Lerwick.

This is a move in the right direction and could be developed further to encompass the core values suggested by the CoioC – more control by crofters themselves. The main concern with the suggested LCBs is that they would be too local,

Rights and responsibilitiesoNe oF the most blatant falsehoods

being circulated in relation to the Shucksmith Report is that the

imposition of a real burden of residency on croft houses will render such houses worthless. What utter nonsense!

The truth about burdens is, firstly, that they would only take effect at the time of assignation or sale and secondly, that any purchaser, or assignee, of a croft house would be expected to reside therein. What is the problem with that? Why would anyone buy a house and croft without actually wanting to live there? The fact that these modest proposals are causing such alarm can only be put down to three reasons. The first is deliberate and malicious misinformation, the second is that people have become so used to a regulatory regime that has permitted such widespread abuse of the system and third is perhaps the legal word burden. How about responsibility?

Shucksmith’s extensive consultations (which, let’s not forget, every registered crofter was invited to contribute to in writing, on-line or at public meetings) revealed a demand for action on absenteeism, holiday homes and affordability of housing. There is a legitimate concern that those former croft houses already decrofted would have no burden, whereas those decrofted in future would, and further work is needed on this aspect. What Shucksmith proposes would not immediately reverse fifty years of regulatory failure, but it would at least stop the rot.

We need to ask some fundamental questions here, like “What kind of crofting

communities do we want to see in future?” do we want more retirement and holiday homes, more schools closed, more land abandoned and derelict – like those townships that today have seventy percent of the houses as holiday homes? or would we prefer to see more families occupying crofts, functioning local economies and services, and our priceless land resource put to productive use? These are the questions that the burden of residency seeks to address.

We need to remember, too, that the burden, the responsibility, already exists. it’s just that it is hardly ever enforced. Crofters’ security of tenure is in fact subject to standard conditions which include residency on or near the croft, and that the land should be worked. Those who call for deregulation, or for continuing in the no-man’s-land of regulation that is not enforced, are taking a one sided view, wishing to safeguard their rights but disregard their responsibilities. A deregulated system, as advocated by Michael otter in last year’s Angus MacRae debate, would sweep away crofters’ rights as well as their responsibilities.

Crofting regulation has two sides to it and it

would not be long, within a deregulated system, before the landlords demanded reinstatement, as they would see it, of their property rights that are so constrained by crofting legislation. if crofters insist on ditching their responsibilities whilst upholding their rights, why should not landlords do the same?

First to go would be the right to buy, both for individuals and for communities. Historic, peppercorn rents would soon be brought up to market values. Tenancies would cease to be heritable leaving crofters with no more security than tenant farmers. Yes, these things could really happen and there are plenty civil servants in edinburgh who will be urging the politicians to adopt just such a course if the campaign by a few self-centred individuals to ‘dump Shucksmith’ succeeds.

of course crofters’ rights and responsibilities need to be balanced. The benefits of living within a regulated system must continue to outweigh any disadvantages and the public benefits delivered by crofting must receive adequate financial reward. For example, Shucksmith’s report recognises the need for revaluation of crofter housing support. Research for SCF has revealed that, twenty years ago, grant and loan support for croft housing covered 84 percent of average build costs compared with just 14 percent today.

Another, so far overlooked, part of the report highlights the urgent need to assist new entrants into crofting and to make support payments available to such people, also the need to reward public goods by more relevant and accessible schemes within Tier 2 of SRdP. does anyone disagree with that?

that neighbour would be regulating neighbour. Perhaps it would be better to call them area crofting boards or regional crofting boards? The point is that size does matter – the areas must be large enough to avoid personalisation but be a size able to interpret regulation in a manner appropriate to the area. The fact that crofting areas differ from each other in how they work is clear and having a flexibility in the way they are regulated to take account of these differences would be welcome.

Let’s suppose: if there were to be a board of commissioners, the majority elected for each of, say, five areas defined by their differing crofting characteristics, maybe elected from and supported by the area assessor network; and these boards had an elected member representing them on the central Crofters Commission board – so it would still be seven or so members, the majority elected – whose remit was over-arching and sometimes stand-apart governance; and it was given clear remit by the areas, and the area boards had the flexibility to apply regulation appropriate to their area, and this commission structure were supported by the civil servants that support it now, under the direction of the Commission which is under the direction of the crofters themselves... well that sounds more like the dog wagging its tail doesn’t it?

Crofting regulation has two sides to it and it would not

be long, within a deregulated system, before the landlords

demanded reinstatement, as they would see it, of their

property rights...


CROFTING REFORM

1.6.1 Revision of SFP rates … use of extended national envelope provisions … bull hire scheme … SFP entitlement to newcomers.

In principle yes, but should be about re-distribution from top-end receivers. Orkney area does not want.

1.6.2, 1.6.3 and 1.6.4 Review of LFASS ...

Yes but reservations in Orkney.

1.6.5 SRdP … non-discretionary measure to crofters and other small businesses …

1.6.6 CCAGS should be retained and (a) support for land-based enterprises other than agriculture; and (b) a 10% uplift in support to young entrants.

1.6.7 development investment on building the potential of communities…LeAdeR and iATe

Yes, but not happy with township development committee suggestion due to potential dominance of non-crofters.

1.6.8 integration of … Hie’s and local authorities’ work – priority to microbusinesses … targeting the remoter parts of crofting areas.

Yes, but crofting development must not come under HIE. A stand-alone crofting community development body based on the Community Land Unit is a good idea but it should come under a reformed Crofting Commission.

1.6.9 Strategic approach to … population retention … developing new enterprise … communities.

1.6.10 enhanced Croft House Grant Scheme … to permit building or improvement without decrofting.

Yes, but level of grant suggested needs to be increased as costs have risen. (Only 14% average building costs now supported by grant compared with 84% (G + L) twenty years ago.

1.6.11 The enhanced CHGS should not be available to those who decroft.

Yes, as long as there is a realistic mechanism to not have to decroft.

1.6.12 The provision of affordable housing for non-crofters should be supported by the measures detailed at section 3.8.4.

1.6.13 Local crofting development plans should set out in what circumstances housing may be built on inbye land and good common grazings … presumption against building on inbye.

Yes, in principle. But there needs to be greater integration between croft plans, Crofting Commission, the local plan and planning authorities. Planners need to have a much greater awareness of planning on croft land.

1.6.14 Measures to assist new entrants to crofting should be emphasised in the allocation of future funding.

1.6.15 Separation in the functions of crofting regulation, development and the maintenance of the register of crofts. … local accountability and ownership in … regulation

Separation of regulation and development is acceptable to an extent – they must both come under the authority of the same body, the Crofting Commission. The register of crofts could come under Scottish Registers if it is shown to be appropriate and they are funded.

liked – misleading in scale) could work but the size of the area is paramount – big enough to be able to retain objectivity and small enough to account for regional differences in crofting. Support staff are essential.

1.6.17 Responsibility for development of crofting should be given to a powerful crofting and community development body, ideally within Hie.

A stand-alone crofting community development body based on the Community Land Unit is a good idea but it should come under the Crofting Commission, not HIE.

1.6.18 Grazings committees should be modernised to become crofting township development committees with a broader remit and more inclusive membership. Their primary function will be to develop and agree strategic plans for local crofting development, with the support of the new crofting and community development body.

The term crofting township development committees is not liked. Grazings committees already have the ability to be inclusive and to make development decisions regarding croft land. If the Crofting Commission works properly the grazings committees will work properly.

1.6.19 An annual State of Crofting report should be submitted to the Scottish parliament by the federation of crofting boards … .

OK, but submitted by the Crofting Commission having been prepared by the area boards and Commission HQ – including the crofting development body.

1.6.20 New legislation is needed to replace, simplify and clarify the accumulated laws which set the framework for crofting today.

1.6.21 No change should be made to those rights given to individual crofters in the 1886 Crofters Act, namely security of tenure, succession, fair rents and the value of their improvements. However these rights should only be enjoyed by those resident on or near their croft and using the land beneficially.

Yes. This is already in legislation and just hasn’t been regulated by the Crofters Commission. Regulate properly and most things fall into place.

1.6.22 All croft houses to be tied to residency through a real burden … included when next assigned or purchased … in perpetuity….

No. This would inevitably devalue croft houses. Referring to the previous recommendation ‘No change should be made to those rights … the value of their improvements’ the croft house is a permanent improvement and should be valued fairly at market value. Whilst the sentiments of curbing speculation, of helping provide more affordable housing for local people and of stopping local houses being bought as holiday homes and lying empty most of the year are appreciated, the price for the failure of the Scottish rural housing strategy should not be borne by crofters.

1.6.23 A crofter wishing to assign or transfer the croft, or forced to do so through failing to fulfil the residency burden or enhanced burden, should be given three options as set out in section 3.14.4 of this report.

Yes in the most part, but rejection of the real burden attached to the house.

1.6.24 owner-occupiers and tenants should be treated alike, simply as crofters, in all aspects of crofting. each local crofting board should have the power to suspend (or not) the 1976 Crofting Reform (Scotland) Act’s right to buy.

Yes to the former. No to the latter – the right to buy is needed to defend a tenant against an obstructive landlord. However stricter criteria for conditions of exercising this right could be acceptable.

Summary of SCF members’ responses to the CoIoC recommendations so far, taking the recommendations from the report summaryPlease refer to the report itself for the full numbered paragraph content.

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

1.6.16 The Crofters Commission would therefore be wound up ….

No. A commission is essential but it must be reformed and renamed Crofting Commission or suchlike to reflect the reformation. It must be given a clear set of duties and responsibilities, it must be majority elected and it must be able to take account of regional variation. Elected area crofting boards (local crofting boards not

Yes

Continued on page 16


CROFTING REFORM

A NUMBeR of questions are coming up repeatedly at SCF meetings held to discuss the Shucksmith Report.

in this article, we attempt to answer those queries – on the basis of what we understand the proposals to say. This should not be read as an SCF position, but simply as an interpretation of the report.

