UKH

If the mega-rich American developers 'Discovery Land Company' get their way, public access to an area amounting to 8000 acres around Kenmore, Taymouth Castle and Glen Lyon will be lost. It will be a private resort, likely to exclude the local population and the public.

The company is run by a group of American billionaires who specialise in 'gated worlds' for the super rich. They have already been granted consent for over 200 luxury homes and are now seeking further consents, which will damage the local community and wildlife.

Please sign the petition:https:

https://www.change.org/p/protect-loch-tay?cs_tk=Ai9-nvBvqretAmda3mQAAXicyyv...

Selling the family silver.

Thanks for posting this. It's extremely disquieting. 
 

sounds like the project described in https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jul/16/its-all-for-the-rich-anger-...

I was up there at the weekend - it really is an awful eyesore (in my opinion anyway).  However, could someone explain how we stand to lose access to any land, the development won’t alter our rights (or indeed responsibilities) of access.  

It's worth having a read of this:

https://www.johnmuirtrust.org/whats-new/news/1519-trust-expresses-taymouth-...

Thanks, I read that and to be honest it’s not really clear that there are specific access issues other than the approach the investing company has taken elsewhere (in countries without our access rights) and their marketing material.  But can see why JMT are sensibly looking to keep an eye on how this develops.

I should add, I’m certainly very opposed to these types of developments/land usage! 

Christ, this rather dystopian development sounds like somthing from a J G Ballard novell, haggis nights perhaps?

While large parts of the real world burn, a wealthy elite seek to isolate themselves in another 'world' off-limits to anyone without the necessary funds to participate. This is not some exclusive, private Caribbean island. Unacceptable. I've signed.

Many thanks all.

If the full development is allowed to go ahead there will be no going back and would set a precedent for similar future developments, potentially impacting public rights of access in Scotland.

To J72: Loopholes in legislation can (and most likely will) be exploited to restrict public access. For instance, there's a shooting estate I know of that has barred access to a track along an entire Glen, merely by calling itself a 'garden'. It's almost impossible to bypass it, as deer fencing effectively fortresses off the surrounding hills. 

Given that the wealthy love their blood sports, the hills around Glen Lyon are likely to be further overgrazed by deer and/or managed for grouse shooting, with the very real prospect of raptor persecution to keep it that way. American billionaires don't want to go home disappointed. This would be wholly incompatible in helping to mitigate climate change and to increase biodiversity. Native tree cover and understorey would not stand any chance at all of establishing itself.

The disregard given to planning laws and our own ways of doing things is apparent given that tracks have already been installed without planning permission.

It is well worth considering the difference between what's meant to happen and what actually happens. The prior owners of Ledgowan estate being one example, (huge track laid all the way up the hill to the immediate north of Achnasheen, through a SSSI, wildlife crime and serious intimidation of local residents) and Trump's golf course in Aberdeenshire being another. It is horribly surprising what a combination of extreme wealth and indifference to anyone else can achieve. 

What is also coming, if not already started, is a second Clearance where every business that might employ someone local, be it forestry, farming, hospitality or the petrol station, gets bought and closed until the only option is to move away or work for the billionaires, and they didn't get rich by being fair let alone generous.

It's things like this that make me admire the Welsh and the Corsicans.

For instance, there's a shooting estate I know of that has barred access to a track along an entire Glen, merely by calling itself a 'garden'. It's almost impossible to bypass it, as deer fencing effectively fortresses off the surrounding hills. 

Which estate/glen is this out of interest? What has the local access officer said about it and has the case been raised with any one of Scotways, Ramblers Scotland or Mountaineering Scotland? This and other "loopholes" have been tested in the courts and landowners don't usually get away with unreasonable behavior of the sort you describe when it is challenged.

Somebody told me the other day when discussing the Kenmore thing that something like this seems to be happening on Jura with an individual or syndicate systematically buying up land and properties whenever they come on the market.

On the face of it, Jura would seem to be an ideal location for this type of underhand operation - small population and most of the land area occupied by large deer estates. Once they've acquired most of it, the rest of what remains becomes unviable unless oriented towards the service of the new 'lairds'. You would find it much harder/impossible on more populated and diverse islands like  Islay or Arran.

Before my husband got his current job, there was one advertised on Jura on the estate you are talking about which sounded like it would suit him well. 

He had a phone interview which went well, but they commented that accomodation was an issue on the island but the job came with shared accomodation in the estate. We thought that might be a bit inconvenient, but probably manageable if the job was right. So we were going to head over for a visit to see the place and for him to have a formal interview. 