Tighter controls on transfer of crofts by sale and assignation

Q. Can I still assign my croft(s) to members of my family?

A. Yes, normal rules applying to family assignation are unaffected – except if you are seeking to transfer multiple holdings to a family member – the local board in your area will have the power to determine how many crofts/how much land can be transferred to one individual. This figure would be set locally to reflect local circumstances.

Q. I want to transfer (by sale or assignation) my croft and croft house to someone outside my family. What do the proposals mean for me?

A. The croft and croft house can be transferred together – for whatever price you agree – subject to the conditions of residency and working the land, very similar to those that exist at the moment in crofting law.

Q. I want to transfer a bareland croft outside my family. What does this mean for me?

A. The croft can be transferred – for whatever price you agree – to someone who

will be resident and make use of the croft. The incoming crofter will have access to housing grants to help build a house.

Q. I want to transfer my croft but keep my house. How would the proposals affect me?

A. The croft house can be separated from the croft and retained or sold, with a condition of residency. This residency requirement could be met by having the house rented out, if you chose not to live in it full time. The croft land would be assigned or sold according to rules set by the local crofting board. This might mean the croft being transferred to someone chosen by the local crofting board, provided that they could meet the asking price. The price would be set by the district valuer, so would reflect the value of improvements, fencing, drainage, sheds etc. The new tenant or owner/occupier must be resident and make some use of the croft.

Q. My house is already decrofted. I want to sell the house and assign the croft. How will the proposals affect me?

A. You can sell your house on the open market and transfer your croft – for whatever price you agree – to someone who will be resident and make use of the croft.

Local boards

Q. Crofting in my area is very different to other areas. What powers would local boards have to reflect this?

A. Within a framework of national legislation,

S h u c k s m i t h R e p o r t – f r e q u e n t l y a s k e d q u e s t i o n s

THA TUiLLeAdH sa chòrr deasbad ann an-dràsta mu Aithisg Shucksmith agus na tha a’ tachairt ann an

siostam croitearachd. Cha bu chaomh leam a dhol a-steach gu domhainn taobh seach taobh dheth san aiste seo, ged a tha mi taiceil dhan aithisg, an àite sin ge-tà, b’ fheàrr leam facal no dhà sgrìobhadh air mar a tha diofar dhaoine a’ coimhead air an fhearann, dualchas agus croitearachd.

Bha coinneamh againn thurad ann an Bun illidh bho chionn ghoirid. Thàinig muinntir Ghallaibh ann, agus bha mi nam shuidh ri taobh bodach aosda a bhuineas dha baile air an rathad eadar Latharan agus inbhir Theòrsa. Chunnaic e putan Gàidhlig orm agus thoisich e ag innse dhomh mun phailteas de Ghàidhlig a bh’ ann nuair a bha e òg, agus gu robh iadsan a tha a’ cumail a-mach nach robh Gàidhlig ann an Gallaibh gu tùr ceàrr. Thug e dhomh eisimpleir no dhà dhe abairtean ‘s facail a chuala e agus thuirt e gur e an sgoil as coireach nach robh Gàidhlig ann a-nis. “Rinn iad na b’ urrainn dhaibh gus ar dualchas a thoirt air falbh. Aon uair sa tha do dhualchas air falbh, tha

there would be power for local boards to set policies reflecting local conditions and views.

Q. Who would be on local crofting boards?

A. Local boards would have a majority of elected crofters (elections every four years) and others appointed by ministers, chosen from nominations from local authorities and other bodies (representing crofters and landowners)

Q. What about all the expertise in the Crofters Commission, both the staff and the board?

A. The federation of local boards would need staff. experienced staff of the Crofters Commission are likely to be in a good position if they wished to work for the new structure. existing board members might wish to stand for election to the local boards.

Q. Will there be an appeal from the decisions of the local board?

A. The proposals suggest a non-statutory appeals mechanism, in advance of appeal to the Scottish Land Court on matters of process.

a h-uile rud air falbh.” Thug an cuspair seo e dha croitearachd.

“Far a bheil mi fhìn a’ fuireach an-dràsta,” thuirt e, “tha na croitearan a bh’ ann bho thùs air falbh. Tha daoine ùra nan àite agus chan eil sgot aca. Airson croitearachd ceart a bhith ann feumaidh tu a bhith air do rugadh is do thogadh ann. Tha am fearann nad fhuil, tha e na phàirt dhe do bheatha. dhan fheadhainn ùr, chan eil anns an fhearann ach rud a ghabhas reic is ceannachd.” Facail inntinneach is domhainn dha-rìribh, a thug sealladh air croitearachd a bha gu tùr diofraichte ris a’ mhòr chuid dhe na chuala sinn.

Anns an dearbh coinneamh bha dithis ann a thàinig a-steach dha croitearachd bho taobh a-muigh. Bha eagal orra nach faigheadh iad prìs ceart airson nan lotaichean aca. Thuirt iad gu follaiseach gu robh iad ag iarraidh prothaid air na cosg iad agus ‘s e am margaidh saor an aon slighe air adhart. Cha b’ urrainn dhan dà thaobh a bhith na bu shoilleire. Air an darna taobh, bodach a bhuineas dhan àite a’ cur dualchas is an fearann ri chèile agus air an taobh eile daoine nas òige bho taobh a-muigh a’ cur cuideam air prothaid.

San t-seagh seo, nach e aon seòrsa an aimhreit a tha a’ tachairt air feadh an t-saoghail far a bheil tùsanaich agus feallsanachd an là an-diugh a’ bualadh ri chèile? Aig an àm seo, thathar ri fhaicinn dè thachras ann an saoghal croitearachd. An e còraichean aig croitearan fa-leth thig am bàrr, no còraichean an t-siostam a thèid a ghlèidheil?

Bu chaomh leam na facail mu dheireadh fhàgail aig tùsanach (ojibwe), a tha faisg air teachdaireachd a’ bhodaich à Gallaibh, “The recovery of people is tied to the recovery of food, since food is itself medicine: not only for the body, but for the soul, for the spiritual connection to history, ancestors and the land.”1 Chan fhaighear an leithid anns a’ mhargadh shaor.

Alasdair B MacMhaoirn

1 Laduke, Winona, Recovering the Sacred, South end Press, 2005, p.210.

na Gàidheil, an fhearann ‘s Croitearachd san Là an-diugh


CROFTING REFORM

A q u i c k l o o k a t S h u c k s m i t h

SHUCKSMiTH’S report is nothing if not visionary.

The vision is, i believe, that which i shared with the many crofters who enthusiastically contributed to the inquiry: the dull hues of silent crofts transformed into a patchwork of much and varied uses; machair and moorland once more alive with folk going about their work; scattered croft houses occupied by young families. Townships and villages, alive again with many comings and goings, news exchanged and confidences shared – lips shaped with Gaelic words and the sound of it too on the wind, mingling with the taste of the sea.

There is nothing new in such a vision – it’s as old as the promise of a land flowing with milk and honey, but Shucksmith is the first of similar commissions to recognise that the attainment of vibrant, sustainable and socially-just crofting communities lies with not merely with the institutions which govern us, but above all in our own selves, both individually and collectively. And there lies the rub: for in any change there will be winners and losers, and already we see the pen-jabbing and hard words of those who over the years have come to see

a croft in terms of property rather than opportunity, as wealth rather than sustenance.

S h u c k s m i t h ’ s recommendations are designed to moderate the inflated expectations of some individuals in order to serve the common good. Watering down or removing key recommendations to appease the angry few would be to pervert the original vision and lead to a collapse in hope. in my view, the integrity of the proposals as a whole must be respected – the recommendations should be adopted as a package, subject only to fine tuning. From my viewpoint the following adjustments should be made.

Burdens

Not every house on a croft is a croft house. Some are holiday lets – a valuable, legitimate and highly significant diversification of crofting activity underpinning the economic viability of many crofts, particularly where the land is poor. i believe this oversight could be addressed as follows.• There should be a formal

distinction between residential croft houses (on which there certainly should be a burden of residence) and houses which

are a business asset of the croft being used as a holiday letting business.

• Crofters would need to register houses as either one or the other, and could only change designation with the agreement of the area board.

• exact conditions of burdens should be set by area boards.

• Burdens should apply to both designations, but slightly differently.

• Burdens on residential croft houses should be as Shucksmith proposes, except … if a crofter lives not on the croft but within 16km, then has the alternative of either seeking redesignation as holiday let business (but see next point), or accepting the house should be separated from his/her croft as an independent residential unit (under the burden of residence) – and re-let.

• Burden on holiday letting business should be that the operator of the business is a crofter resident within 16km of the property and that it is marketed and operated as a bona fide letting business. Criteria for judging whether the business is genuine should be set by the area board, but could

A response to Shucksmith from a new crofter ‘Neonach’

“CRoFTiNG has to be protected from crofters” is a non-

attributed statement near the beginning of the well-respected Professor Shucksmith’s final report from the Committee of inquiry on Crofting.

Reading through the document, the major theme seems to be that it is the land rather than the crofter which needs protection. in a way this is perhaps understandable following the well-publicised Taynuilt case and also a case on another island where a large arable field on a croft is left uncultivated and unstocked.

The report was researched by a group most suited to the job and known to most of us. They have produced a summary of their findings at the many public meetings held throughout Scotland.

if crofters are not in agreement with the recommendations in the report perhaps they only have themselves to blame when they absented themselves from these meetings.

Some of the most problematic

parts of the report include the abolition of the Crofters Commission and the establishment of local crofting boards with up to 70 members.

While the Commission did not function as well as it could have, there has definitely been a shift in emphasis since the introduction of the Crofting Reform Act of 2007. The advertising columns of the local papers are testament to that. Perhaps if the later Act had been given more time to bed in maybe the clamour for the Commission’s abolition might not have been so vocal.

The proposed LSBs are felt by many to be too local to have statutory powers but could have an advisory role perhaps replacing assessors. if the Commission is replaced by a new regulatory body its board members must be elected by crofters and it must not be an offshoot of Hie (as suggested) but a stand-alone body. its headquarters could be situated in a new purpose-built unit in a crofting community such as the easily accessible isle of Skye.

Placing burdens on croft houses and sites is a non-starter. it would result in the classification of houses within a crofting township and would lead to a loss of value – even negative equity after final building costs. it would impede a crofter who wished to borrow capital, for example, for croft improvements on the strength of the value of the house. it would also cause difficulties if younger or elderly relatives wished to build a house on the croft.

The suggested increase in grant and loan for housing is to be welcomed but would need to be a lot higher than the proposed £30,000, particularly when a new build in the islands is on average around £120,000. Grant aid for improvements should also be available to those who have decrofted their house but are still engaged in crofting.

A crofter should still have some say in who succeeds him or her in an assignation. Certainly there must be dialogue with the regulatory body at some stage as to the suitability of the new tenant. The notion, however, that the local

crofting board should impose a new tenant on the croft while the original crofter is perhaps still residing in the croft house is unfair. Again the 2007 Act already gives the Commission extra powers to regulate assignations.

The report’s proposal that government should backdate everything to 12 May 2008 is impractical. For example, crofters already in the process of buying their house site will find it very difficult, perhaps impossible, to conclude legal formalities with a proposal such as this hanging in the air.

The Minister needs to make an early announcement that this will not be implemented otherwise problems will arise.

Highlighted above are some of the more contentious issues in the Shucksmith report. There is a lot of good stuff too. in the future it will come in very useful as a reference document on crofting.

The Shucksmith Report is available free by phoning Linda Marshall on 0131 244 6604.

Alex MacArthur

be for example a minimum of 26 weeks paid lettings per year, excluding to self, family or friends.

The Crofters Commission

• The Commission should not be abolished, it should be reformed.

• The emphasis should remain on crofting, not crofters – it should be about general principles and the socio-economic system, not about populist policies, laying down the ground rules for the area boards and development committees.

• A majority of the Commission should be comprised of crofting board chairmen; the minority could be government appointees or co-opted

• The Commission should provide the first level of appeal on decisions of local boards, the next being to the Land Court as before.

• A federation of area boards would be unnecessary.

Area Boards

• Geographical extent and policies should vary according to local circumstances.

• They must be large enough to eliminate any risk of personal

Continued on page 16


Norman Leask reflects on the lessons of history related to the challenges of proposed new crofting legislation

iN LATe deCeMBeR, the last fishing days before Christmas 1888, my great grandfa-ther and two of his sons who fished for the

laird using the laird’s sailing boat and equip-ment – and their strength and expertise – were hit by a rogue squall while sailing home.

As the laird was also the local merchant no cash changed hands, the rent for the croft was settled and remaining credits for the season’s fishing (they were good fishermen) were used up in goods and chattels required to keep the croft going until the next settling, so when the boat sank a variety of problems for different individuals occurred.

The laird/merchant lost an excellent fishing crew who had made him a very wealthy man. He also lost three qualified craftsmen who could repair or make anything they required (why did these qualities not pass on to me?)

The neighbours lost three capable and willing members of the community who, when not at the beck and call of the laird, were also gifted musicians (that gift was not passed to me either) always ready to get involved in any celebration.

The two young children (16 weeks and two years) had no father or grandfather but they still required milk, butter, kirn milk and bland, all products of the Shetland cow, which were a major part of their staple diet.

The two widows had to continue working the croft, feed themselves and the children, needing the milk, butter, kirn milk and bland but also the flour and the other supplies that went down with the boat.

The three bodies had to be retrieved along

CROFTING REFORM

issues governing decisions, but small enough for representation and policies to reflect local conditions. Separate boards for Uist/Barra and Harris/Lewis would be quite different in population/size, but would be the optimum, though operating costs might dictate lumping these two together.

Crofting Development Committees

• Wider community representation would help deal with the current problem of grazing committees being an arena for local feuding. it may well also address the problem of died-in-the-wool crofters resisting changes for the greater good, but there is also the risk that the tables could simply be turned

A response to Shucksmith from a new crofter ‘Neonach’Continued from page 15

What’s in a name?There has been much said lately

on some of the recommendations of the Committee of Inquiry

on Crofting, particularly over housing and regulation.

But just a thought:

Would we feel the same way if the word ‘burden’ was replaced with

‘responsibility’?

Would we feel the same way if the word ‘federation’ was replaced with

‘commission’?

Would we feel the same way if the word ‘local’ was replaced with ‘area’

or ‘regional’?

1.6.25 All sub-lets and tenancies should require the consent of the local crofting board … power to limit number of crofts or the amount of land which can be held ….

At present sub-lets need approval of the CC so yes, approval of the area CC board is ok. Limiting the number of crofts held by one person would have to be very carefully scrutinised as many crofting businesses depend on multiple holdings. However, multiple derelict, disused or absentee holdings should be redistributed.

1.6.26 Responsibility for the register of crofts would be taken over by Registers of Scotland.

Yes if it shown to be appropriate and funding is made available.

1.6.27 Boundaries of crofts which in practice have been accepted for twenty years or more will not be challengeable.

Yes, if the boundary is clearly defined; unfortunately many are not.

1.6.28 The Registration of Leases (Scotland) Act 1857 should be amended to make a crofting lease registrable and hence eligible for standard securities.

1.6.29 All holdings similar to crofts within defined crofting parishes should, if their owners or tenants wish, become subject to crofting regulation.

Yes as long as support budgets reflect the increase in crofts.

1.6.30 Government should consider back-dating the introduction of the real burden to all assignations and purchases made after May 12th 2008, so as to forestall any rush to avoid the provisions of the legislation.

The real burden concept is rejected.

Note: this is our members’ position so far – if you have anything to add please let us know

Summary continuedContinued from page 13

Yes

and one injustice replaced with another. • in my own group of open townships, for

example, there have been proposals for all winter grazing to be confined to the out-run of the few remaining crofts that have not been residentialised. on the face of it this is to improve the amenity of the village area, but this would be largely for the benefit of those who have already de-crofted and built on or sold much of their crofts (which is on the best grazings) and at the expense of the few whose crofts remain just that.

• development committees must therefore be re-organised where necessary to distinguish between increasingly residentialised townships and those that remain essentially agricultural.

The importance of security of tenurewith the laird’s boat. He organised the salvage and delivered the bodies to the graveyard on Christmas eve, which appeared a charitable thing to do.

He considered he had been very hard done by as he had lost an expert fishing crew and very able maintenance men. The rent was paid until November 1889 and security of tenure had come in two years earlier so he could not throw out this now-useless family and get another family into the croft that had young men who could be on his fishing boat and make him more money.

He could see an excellent milking Shetland heifer, newly calved with a nice heifer calf at foot. He claimed that the cost of recovering the boat, the damage done to it and the cost of delivering the bodies came to the value of the milking cow – lifeblood for the survivors – so as he sailed back from the funeral he took the cow in payment thinking that the people would starve or have to leave.

The other factors in this saga saw it differently. The neighbours gathered together, as a crofting community does, and divided up the responsibilities until the other son who was sailing deep sea came home.

The laird was the real loser. Because of his actions he lost all the respect in the community and the security of tenure made it impossible for him to prosper on their grief by throwing them off the croft.

Security of tenure is still sacrosanct.

We are delighted that the Shucksmith inquiry is completed, but i foresee problems if everything suggested was included in the Bill. Please, please let us know what things you feel are sacrosanct now and what you believe should not be changed in the new Bill.


A feature article appeared in The Herald on 5th August 2008 written by Iain Macaskill Smith who claims to be a crofter, amongst other things.

We are not allowed to reproduce the article as Mr Macaskill Smith has withheld his permission. Suffice to say that it came across as a bizarre tirade against crofting communities and advocates the de-regulation of crofting.

Naturally it completely discarded the Shucksmith Inquiry and final report.

Though we can not reproduce Macaskill Smith’s article, we thought it worth reproducing Donald Murdie’s response to it, for which we do have permission.

You will find the letter online at this address – http://snipurl.com/3carc or go to The Herald website and search for crofting.

by Thatcher’s unfettered free market. Mr MacAskill Smith calls for removal of legislative protection from crofting, resulting in more holiday homes, more retired people and bigger and fewer crofts. Professor Shucksmith on the other hand envisages more families occupying crofts, increased rural population with growing rural economies, and balanced age structures in communities. i know which i’d go for. This nonsense about enlarging crofts was all gone through in the 1950s when the now discredited Crofters Commission was set up. Fortunately it didn’t work. if a hill farmer with thousands of acres and thousands of ewes cannot make a living, then there wouldn’t be many crofters left, even if crofts were enlarged exponentially.

The point about crofting is that it gives people a chance to maintain a foothold in some of the country’s most remote areas and carry out some marginal agricultural activity – producing some food for the family and good store and breeding stock for sale – as well as carrying on a variety of other full- or part-time occupations. Functioning rural economies need economically active people – teachers, builders, mechanics, plumbers, carers, fishermen and IT specialists as well

as agriculturists. Crofting gives these people the chance to live and work and build homes in areas which would otherwise be retirement villages or deserted entirely. Agricultural

The decay of the crofting systemCROFTING REFORM

enlargement was such a success in, for example, the Straths of Sutherland, that they are today an empty wasteland with a degraded environment, except in the few areas that were re-crofted in the early twentieth century. in england, and most parts of rural Scotland, only the very rich can afford to live in the countryside. Crofting makes that possible for people on normal incomes.