Not long before we had planned to go, the guy who was doing the recruiting said that his superiors wouldn't permit anyone to live in the estate who didn't work there, so we couldn't go as a couple. 

Afterwards, chatting to someone else, it sounds like a horrible place to work and we probably dodged a bullet!

I f**king hate the rich.

That's all.

Not all of them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yvon_Chouinard

I'm not sure it would be wise just now to publicly name the Estate, partly because I regularly stay in the area. Better to raise the issue through the relevant channels, as you have mentioned - thanks for the pointers. I've already made Ramblers Scotland aware of this issue about 2 years ago, but have not heard back.

I used to walk the Glen to gain access to the quiet hills south of Loch Tay. There's now a notice erected at the entrance saying "Gardens. Private Drive. No Access" plus an intercom system at the gate with a curt voice on the other end (when access to the Glen is politely queried): "What part of 'Private Drive' do you not understand?". I have not walked the Glen since.

To my mind that qualifies as unreasonable, given that this is the only way up or down the Glen and given the hard-won public access rights generally in Scotland. It is also unreasonable to suggest that the track encroaches on a private garden. It doesn't. Unless of course the landowners have since gone out of their way to plant up the margins of the track, thereby loopholing their way into stopping all public access.

This is EXACTLY what these entitled, wealthy @rseholes want. They seem to think that their wealth trumps the common rights of the 'great unwashed'. When I was younger, this would be like a red rag to me and I would barge past, fully prepared to argue my case with whoever. Nowadays, sadly, like yourself, I'd be intimidated and turn away. This is why opposing things like the Kenmore development are so important.

Exactly, it puts a significant dampener on the day's enjoyment if I know there's some seething gammonista with a blood pressure problem and a firearm licence, resenting the very air I breathe.

I think I've worked out which glen you are referring to... If I'm right it's in Stirlingshire and their "Access and Sustainable Travel Officer" would be the person to contact, but the post may be either vacant or only recently filled.

It looks like the track up the glen branches off the new drive (built across fields!) over 130m from the "big house" - if this went to court I can't imagine this would be considered as "garden"*, and hence excluded from access, by the Sheriff.

If the owner doesn't want the "great unwashed" coming even as close as 130m to their house, I'm sure the Access Officer would allow a compromise whereby the landowner constructed a path round the top of the fields crossed by the new drive - I'm sure s/he could afford it!

* A "garden" per se is not automatically excluded, rather sufficient space around houses to give residents reasonable privacy and lack of disturbance can be excluded.

I think Madonna tried this and lost a court case. From what you say, the landowners are wrong and it should be challenged.

If you would like to PM me a location, my wife can check in Scotways internal records for historical rights of way etc, and flag it with them as an access issue. If there is a historical RoW (and there are a lot of them about) I would expect scotways would take this up…

Local authorities have access forums which meet to discuss problems. The minutes should be available and are for the other half of Perthshire on the Perth And Kinross site. Unfortunately cannot find anything on Stirling Council's site.   The Access and Sustainable Travel Officer appears to be a vacancy.  

A look at aerials suggests that this is a really bad case of "house blocking", up there with that sawmill in Ardnamurchan and a pig to get around.  The gate is a long way from the house.  It is a shame that there is nothing baggable up there, if there were this would be a big story.

What happens if you descend the glen not knowing that getting out is an issue. 

Yep. Hence why Scotways are a useful alternative route. They take this stuff seriously.

I think this is the place - only ever visited the upper glen.  Nicely set in the gap in the floorboards between the National Park and Perth And Kinross with no bagging interest.  Perfect for a p-taker. Needs dealing with.   Even so, very surprised its been going on for so long.  

https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/5152193

Maybe we should organize a few walks which finish there? I guess you would climb the fence? Make it obvious though that you looked for a suitable gate or stile! Could even knock on their door and ask where the access point is to get to the road. Shall I bring my dogs?? 😜

I'll come too, seems to be a lot of this going on lately.

Last year I walked along the beach at Bay Macneil in Ardnamurchan and arrived at the southern end only to be halted by the caravan site fence and gate referenced here https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/2588638  Being reasonably agile I just shinned over and walked on. I wasn't challenged (there wasn't anyone about). Was I within my rights to be there? I'd just walked down the shore from the north and exited onto the road.

I checked out the planning application for the new drive (there are apparently two sets of electric gates!) - there was no condition attached requiring access to the hill track to be maintained. A failure by Stirling Council IMO.