Crofting is indeed an anomaly which a lot of people don’t like. it can only survive within a regulated system. if there is to be such a system it must be upheld and enforced, which the Crofters Commission has failed to do. Shucksmith’s report is being opposed by those who have profited handsomely from regulatory failure. if they have their way they will indeed kill off something unique and of real value, which rather than denigrating, Scotland should be exporting around the world as a means of providing land, homes and jobs. People are empowered by their rights to the land. That’s why right-wing theorists, free market extremists and corporate gangsters have always tried to grab the land from the people. Shucksmith envisages more people, not less, benefiting from rights to the phenomenal land resource we have in crofting tenure.

“Crofts are in danger of becoming the last refuge for those who failed to cut the mustard anywhere else,” says Mr. MacAskill Smith. What an insult and how offensive to thousands of hard-working, progressive and innovative crofters. But a cheap and easy shot to deliver from Newcastle.

Yours faithfully

donald A C Murdie

“Crofts are in danger of becoming the last refuge for those who failed to cut the mustard anywhere else,”

says Mr MacAskill Smith.

dear Sir

The debate on the future of crofting which has been stimulated by the report of Professor Mark Shucksmith’s Committee of inquiry has unfortunately, but inevitably, been joined by a sneering band of nihilists who seek only to profit from continuing the decay of the crofting system.

The views of this destructive minority were advanced in your columns last week by iain MacAskill Smith, who describes himself as a crofter, political theorist and economist. it sometimes takes a bit of time to reach the truth in these matters, hence the timing of this letter, but i can clear up one point straight away. Mr Macaskill Smith is not a crofter. He lives in Newcastle. i do not know if he is a political theorist or an economist, but if he is, there is no reference to any of his work on the internet, which your readers might find surprising. I have no idea what qualifications or experience Mr Macaskill Smith brings to the debate on crofting, or what has brought about his evident hatred of a system that has, against all the odds, maintained significant populations in some of Scotland’s most remote and disadvantaged areas.

Yes, crofting is an anomaly which only survives because it is the last part of British society that has not yet been totally trashed

... more families occupying crofts, increased rural

population with growing rural economies, and

balanced age structures in communities.

Crofters were cleared from these glens A vibrant crofting township We want to see less of these


Steve Robertson of the North Highland Forest Trust reports on a recent visit

i WAS FoRTUNATe this summer to visit the forests of Slovakia on a nature

exchange programme, courtesy of the ARCH Network project and funded through the Leonardo da Vinci programme.

one of the many fascinating aspects of the Slovak forests was the interaction between shepherding systems and the large, wild carnivores that populate the surrounding forest. Slovakia not only has a healthy population of bears and wolves but also of the even more elusive lynx.

We had a close look at one grazed meadow system whilst on a bear hunting expedition in the mountains above Liptovsky Hradok. driving through the region, we saw typical large, lush grass meadows with isolated islands of trees and surrounded on three sides by dense forest or scrub. Here the forest was dominated by Norway spruce and it rose sharply from relatively flat grasslands into the High Tatra mountains above. The woodland edge is also the edge of the national park and not only is domestic grazing not allowed within the park, but the predators who live there are highly protected. Quite a dramatic boundary, therefore for the shepherd and very different from the Scottish experience of coping with neighbouring land managers’ wild game and restrictive land designations.

The lower boundary of this meadow was a mosaic of arable and forestry management, descending to villages, roads and larger farms of the valley floors. Housing tended to be in tightly clumped villages with very few individual houses. The shepherds at this meadow had a small house hidden in a stand of trees next to a traditional, steeply-pitched, one-

and-a-half storey barn and with the sheep paddock adjacent. This whole complex was strategically placed at the centre of a fairly open swathe of meadow. Handy at night, when there are wild beasts prowling outside.

Wild beasts! our guide told us something of the history of persecution of bears in this region of Slovakia with numbers rising from an estimated low of 20 individuals in the 1930s to around 800 at the present time. Wolf and lynx numbers have also risen proportionately. We didn’t see any bears – although one large thing did dive off into the undergrowth at one point – but we did see lots of bear tracks in the forests above the sheep meadows, with dung on the footpaths and scratching and bite marks on trees. Wolves had used those paths too with wolf dung easy to identify (for the expert eye) at several locations.

Wolves, bears and Slovak sheep

Not sure of the breed! Slovensjy Cuvac guard dogs. And the flock ready for milking. The closest we got to a bear!

The meadow paddock at Liptovsky HradokFor the richness of biodiversity in the surrounding forests this balance of large predators is surely an excellent thing.

The main diet of these animals is not sheep, though they do inflict significant losses (both in management time and in actual losses) on small herders typically

managing from 200 to 1500 sheep. For example, in 1997 throughout Slovakia about 400 sheep were reported as having been killed by bears, 200 by wolves and five by lynx. only bears losses are compensated by the government, so wolf and lynx kills are likely to be more significant than this figure suggests. Wild boar and deer comprise the majority of the diet of most wolves and lynx. indeed, the wolf dung we saw was mostly made up of wild boar hairs and the bears had been eating herbage. About 85% of the bear’s diet is made up of grass and other plants. But all predators will take easy prey, and a percentage of the shepherd’s life must be spent on not presenting their stock as easy meat.

This picture seems typical of central european countries. A rapid hunt through the web came up with the following statistics

for Romania, where around 4.5 million sheep and 1.5 million cattle co-exist on the same range as 5000 bears, 3000 wolves and 2000 lynx (From “2002 State of Carnivore Science”, at www.carnivoreconservation.org). That’s a lot of sheep, outnumbering the predators 450 to one, but easy to

see the losses stacking up if the situation is not well managed.

The rich biodiversity of wild game helps tourist numbers, but this too is seen as another burden for some shepherds due to the challenges of combining effective guard dogs with random, straying tourists. We saw one system of predator dog defence using Slovensky Cuvac guard dogs, a local, large, long-haired breed looking a bit like a white Newfoundland. The dogs were chained at intervals around the night-time sheep pen in the centre of the meadow. They howled at us on our approach, but seemed like they could be friendly enough if trained to be so. our guide explained that this was a common system throughout the country, but not very effective. The dogs howl all right, but can’t get at the predators which walk between them, take a sheep or two and exit before the shepherd can be on the scene. in the old days, these dogs would be raised with the flock, literally, so that they saw themselves as one of the flock. They would naturally put themselves between the predator and the flock. The dogs were not trained to attack, but it is easy to imagine that this system might not work so well with high tourist numbers using the forests on skis, bikes or on foot. Many shepherds have resorted to chaining the dogs and treating the resulting stock losses as justification for illegal hunting of predators.

it was not clear on our very brief visit how other issues, such as land rights or communal land use, might restrict change for what would appear to be a relatively subsistence form of agriculture. Still, for the two middle-aged men and one woman we saw rounding up their 400 sheep for milking at Liptovsky Hradok, shepherding still seems to continue in a way very recognisable to shepherds of many centuries earlier and around many parts of the world.


RiSiNG CoSTS of energy and in turn living costs are being felt in all areas

throughout the world, no more so than in the crofting areas of Scotland.

These areas are home to some of the most innovative, capable and promising communities whose potential is often underdeveloped. This is exactly where Community energy Scotland – previously known as the Highlands and islands Community energy Company – a registered charity which enables communities to develop the natural resources of communities throughout Scotland, can help through renewable energy and energy efficiency measures. This includes advice, support and funding, up to a maximum of 50% of the costs of such measures.

Community renewable energy projects vary immensely and utilise different technologies and resources from wind to biomass to solar. one example is that of the North Harris Trust (NHT), based in the isle of Harris, who have been developing a turbine project at Monan. The group have planning permission for a 2.5 MW wind development which is estimated to give an income of around £100, 000 annually. The community plan to use the money for such projects as improved housing, employment creation, energy audits and enhanced health provision.

The fact that they have had years of hard work to get to this stage only seems to increase the determination of this group. david Cameron, chairperson of NHT highlights this by saying that, “When a community project produces energy from renewable sources everybody wins: the environment, the energy user and the community itself. North Harris is an area of 62,500 acres purchased and now owned by

the people who live and work on the land. We have renewable energy projects involving wind, hydro and biomass, all of which will contribute to the benefit of the community. We are lucky to be in a part of the world rich in renewable options and in due course there is every reason why as a community we can become involved in marine-based renewable energy production.”

Another innovative project

which highlights that remoteness need not stifle or constrain community use of renewables is that of eigg, a small island off the west coast of Scotland which does not have access to the national grid. Until now the eighty-seven islanders have relied on diesel generators, gas bottles and mini-hydro schemes for their power and have had to juggle the use of electrical equipment in their homes. This year they managed to commission their own electrification scheme with an integrated mix renewable source of hydro, wind and solar photovoltaic connected to a newly-installed grid network.

This has enabled islanders to be connected to a twenty-four hour renewably powered electricity

supply. Previously, they were reliant on imported, expensive and dirty diesel supplies to fuel individual generators. This community now has an invaluable understanding of energy and how their daily routines can affect and impinge upon it.

The differing technologies which community groups take on doesn’t stop there. Biomass supply and demand clusters are an obvious winning example of

community control, empowerment and growth. An example is the North Sutherland Community Forestry Trust. This community group managed to agree a ground-breaking management agreement with the Forestry Commission which meant that any operations in the oldest conifer plantation in the country had to be run under the nose of the trust first. Since this agreement they bought sheds at Forsinard in the middle of the flow country that are so big you can turn an articulated lorry in them without reversing. They raised funds and bought a second hand Stenner sawmill from Czechoslovakia, a fork lift and a state-of-the-art chipper. They employed someone locally to start the milling and

Energy on the croftchipping operation and have been supplying chip to the first woodchip-heated swimming pool in Scotland for over a year. More recently they have also raised the funds for a new-build log cabin in Borgie Forest which they use as an office and a meeting place and have installed a simple low-cost wood heating system that we part-funded. These are the quiet successes they have had, phenomenal since it was all on voluntary effort.

in order to install a renewable on croft land there are a number of issues which may arise, the main one being land ownership. if the community group or individual owns the land then they are able to apply for planning permission without too many problems. However there are a number of cases where this isn’t an option and the community either has to buy the land concerned – the project ‘footprint’ – or else lease it for the life of the project, usually 25 years. A number of projects seek to agree a lease with the common grazings committee. This would be discussed with all the shareholders and the landlord and may need to be approved by the Land Court. A decision is often based on the quality of the land, vicinity to local croft houses and impact on crofting as a whole.

in developing projects, communities and their members are now gaining new-found confidence, skills and relationships. These schemes are run by the community for the community and highlight the potential which rural groups have to grow on their doorstep.

Any community wanting to know more about schemes such as these, as well as smaller-scale schemes which can power a building or offset electricity costs should go to http://communityenergyscotland.org.uk or phone 01349 868933.

eigg turbines

THe SCoTTiSH Government recently launched the Climate Chal-lenge Fund, which over the next three years will invest £18.8M in measures to reduce carbon emissions.

The Scottish Government proposes, through its Climate Change Bill, to reduce Scottish carbon emissions by 80% by 2050. The fund is designed to enable communities to come forward with their own solutions to make a significant reduction in carbon emissions.

The Climate Challenge Fund offers grants to a range of community organisations to help with the planning, learning, communication and most importantly, action to reduce carbon emissions. The projects can involve a range of actions, from helping us use less energy, or walking and cycling more, to local sustainable food. The projects should be delivered in the context of the wider environmental, social and economic dimensions that give people new skills, improve health, help them to work together or provide better community facilities, but carbon reduction must be at the heart of every proposal.

The guiding principles of the fund are:

• Make significant carbon emissions reduction as the central focus, but also bring wider environmental, social and economic benefits.

• Be community based, and have the community at the centre of decision making.

• Seek to improve quality of life now and for future generations.There is no set grant, no minimum amount, but there is a £1m

maximum. Larger projects may apply if they can demonstrate a particularly high potential carbon saving and clear alignment with the other fund criteria. Applicants are not required to find funding from other sources but jointly funded projects are welcome.

The fund will not be targeting any specific or particular carbon- reducing activities but the extent and sustainability of carbon reduction will be an important factor in which initiatives gain support.

For further information on the Climate Challenge Fund contact Keep Scotland Beautiful 01786 471333 www.keepscotlandbeautiful.org/ccf or email [email protected] .

Help communities reduce carbon emissions


Tel: 01643 841611 [email protected]

Please quote ‘CR08’when calling. Thank You.

DA

TA C

AP

TU

RE

ELE

CT

RO

NIC

PERFORMANCE RECORDING SOFTWARE

SHEA

RW

ELL

DAT

A

WE SUPPLY QUALITY VISUAL & ELECTRONIC SHEEP & CATTLE TAGSSET sheep tags from 9p each Replacement cattle tags from £2.50

iF YoU are confused about present sheep tagging rules you have my every sympathy, comments Richard Webber.it seems like we have taken ten steps

backwards as far as traceability goes in the UK. To be told the S tag has to go, when we all know it was one of the best ways to link the last holding, was in my opinion stupid. in place of it we only have to double tag breeding sheep and insert a holding of birth tag for all born on the farm. Now look ahead to 1 January 2010 and Electronic Identification (EID); as yet the rules have not been agreed in detail (some concessions are highlighted below) but if we have to electronically identify all sheep and record individually then there is a task ahead.

eC Council Regulation 21/2004 introduces electronic identification (EID) of sheep and individual recording of sheep and goats from 31 december 2009.

However, industry identified the requirement to record individual details of animals that are not electronically identified on movement documents as too burdensome.

The Regulation now provides for a phased approach to the introduction of individual recording as follows:• no animals to have to be individually

recorded on a movement document until 1 January 2011,

• no animals born before 31 december 2009 have to be individually recorded on a movement document until 31december 2011;

• no animals born before 31 december 2009 and moving to slaughter (directly or via a

market) have to be recorded on a movement document at all. Quite how this will be interpreted by the

devolved areas of the UK remains to be seen.i need to make it clear that i have never

believed that eid in sheep should be a national solution; rather that it is a management tool for both sheep and cattle for those who want to use it. Now it seems that we have to address the possibility of compulsory eid in all breeding sheep. The only other successful system i know about is in cattle in Victoria State, Australia, which took five years to implement.

We have to find ways to minimise cost and allow benefit to be found for those that want to use the technology. if a way can be found for hauliers, markets and abattoirs to install the equipment to read EID tags with financial support coming from the government (as has already been the case in a number of other countries) then maybe there is light at the end of the tunnel.

Richard Webber is managing director of Shearwell Data Ltd, which supplies visual and electronic ear tags, bolus, farm software and electronic identification systems throughout the UK and worldwide. For further information or advice on tagging, contact Shearwell on 01643 841611.

SCF and all the UK farmers’ organisations are continuing to oppose compulsory electronic identification. The Scottish Government has promised only to introduce a system that is practical and affordable. it remains to be seen whether such a system exists for crofters.

EID – the big debatedeVeLoPMeNT of the service under

the above title is taking place in tan-dem with the opening of the Scotland

Rural development Programme’s (SRdP) Ru-ral Priorities measures.

At present Crofting Community development Scheme (CCdS) staff are providing guidance to groups with project ideas on the initial requirements for Rural Priorities proposals.

All groups seeking assistance through the new programme need business reference numbers issued by the Rural Payments and Inspections Directorate local offices. For village hall and other facility-providing groups this is a new requirement but is a fairly straightforward process.Also new is the two-stage web-based application process. Basic help with navigating through the Statement of intent phase can be given but access to broadband linked computer equipment has to be provided by potential applicant groups.

This service is still very much under development, as is the SRdP, and therefore may not be able to resolve all queries instantly.

CCdS staff are also still involved in closing this scheme and with 100 or so groups trying to meet the foreshortened closing dates, they are mainly engaged on CCdS work at present. They will try to provide as much help as possible with limited resources but it is worth noting that there are other support organizations in the rural areas.

Local authorities and voluntary services are actively assisting groups with fund finding and may be of use in accessing Rural Priorities and other fund sources.

Arthur Macdonald CCDS Manager

Rural Direct


PReVioUSLY in The Crofter we have looked at how tourism on the croft can

give you a good income stream. We have something special to of-fer people on holiday through our culture, heritage, environment, wildlife and local knowledge, cou-pled with traditional hospitality.

But the costs of a new development can be a stumbling block. Banks may not want to lend because it is for a croft and you don’t own the land or perhaps rates of return may not be good enough to justify paying commercial interest rates. Therefore, as careful crofters, we look for grants.

if you are thinking about starting up a business and are trying to get an idea of costs then the SAC has a website with some good information on it. See www.sac.ac.uk/consultancy/farmdiversification for details. There are two sections of interest to us: tourist accommodation eg camping barns, B&B, self catering and leisure and recreation eg pony trekking, clay pigeon shooting and so on. The costs and returns it gives are very general and may not be up to date. Costs especially can be subject to great local variation (for example if you don’t have a water supply then the costs will change dramatically). But they can give you a start in your budgeting.

The main vehicle nowadays for support for these sorts of projects is the Scottish Rural development Programme (SRdP). details are on www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Rural/SRdP. At £1.6 billion over six years it certainly sounds impressive.

The programme is competitive and open to all groups in rural

areas in Scotland, not just to farmers and crofters. They have defined a set of regional priorities (different for each region) and applications are measured against these priorities.

You have to meet as many of these priorities as possible. There are a set of priorities under Diversification of Rural Enterprises, specifically priority 30 which concerns tourism. The priorities list for Highlands, outer Hebrides, Northern isles and Argyll all contain this measure but in slightly different forms. The Highland one is replicated below.

improvement in the value and duration of tourism visits in rural areas, including maximising opportunities for green tourism. in particular proposals that:• support existing local tourism

strategies • encourage retention of more

tourism spend within the local economy

• decrease seasonality and promote a better spread of visitor numbers throughout the year

• support tourism developments based on the special qualities of the area, eg wildlife, outdoor activities, arts, culture

• support tourism developments that minimise their negative environmental impacts and encourage visitor awareness of environmental issues including support to access the Green Tourism Business Scheme

• support tourism developments that involve, and provide facilities for, local communities.But you have a better chance of

getting through the beauty parade if you can play to as many of the priorities as possible – for example if you can also claim to support

Croft tourism – how do you get going?biodiversity, landscape, built and cultural heritage, public access, etc. So you need to be creative in wording your application.

The process is quite complicated and has attracted some criticism as it must be done on line.

First you need a good idea that you are really interested in following through. it is probably best then to discuss with your local SGRPID office. Then you need to prepare a Statement of intent which is designed to be fairly high level so that you don’t need to do a lot of work up front. After that you get an amber or red light to continue or not. For an amber light, you get assigned a case worker and can then start on the detailed work. There may be funding available to help you get through this stage. Finally you again submit on line and the regional committee decide how much to give you.

This is still a new process so we are not sure how it will work in practice eg we don’t know how the money will be

divided up between regions or how the regional committees will divide up their share of the cash between competing priorities. The old Agricultural Business development Scheme famously said they wouldn’t fund self-catering cottages since (they thought) the market was oversupplied. We don’t yet know how the various committees will react to their own or the government agenda. So let the SCF know if you think you have been overlooked.