I fear that that would have been an assumption due to the Law.  Stirling Council  (I have form with them elsewhere) have also failed with their web site. Any attempt to find a place with the access forum minutes, where to report a problem etc, seems to come up with nothing better than the odd 404.   I wonder given that it is a detached bit of their patch, surrounded by the Lomond and Trossachs NP and Perth And Kinross, if they are aware of the place.

Yup id also be up for a wee walk round there too 😁

Hi Jonny, thank you for that offer! 

I've PM'd the location to you.

Unfortunately the glen is not in Moir. However, three Grahams can be reasonably accessed from it. I'm up for a wee wander in the area! 😁

Can I ask what Moir is? 

"Scottish Hill Tracks". DG Moir. Historical record, most being rights of way. Modern SOAC legislation trumps it of course, but might've been useful if it had been listed in the past. 

I'm heading to Skye in Spetember and I think I'll take a detour for a stroll up Glenbeich. Looks like the gates can be walked around but I'd happily climb them (carefully) if also fenced. Really annoys me when people obstruct access and my experience growing up in Ayrshire is that physical obstruction usually wins as councils just aren't bothered/ resourced to deal with it.

https://scotways.com/ken/private-signs-private-road-public-roads-whats-the-...

Have fun! You should write up a nice route description so others can enjoy it too. Get some nice "insta" photos, get it popular with the touristy crowd! 😜

Kenmore: on Radio Scotland this morning -

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001psxq

49 mins.

(Message to Fru-T Bunn :  We are qualified to object because it is our access laws and traditions that are under threat.)

Thanks for posting that link.

Agree with your last comment!

I have an update on that. I've emailed the National Park Access Officer, Ramblers Scotland and the new Access Officer at Stirling Council (She's been in post since last Wednesday - very pleasant and helpful). All three agree that access to the Glen should not be in doubt, as long as privacy etc are respected.

The NPA say: "This sign is not compliant with the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 and we are of the clear view that access rights apply up [the Glen], as long as people keep away from the curtilage of the [Estate] House and any other properties"

Ramblers Scotland: "It seems that the owners have got confused about what a private road means in relation to public access. They are certainly able to restrict access for motorised vehicles on a private road, but not to walkers, cyclists, horseriders, etc, unless there is some other exclusion which applies on the road – and I can’t really see what that would be" 

Stirling Council: "I can echo the NPA’s Access Officer in saying that you are legally entitled to take responsible access as outlined in the Outdoor Access Code as long as you ensure you are respecting people's privacy and peace of mind (section 3.13) and avoiding gardens and what is deemed as curtilage of houses, gardens and outbuildings"

I know where I'll be going next month...

Thanks for your efforts - trouble is, these people have their own ideas about curtilage, and often believe they are entitled to more than the rest of us - see Yester Estate in East Lothian.

What does 'curtilage' mean? It sounds like one of those mediaeval-type words that the entitled classes (or their lawyers) might use to entangle ordinary people.

It’s the legal term used to describe land adjacent to a building - it’s different to garden in that it might not be a garden at all - I don’t really understand the legal principles as to how it’s defined though! 

The Scottish Outdoor Access Code doesn't quite define curtilage, but describes it thus:

'Access rights do not extend to the curtilage of any other building. Generally, such land will normally be closely connected, physically and in terms of purpose, to the building and forming one enclosure with it. It will usually be possible to judge what is the curtilage of a building by the presence of some physical feature such as a wall, fence, an area of hardstanding or some other physical boundary. Where there is no physical feature, you will need to make a judgement about what land is used together with a building. When exercising access rights close to such buildings, use your common sense and remember to respect the privacy and peace of mind of those working there.'

Thanks. It's as I suspected - plenty of scope for the 'taking of piss' by the property owners

Agree it's a flabby ill-defined word to use in a legal context. Those who uphold open access might interpret it very differently to those who own land.

The sign at the Glen entrance refers to it as "Glen [...} Gardens. Private Drive. No Access". The word "Gardens" suggest that walking further would violate a curtilage enclosing it, creating a public access barrier to the miles of hill and glen beyond it. 

If I remember correctly from years ago, the track passed a few metres away upslope from the house's garden to the west. What worries me is that the curtilage may have been purposely extended, engulfing the track itself on either side. 

I don't know how that would stand legally if that's the case. Maybe a blatant move by the Danish landowner to subvert Scottish access law?

Excellent news that you have had positive feedback from the Access Officer etc.

I would day there is no "maybe" about it - it is almost certainly a blatant and very deliberate attempt to subvert access! Legally* I suggest you will be absolutely fine - the landowner and his/her local staff probably know that they are in the wrong and would lose badly in any court case, so instead are trying to intimidate with their signs & gates.