Remember CCAGS as well – this is a non-competitive scheme so it could be better bet for things like access roads or other qualifying items. You could also try your local HIE office to see if they can come up with anything – refer to www.hie.co.uk.

Meanwhile, if you do have a tourist business, advertise it now on the SCF website – see www.crofting.org croft holidays for some examples. Contact Russell Smith (01863 766144) or HQ for details.

iF YoU haven’t visited the SCF website recently, you don’t know what you’re missing!Packed with new and

interesting features and photos, the Foundation’s website provides lots of information on our activities and keeps you up to date with press releases, consultations and much more.

The events page shows you what’s happening across the crofting areas, including the SCF’s Annual Gathering. The croft holidays feature offers you the opportunity to promote your tourism business to thousands of

SCF website not to be missedviewers.

Read about the latest SCF initiative, the Crofting Mark. This issue of The Crofter tells you more about this innovative new way to sell your croft produce, whatever it is, from lamb to jam to honey or knitwear.

Another new feature on the site is the discussion forum, which allows members the opportunity to debate issues of interest, ask for information and guidance and share opinions on crofting topics.

You can find contact details for SCF representatives – learn about new training events – you


can even renew your annual subscription.

The SCF website is your website – have a look at it today.

Exclusive member offer – advertise your tourism business on

the SCF website’s Croft Holidays page at very

reasonable rates. Go to

www.crofting.org or get more information

from HQ.

New Opportunity

On our new Croftmart adverts page on the website, you can have a classified ad on the internet at the same cost as in The Crofter. If you already advertise your business in The Crofter, you can have an ad on the internet for half price. Contact Calina on 01478 640 276.


Angus MacNeil MPConstituency Office

31 Bayhead Street

Stornoway

Isle of Lewis HS1 2DU

Tel no 70 2272

E-Mail [email protected]

Enquiries welcome – office open Monday-FridayAngus MacNeil MPConstituency office31 Bayhead Street

StornowayIsle of Lewis

HS1 2DUTel no 70 2272

E-Mail [email protected] welcome

Office open Monday-Friday

A NeW FUNdiNG structure has been unveiled for Scottish agriculture – Scottish Rural development Programme

(SRdP). As with every new scheme there is a fair bit of confusion and it is crucial that crofters are not unduly put off schemes before looking into them carefully.

A brief overview of subsidy/funding available

SFP (Single Farm Payment) – subsidy based on past livestock/cropping claims. To claim you need to have entitlements and submit an iACS form each year

Funding under the SRDP

• LFASS (Less Favoured Area Scheme) – This is a subsidy for active agriculture in areas deemed to be less favourable for agriculture. This can be claimed for on your iACS form.

• LMo (Land Management options) – New scheme which you apply for at the same time as your iACS form.

Option Stock exclusion Payment rateAway wintering of ewes and hoggs 22 weeks Approximately £16.80/headoff wintering of ewes and hoggs 22 weeks Approximately £7.20/head

Bracken control - £200/haStock Fencing £4m

Gate - £100/ gate

Option name Shut off dates Payment rate (£/Ha)

open grazed grassland for wildlife & Wet grassland for wildlife

6 weeks between 15th March and 1st June or Below 1 Livestock Unit per hectare for

whole period£111/ha

Wetland Flexible £90/ha

Species-rich grassland 15th May to 15th August £111/ha

Mown grassland for wildlife 1st April to 1st July £174/ha

Mown grassland for corncrakes option 1 15th May to 1st August £271/ha

Mown grassland for corncrakes option 2 15th May to 15th August £381/ha

Mown grassland for corncrakes option 3 15th May to 1st September £691/ha

Management of corncrake grazing1st March to 15th July

Stocking density to remain below 1.4LU/ha to 31st August

£313/ha

• LMC (Land Managers Contracts) – existing scheme which if you are already in, any commitments will run their five-year length.

• CCAGS (Crofters improvement grant) – Not that much has changed but prior approval must be sought.

• Rural Priorities – Competitive grants which cover many options such as environmental, forestry, diversification and marketing.Therefore if you are a traditional crofter who

claims Single Farm payment and LFASS there is nothing new for you to do.

CCAGS is still a very useful grant and one that many farmers are envious of. Under the new scheme crofters should remember they need to fill in a prior approval form. Also they should be aware that there are no longer standard costs. The payment is based on approved amounts, therefore for any expected overspend, contact your local department office immediately.

Risk-adverse crofters should ensure they

are maximising their LMC/LMo budget. This is calculated on the area of ground that you have and includes common grazing shares. 2008 was also the first time common grazing committees could apply. Clearly many grazings committees will have much larger budgets. This may be a low-risk free and simple way of increasing township funds if there are eligible options. Popular ones include moorland plans (£1/ha), summer cattle grazings (approx £30 a cow, please note you must have a fenced hill) and management of rush pasture.

Finally let’s look at the competitive online application process, the Rural Priorities. Please see common suitable options for crofters and grazing committees below.

Diversification

• Variable grants up to 50% in our area• Diversification outwith agriculture • Machinery/upgrade of building supported• Clear market research and business viability

required

The SRDP – a crofters guide

FoodThere are many options available for food

producers: marketing • consumer education• applying new technology and innovation. • The first step is to build an application that

meets the objectives for your region. The online process can appear daunting but

you can commission an agent on your behalf

if you do not have access to a computer. There are two steps in the process – the initial Statement of intent (Soi), followed by the full application if your Soi is acceptable.

Groups such as training groups can also apply for funding, once they are registered with the local SGRPID office. Crofters are well placed to create collaborative inter-linked projects.

in summary, crofters should ensure they are

making the most of grants solely for crofters ie CCAGS and ensure they are maximising LMo options. There are no guarantees when making a competitive application but crofters may miss out on attractive schemes if they do not examine the new possibilities open to them.Janette Sutherland, Agricultural [email protected] 01478 612993

ROB GIBSONMSPfor Highlands and Islands

Welcomes All Enquiries

WICK OFFICE

4 Grant Street,

Wick, KW1 5AY

Tel: 01955 605016

Fax: 01955 604963

Email: [email protected]


Dunlop Tractor SparesFERGI, 35/65, DEXTA, MAJOR

NEW AND USED PARTS, BADGES, ETC.OVER 1800 DIFFERENT PARTS

Send stamped addressed envelope,A4 size, for price list.

67 Crankill Road, Ballymena, N. Ireland BT43 5NNTel/Fax: 028 2565 2560 Mobile: 07710 994 190 or 07834 455083

website: www.dunloptractorspares.co.ukemail: [email protected]

dunlop tractors 88x40 28/5/07 11:39 Page 1

For Sale: PediGRee SHeTLANd CATTLe & HeBRideAN SHeeP, hand knit wool and tweed from Hebridean fleeces. Further details: www.farmofgarth.co.uk or ring Nickie on 01856711350 or 07880928885

For Sale or Hire: PediGRee ABeRdeeN ANGUS BULL. West coast/islands. (in Uist Health Scheme). Tel: 01871 890348

For Sale: PediGRee HiGHLANd HeiFeRS. Genuine hill cattle. Hi-Health status and organic. Black & Red. Contact: Aeneas MacKay, Ardalanish, isle of Mull. Tel: 01681 700674 or e-mail: [email protected].

For Sale: PediGRee BeeF SHoRTHoRN BULL (red/white) “xavier of Glenrinnes”; from show winning stock; poled; progeny can be seen; 4 yr old; easily handled; Hi-Health status. Contact: 01478 640276 (isle of Skye)

For Sale: VALASAY, iSLe oF LeWiS 22 ACRe oWNeR-oCCUPied WoRKiNG CRoFT; bright, spacious 3/4 bedroom house in good order; outbuildings, 3 polytunnels and outdoor cropping; grazing parks; well-established shelter belts; shares in common grazings; peat cutting rights. Currently horticulture (organic) and sheep enterprise, but many other possibilities. Stunning location. offers over £195,000. details www.kenmacdonaldproperties.co.uk or 01851 704040.

CROFt MARt

VeTAid is planning to hold first conference on the importance of small-scale farming in east Africa this November. The conference will focus on farming communities in Tanzania and the challenges

that they face. over 77% of Tanzania’s population are employed in farming and the

majority of this is small-scale production on family farms, not dissimilar to traditional crofting.

Through its work in east Africa, VeTAid has realised that challenges such as the cost of fertiliser, climate change and lack of government support are issues that affect farmers in both east Africa and in Scotland.

VeTAid believes that by sharing knowledge, farmers from different countries can help each other progress. For example, Scottish farmers are more advanced in terms of mechanisation and product marketing, while Tanzanian farmers produce bio-gas from manure, make some of their own worming drenches, and have a much smaller carbon footprint than their Scottish counterparts.

The conference, which will be held in inverness, is open to crofters, farmers and anyone else with an interest in farming in other parts of the world.

if you would like to register your interest or would like further details, please contact John Ferguson at VeTAid (details below). Additionally, John will be attending the Scottish Crofting Foundation annual gathering this october and he would be happy for anyone who is interested or who has questions to speak to him then.

VeTAid is a Scottish-based charity which works with some of east Africa’s poorest rural communities. Much of the work they do involves training farmers on improving livestock health. For more information please visit www.vetaid.org

e-mail: [email protected] 0131 445 6241 Write to:John Ferguson, VeTAid, Pentlands Science Park, Bush Loan, Penicuik. eH26 oLP.

VetAId – supporting herds and clans project


printed by strath print 01471 822555

printed by strath print 01471 822555We are dedicated professional printers for the north west.Phone or email us for a quote,

or to discuss your requirements.

You won’t be disappointed!

Broadford, Isle of Skye IV49 9APTel: 01471 822555 Fax: 01471 [email protected] www.strathprint.co.uk

It’s amazing what a little bit of can do...

Colour Brochures, Wedding & Business Stationery, Leaflets, B&B Cards, Lotto & Raffle Tickets, Posters, Invoice Books & much more...

colour

printed by strath print 01471 822555printed by strath print 01471 822555printed by strath print 01471 822555printed by strath print 01471 822555printed by strath print 01471 822555printed by strath print 01471 822555printed by strath print 01471 822555

Lewis Crofters Ltd

SHEEP FEED CATTLE FOODDRENCHES VACCINESFERTILISERS HARDWARESEEDS CLOTHINGFENCING TRACTOR PARTSFOOTWEAR CAR TRAILERS

Lewis Crofters LtdIsland Road, Stornoway, Isle of LewisTelephone 01851 702350 Fax: 01851 703077www.lewiscrofters.co.uk

Independent advice andconsultancy services

throughout theCrofting Counties

Balivanich 01870 602336Campbeltown 01586 552502Inverness 01463 233266Kirkwall 01856 872698Lerwick 01595 693520Oban 01631 563093Portree 01478 612993Stornoway 01851 703103Thurso 01847 892719

sac 88x85 2/8/07 12:09 Page 1

Macleod & MacCallum Solicitors and Estate Agents

28 Queensgate Inverness IV1 1YN

Supporting Crofting

Communities throughout the Highlands and

Islands 01463 239393

www.macandmac.co.uk

WHEN RESPONDING

TO AN ADVERT,

please say you saw it in The Crofter

Crofter advertising: Calina Macdonald

01478 640 276


rooted in our community


CoMMUNiTieS are getting more support to develop woodland crofts with the

announcement of a new project officer to drive forward the initiative.

Sandra Holmes has been appointed as the new woodland crofts projects officer with a role of kick-starting the initiative to get woodland crofts up and running.

The initiative is being funded jointly by Forestry Commission Scotland and Highlands and islands enterprise.

Woodland crofts have the potential to support and sustain rural livelihoods, with community groups owning and managing woodland for economic, social and environmental gain.

Announcing the new appointment, environment Minister Michael Russell said:

“Crofting is part and parcel of Scotland’s cultural heritage and we are committed to sustaining and safeguarding this way of life.

“Woodland crofts will provide a range of opportunities for rural business and the promotion of a sustainable lifestyle. it is important that we make it attractive for people to stay or move to remoter rural areas and the development of woodland crofts is another important step to making this happen.

“Sandra’s apointment will act as a catalyst to give communities advice and support to purchase land and develop it into a successful woodland croft.”

Below Sandra answers some common questions.

What are woodland crofts?

They are new crofts that are created within a woodland setting. They could range from being mainly woodland to mainly agricultural with a woodland element and will be occupied under crofting tenure in the same

way as existing crofts. Tenants of new crofts created within the crofting counties will be able to access crofting-specific support schemes (eg CCAGS, Croft House Grant Scheme).

Will woodland be cleared to provide agricultural land?

Whilst is might be necessary to create a clearing for building development, it will be expected that the trees on the croft will continue to be managed as a woodland.

The woodland could be used to support new business or to provide a wood fuel source for the crofter.

Why create woodland crofts?

The concept first originated as a means to deliver increased public benefit from woodland owned by Forestry Commission Scotland. Woodland crofts would provide an opportunity to retain or increase population in remote rural areas and encourage the development of small rural businesses.

Why not just sell off woodland plots?

Crofting tenure involves a

regulatory system designed to encourage sustainable land use with the tenant residing on or close to the croft. This provides a degree of control over the land and will help deliver wider public benefits that would not be achieved by selling plots in a free market.

Who will create woodland crofts?

They can be created by any owner of land within the crofting counties and other designated crofting areas. it is anticipated that most woodland crofts will be created by community landowners who have acquired national forest

land using the woodland croft provisions of the National Forest Land Scheme (http://www.forestry.gov.uk/forestry/infd-66re5j).

What about the crofter’s right to buy?

The Crofting Reform Act 2007 allows new crofts to be created with or without the right to buy and/or the right to assign. if landowners wish to safeguard public benefit it is likely that they will create crofts without a right to buy.

Boost for woodland croftsWill the crofter be able to build a house on the croft?

it is possible to create crofts with or without a right to buy a house site. if the right to buy a site is not allowed a house could be built on the croft as a croft improvement. However, it is likely that the crofter would be unable to secure a mortgage in such circumstances. Another option could be for the landowner to sell a private site to the crofter. As this land would not be under crofting tenure the crofter would not be eligible to apply for Croft House Grant Scheme assistance, but other non-crofting housing assistance, such as Rural Home ownership Grants, might be available instead.

Are woodland crofts a solution to rural housing shortages?

Whilst a woodland croft could provide a housing opportunity, the focus is on crofting and sustainable land use. Woodland crofts could make a small contribution towards housing need but should not be viewed as a rural housing solution.

Who will pay the cost of equipping the croft?

Under crofting tenure it is usual for the tenant to undertake improvements and to equip the croft. it may be possible for the tenant to access grant assistance towards some of these costs.

Further information:

Sandra HolmesWoodland Crofts Project OfficerCommunity Land UnitAuchtertyreKyle iV40 8eGTel: 01520 722988

www.forestry.gov.uk/forestry/infd-6mfe5l (woodland crofts)

CAP Healthcheck offers n e w o p p o r t u n i t i e sTHe PoSSiBiLiTY of

creating Single Farm Payment entitlements for

new entrants and using national envelope provisions more flexibly are among the topics for discussion in the consultation paper on the CAP Healthcheck published by the Scottish Government recently.

Among many questions on the detail of CAP implementation, the abolition of set-aside and the gradual removal of milk quotas are also a number of bigger issues which could impact on

crofting. The paper seeks reaction to moves suggested in europe to move away to some extent from the purely historic basis of payment – something that the SCF strongly advocated during the earlier discussions on CAP reform. it also seeks views on proposed increases in compulsory (ie eU-wide) modulation, which europe is keen to see go hand in hand with a corresponding reduction in voluntary (ie member state level) modulation.

The barriers encountered by young entrants, who have to buy

SFP entitlement or do without, are recognised in this paper – as also they are in the Shucksmith report – and the consultation seeks views on using a national reserve to provide entitlements to new entrants.

The paper also asks for opinions on the suggested idea of a minimum payment level or minimum hectarage size, below which payments would not be made. This is set at €250 per annum or land area of less than 1 Ha. This would affect several hundred businesses, many of

which may be crofts. in addition the paper asks

for views on the longer-term perspective for the CAP. So, all in all, some pretty important issues and some major questions. A more detailed briefing paper will follow. The consultation can be viewed online at www.scotland.gov.uk or available in hard copy from SGRPID offices.

Please feed in your views to our draft response and our input to the stakeholder group overseeing this discussion.

Highlanders at dunbeath amongst birch, hazel and willow


THiS YeAR’S Royal Highland Show was the setting for the official launch of the

Highlands and islands Crofter and Small Landholder Training Programme hosted by Lantra (Sector Skills Council for Land-based industries).

A windy but sunny and dry day saw the arrival of Mike Russell MSP (Minister for the environment) to a packed Lantra stand of Lantra, SCF and agencies people. He was met by Lantra officials and our own chief executive Patrick Krause.

The focus for this event was on the Crofters Competency Framework, a document identifying and recognising the particular skills necessary for crofters of today and tomorrow. This lack of occupational standards for crofters and small landholders has brought about the creation of a training panel, first mooted by the SCF. The panel is made up of representatives from Crofters Commission, Forestry Commission for Scotland, Highlands and islands enterprise,

Crofters’ training programme receives ministerial praise

Scottish Agricultural College, Scottish Crofting Foundation (secretariat) and Scottish Natural Heritage.

Gordon McGlone oBe (chairman of Lantra) made the general point about the crisis of skills shortages now facing the agricultural industry and Lantra’s strategy for overcoming this problem. Patrick followed along this theme by explaining the whys and wherefores of our training programme; a training programme specifically designed with crofters and small landholders in mind.

Mike Russell said how pleased he was to launch this initiative and what an excellent example of a strong and successful partnership the organisations represented on the training panel had made. He went on to say, “For the first time ever, the unique skills of crofters are being formally recognised. Previously, lack of formal standards was creating barriers to new entrants wishing to enter into crofting. Similarly, the skills development of existing crofters was hampered by lack of appropriate training courses. The fact that the on-line version of the framework has proved popular demonstrates the important role that modern technologies have to play in developing and preserving traditional skills, skills that have been in Scotland for over hundreds if not thousands of years.”

WiNTeR! … What a thought. But this really is the most opportune time

to be thinking about the upcoming season for the crofting induction courses and in particular to take on suitable people to organise them near where they live.

These 10 week evening courses traditionally take place during the winter months – usually January through to March. For the course organiser this means a lead-in time of say six weeks and a wind-down time after the course has finished of say four weeks. Over the last ten years we have found this to be a realistic time scale for completion of this work.

Course organisers, more formally known as local course directors, need not be crofters or know about crofting, though it would be helpful. This is not voluntary work. This is a part-time job that would suit anyone with reasonable organisational and administrative skills. The person

A w e e p a r t - t i m e j o b f o r t h e w i n t e r m o n t h s ?

concerned would be under a short term contract with SCF and expected to work from home, have a computer and reasonable iT skills. A casual user car allowance is also included.

SCF’s aim is to run up to ten courses in the Highlands and islands each year. The working time is flexible, just a few hours a week and takes place over a period of some 16 to 20 weeks. The local course director is not expected to teach but simply to co-ordinate and facilitate the two hourly sessions over the ten weeks of the course.

if you think this job might interest you, or you know of someone who might be suitable to do this work, then please get in touch with John Bannister – SCF’s training manager – on 01599 522250 or Calina Macdonald – SCF’s training co-ordintor on 01478 640276 for an informal chat, or email [email protected] for further details.