As I previously mentioned, it's all about houses having sufficient space around them to give residents reasonable privacy and lack of disturbance - this is what any Sheriff would look at if the case went to court, not simply where the landowner had erected a fence or a gate, or indeed where the garden actually (let alone notionally) was.

* I am no laywer, but have read a few judgements from the Sheriff Courts on similar situations.

P.S. I signed the petition "Protect Loch Tay" a while back. Given the failure of Stirling Council to run the application for the gates at "Glen..." past their Access Officer and to make continued access for walkers, cyclists, horseriders a condition of granting permission, it is important that any planning applications from DLC at Kenmore are properly scrutinised in that regard.

Thanks, I agree with all of that.

FatBumbly2's Radio Scotland clip was interesting, which gave the impression that most of Kenmore's residents are in favour of the proposed development. They are probably "a bit wowed and starstruck" as one person put it, at the prospect of a gang of billionaires taking an interest in their area without necessarily thinking about the long term consequences of it.

Whether from America or Denmark, wealthy landowners should, in no uncertain terms, be made to be respectful of the laws in Scotland that all the rest of us have to abide by.

I learned a new word a couple years ago. "Curtilage."

Myself, a friend, and my OH had climbed a couple obscure, boggy corbetts at the end of Glen Lyon. Our descent roughly followed the WalkHighlands route. We wended our way through peat hags until we got to a Land Rover track, which passed within a couple hundred meters of some buildings but did not, in any way, go through their backyards. All descents that weren't the 4x4 track went through dense, vertical plantation forestry, so there weren't any other realistic options from that point. We could see a large, posh estate house, but it was over a k away from our track.

Thnking nothing of it -- usual Highland terrain, really -- we made our way down to the public singletrack road in Glen Lyon. At which point a Range Rover approached us, and we stepped out of its way. The vehicle stopped, and the female driver said, in an accent straight out of 'The Crown,' "Where did you come from?"

"Oh, just the wee mountains up there. A couple corbetts," we said breezily. You think that people are just being friendly and making chat, because that's what most people do.

"You have just walked through my curtilage, and I would appreciate it if you did not do that again," she said.

"Uhhh, right," we said.

Then she drove off. I had to Google the word 'curtilage.' We were too baffled to engage in a debate about the meaning of SOAC, and the mountains we did were boggy lumps which aren't on my top ten list of hills to repeat anyway.

I have related this anecdote on WalkHighlands, whose bloody route description for those hills puts you onto that track. Paul Webster replied that the estate in question is a known problem child re: access, and conversations with the Perth and Kinross access officers remain ongoing.

No doubt accompanied by the imperious, steady gaze of the entitled wealthy. Back in my stroppy, younger days I'd have demanded to know where THEY had come from. Now that I'm old I just smile, say 'thanks' and carry on knowing that the law is actually on my side. I think the last access barney I had was about 10 years ago with a gamekeeper on Bowland who tried (not that successfully) to argue that the land we were on was a nature reserve (think typical grouse moor). I had the large scale map that showed we were all legally standing on CRoW access land. After he realised he was talking to someone who actually understood the access laws he was OK and even recommended the best way off the moor back to our car. I've had a very similar 'debate' with a farmer on a quadbike in a more remoter part of the eastern Lakes. In that case I genuinely think he'd never heard of the access laws and probably hardly ever encountered walkers.

Was this the notorious Chesthill Estate, or another one?

It illustrates well how silly and inaccurate the word 'curtilage' is especially when my own (and probably most people's) extends to a few metres away from the house, and hers, supposedly kilometres. I'm guessing there wasn't even a physical boundary like a wall or fence to back up her claim?

It sounds like another shooting Estate getting bolshie about public access. This creeping gentrification of Glen Lyon along much of its length will end up closing it off piece by piece, unless Perth and Kinross get their act together to uphold SOAC and its foundations in law.

The lame reasons for barring access seem to be an object lesson in barrel-scraping excuses. Chesthill cites 'disturbances to wildlife' being their excuse, even though it is clearly a shooting estate with deer numbers being kept artificially high for that purpose. Land that is managed for deer (or grouse for that matter) is very poor indeed in wildlife diversity. Indigenous trees and the wildlife they would otherwise support, stand no chance at all in establishing.

shame that accent misused the term "curtilage".  It is sensibly used of a property, not of a person.  She possibly liked the sound of it more, particularly when hearing her own voice, than the effort of learning to use words properly.