ANGUS M GRAHAM, the former area secretary of the Lewis and Harris Area

of the Scottish Crofters Union, has died on Lewis aged 60 after a terminal illness.

Angus, a former vice convener of the Western isles Council, was one of the big men, “na daoine mòr”, who were involved in the early days of Scottish Crofters Union, forerunner to the Scottish Crofting Foundation, in the mid-80s.

As area secretary he ran the NFU insurance franchise in Stornoway and established it as one of the best-performing NFU branches in the country. its success was based almost entirely on the trust Angus earned from the crofting community over many years as a politician and campaigner for the crofters’ cause.

Born in Govan and brought up in the Back district of Lewis from a young age, Angus had enough jobs to fill several lifetimes but it was as a politician he excelled. He became a councillor on Comhairle nan eilean in 1983 where his radical politics and fearless style had an immediate impact. He took few political prisoners but he was also a man of immense charm and at any gathering he was a source of great yarns.

Always vocal, he was also a great strategist and a practical politician. He was instrumental in setting up the crofting and fishing consultative committees that gave these groups a voice in council affairs. Using his influence he ensured Brevig pier was built in Back and he spearheaded the

Angus Graham – fighter for the crofters’ cause

effort to find a rescue package to retain Stornoway abattoir when it was threatened with closure.

When that succeeded he made sure the next logical steps, setting up Heather isles Meats and then the Lewis and Harris auction mart facilities, were in place.

He fought cases on behalf of individual crofters and pushed (what then seemed like) radical land reform and community ownership agendas within the Western isles Council. He served on the northern area board of Scottish Natural Heritage and while he valued the natural environment he cared more for the livelihood of people in it. As such he backed the Lingerbay quarry in Harris, the Lewis windfarm project and efforts to bring industrial work to the Arnish fabrication yard.

By the time the ill-construed Crofting Bill and the subsequent Shucksmith Report came about he had to devote his considerable energy to battles of his own and he regretting not being able to be at the forefront of the fight to defend crofting.

iain Maciver, past president of the SCU and factor of the community-owned Stornoway Trust paid tribute to “a visionary” who was that rare thing – a politician who actually delivered on what he talked about. “Angus had big ideas for crofting but sometimes petty rules and little people got in his way,” said Mr Maciver. “He did a lot of good for crofting and he often caused a lot of laughter. Personally, i will miss him, i think we all will.”

Torcuil Crichton

Tirlanna, Sula Sgeir

dear Sirs

May i prevail upon your good nature to assist me in an endeavour to protect the wider crofting community from a newly emerged danger which has recently manifested itself at Tirlanna and could without further warning occur elsewhere.

Whilst the dangers associated with the misuse of quad bikes have been well documented by the Health and Safety executive these warnings too frequently go unheeded by each of the generations, not least those now in the insurance class elderly (over 45) who would be safer returning to the horses of their childhood.

However, a further hazard awaits those such as my man, dances with Coos, whose metal steed has just stoved in a few of his ribs by landing on top of him after it lost its footing on the moor.

The recovery process has been hindered considerably and excruciatingly painfully by the Auld Fool having obtained a copy of Aimsir eachainn’s “A View from North Lochs”. All nursing staff, professional and amateur, should be made fully aware of the adverse impact that this book can have on crofters whose ability to laugh has been impaired to the very least extent. Paracetamol or ibuprofen are no protection from Hector Macdonald, so you have been warned.

Yours faithfully

Kitty Laura Stalk (Mrs)


Call us on 0141 225 3233 or contactyour local NFU Mutual agentfor face to face advice on protection for you and your familyNFU Mutual Financial Consultants advise on NFU Mutual products and services and in special circumstances those of other providers

It’s an NFU Mutual understanding

NFU Mutual is The National Farmers Union Mutual Insurance Society Limited (No 111982). Registered in England. Registered Office: Tiddington Road, Stratford upon Avon, Warwickshire CV37 7BJ. Authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority. A member of the Association of British Insurers. For security and training purposes, telephone calls may be recorded and monitored.

INSURANCE PENSIONS INVESTMENTS

The last thing your children needwhen you’re gone

is your bills

The Crofter - Protection#1FEA25 28/3/06 2:09 pm Page 1


Contacting the Scottish Crofting FoundationSCF HEADQUARTERS: Lochalsh Business Park, Auchtertyre, Kyle IV40 8EG t: 01599 566365 • f: 01599 566375 • e: [email protected] • www.crofting.org

Chief Executive: Patrick Krause • Land Use Programme Manager: Becky Shaw • Land Use Projects Manager: Donald Murdie • Training Manager: John BannisterOffice Manager: Carol Anne Stewart • Membership Administrator: Marion MacLeod • Accounts: Mabel Macaulay

• Crofter Editor: Fiona Mandeville – [email protected] • Crofter advertising: Calina MacDonald 01478 640 276Publication of The Crofter is supported by ‘Awards for All’

Crofting – delivering the goodsSCF Annual Gathering 2008, Isle of Barra, 6th, 7th, 8th October

eVeRY YeAR we say “This is a very significant time for crofting” but this year it is probably more true than ever

before. CAP reforms have meant that support for

food production and land management is changing, with the emphasis on delivery of public goods. However, there is increasing concern about food security and there is consequently a movement towards increasing home-grown food production. There is also increased consumer demand for more traceable, eco-friendly food. Both are opportunities for crofters to increase their contribution to the food supply.

Crofting has been under the scrutiny of the Committee of inquiry on Crofting (CoioC) for the past year and the final report highlights crofting’s contribution to sustainable Scottish rural development.

This year’s SCF annual gathering is based

on the theme of what crofting delivers. We are taking two significant aspects: croft produce and the crofting reform proposals related to the CoioC recommendations.

Croft producer of the year

Who is the croft food producer most deserving of this award and cash prize?

Send your nominations to [email protected] by the end of August.

The croft produce theme will be supported by speakers who are specialists in related areas such as the promotion of good food (ethical, eco-friendly etc), direct marketing, marketing a niche product and using the environment as a selling point. The Scottish Crofting Produce Mark will be launched by the Minister for Crofting, Michael Russell MSP.

The crofting reform part of the programme is looking at what reforms are needed in crofting and the related legislation to enable crofting to deliver public goods and to find markets for their produce.

Professor Mark Shucksmith, chair of the CoioC, will be available to talk about the conclusions the Committee of inquiry on Crofting came to and the Minister for Crofting, Michael Russell MSP will outline what the Scottish Government intend to take forward. He will be available for questions following his address. We also will have Scottish Government officials involved in crofting legislation who will take part in a workshop to discuss the proposed reforms.

The programme also includes the second in the series of the Angus MacRae Memorial Debate and there will be field visits to local enterprises.

The whole event will be covered as it happens on a live web blog.

RSABI can help more people in the crofting countiesJohn Macfarlane, welfare manager at RSABI, outlines their ongoing help for those in need

THe NAMe RSABi has recently been brought to the attention of crofters and livestock farmers when a leaflet

about our FMd emergency Fund went out to nearly 12,000 addresses, many of them in the Highlands and islands. RSABi (Royal Scottish Agricultural Benevolent institution) is pleased to have been able to provide grants to assist several crofters who responded to the mailing and who are struggling to keep themselves going until lambs can be sold over the coming months. Here’s hoping for a good trade!

RSABi has also been able to help retired crofters, farmers, farm workers, shepherds and gamekeepers with grants from our Fuel Poverty Fund over the last 12 months to help pay for ever-increasing heating costs. Regional advertising for that – funded by the grant received from The Scottish Power energy People Trust – successfully brought our name to the attention of many people who didn’t know that we are here to help. The fund is now fully spent – but we do hope to repeat

its success this coming winter. Watch this space, as they say.

RSABi’s core means of helping people in need, however, is by way of regular annual grants of up to £675. We currently help over 440 people throughout Scotland in this way. These are folk who have retired or can no longer work due to ill health or disability and are on very low fixed incomes. When RSABI takes them on as annual beneficiaries, we commit ourselves to continuing help for as long as they are in need. This is often for periods in excess of 20 years, which is why RSABI needs to maintain significant financial reserves to fund our commitment.

in RSABi’s forward plan, our trustees want to see the number of our annual beneficiaries grow over the coming years. They also want to see the charity reach areas where we are currently less well represented. This includes a large proportion of the crofting counties – particularly inverness-shire and Argyll.

The promotion of RSABi’s FMd and fuel poverty funds has resulted in bringing people to us whose circumstances enable us to help

on a long-term basis. it has also demonstrated that there must be a lot more people in the Highlands and islands who would qualify for financial help from RSABI, but don’t know we’re here.

over the last six years i have had the privilege of visiting people in the Highland region whom we help. i have seen the difference that a little extra money can make to people struggling to cope with rising food and fuel costs. i have felt gratitude and appreciation from those people for having an organisation that cares about them and provides advice and support on many issues.

You too can help RSABi do the job that it was established to do 1897 by remembering who we are and bringing the charity to the attention of anyone who you think may fit our criteria for regular help: at least 10 years working in a land-based occupation (or a dependant of someone who has) and now retired or no longer able work with a low income and little savings.

With your help, RSABi can help those in need!

SCF had stands at all the major shows this summer. The photo shows the Rotal Highland Show at Ingliston. We were also at the Black

Isle Show, the Orkney Show, the Portree Show and the Granton Show.

Printed by Strath Print Ltd, Broadford, Isle of Skye email info@strathprint .co.uk Tel : 01471 822555

Documents

THE CROFTER - Scottish Crofting Federation · THE CROFTER, AUGUST 2008 3 Committee of Inquiry on Crofting final report Averting future food crises Three-year crofting land use programme