Introduction
There has been a very good response to this website, with 1400 views since it went live on 24th February. The majority of people appear to be reading the website all the way through, and we are getting feedback from people who should be able to help us affect the outcome of all this
Our objective is to stop this project as soon as possible.
While there has been a lot of discussion online, the website has also been generating email feedback. While some of that is positive in relation to the project, generally in terms of the vision, not the means, there is obviously a lot of concern being expressed as well.
The following five replies give a flavour of the feedback we have received.
Reply 1: Received 25/2/25
“Safety for hillwalkers, should a hillwalker get lost or have an accident, surely an electrified fence would be an impediment for both the hillwalker getting off the hill and also it would be an impediment for mountain rescue teams reaching the person?”
There have actually been a number of people mention the potential dangers that might be created for people coming off the mountain in directions other than the main path, and the complications that might arise for mountain rescue teams, especially in Gleann Mhor.
Curiously, the Mountaineering Council of Scotland (MCoS), Ramblers Scotland and other such groups seem to have very little to say for themselves at all. With JMT actually driving this project, it appears that there is no longer any group in Scotland which is willing to try and protect our mountain environment. It is interesting to speculate why that might be, but we will not do that here.
Reply 2: Received 28/2/25
“Excellent article drawing attention to the Schiehallion fencing and woodland project. I am a member of JMT and will certainly raise concerns.
Would like to be anon as local and don’t want to antagonise! We often walk in Glen Mhor, and tend to climb Schiehallion from the west. As a child we climbed from the north! V steep. “
Of all the email replies received, just over half have been JMT members.
Reply 3: Received 24/2/25
This reply comes from an estate manager locally who has very extensive experience with development of upland native woodland schemes.
“Thank you for putting this together. Obviously, I had heard about this, but thought it was dead and buried long ago!
I can’t understand how an EIA and proper public consultation has been side stepped.
Seems very different from my experience.
We were being heavily pushed towards the grant system when we had funds to do the work itself. Also had almost 2yrs waiting to discover if a full EIA would be required.
In the end as it was 10yrs since the last EIA, we had to re-do vegetation, birds, mammals and oddly, archaeology.
Each circa 10k a pop.
In frustration at delay I had suggested we plant 2ha per year but was told that if the intention was to keep planting that each year it would require EIA.
I suspect this scheme may blow up in the faces of Scottish Forestry, Nature Scot and the JMT.
If I can assist in anyway please let me know.”
Reply 4: Received 27/2/25
“I am a JMT member and used to live in the area so have an interest in this subject. I have worked for and with NGO’s in various places across the world. I am very concerned that internal politics and pressures are affecting JMT’s ability to manage the estate. I believe deer more than sheep are responsible for the issues the JMT have. I have had unsettling thoughts regarding the ability and wish for the JMT to limit deer numbers except when they have to. Late season and out of season culling should not be necessary with proper management and cooperation with neighbours.
As far as sheep overgrazing the ground, I find this to be a bit of a puzzle, surely if they are grazing across the whole hill, JMT should be in better communication with the neighbouring estate to have them rectify this – a small amount of march grazing is to be expected. The whole situation seems to me to be more of a management issue and not something that can be fixed with the large cost – to members – with no guarantee of even limited success.
I have worked successfully with electric fences in New Zealand for both livestock and deer management but over there the normal voltage in use is 10,000 volts and often 17,000 volts with higher amps as well – a really nasty jolt. It also takes a different mindset to manage successfully as actually touching the fence is not recommended and over long pulls management of any potential earth is critical. I seriously doubt that UK system would be any good in this circumstance. Regardless, thank you very much for this article and I will follow the story with interest.”
Reply 5: Received 27/2/25
“I have just read your web page article regarding the JMT proposal for managing grazing on Schiehallion and why. I grew up in the Tummel valley (in the early sixties) and was lucky to be able to experience and witness the landscape at a time when the human impact on it was less obvious than now.
I had intended to wax on about how impractical and invasive it would be to put up a fence without entirely enclosing the areas where grazing management is required but you’ve done that already. I don’t disagree with anything you say. Your explanation of the situation is well made. It’s just a real pity that the JMT couldn’t have done the same.
For plans to have got to this stage without consulting the wider public and interested bodies is staggering. Maybe that was because they understood how many people it would upset? What I would say is that just because they own the ground it doesn’t entitle them to be dismissive of ALL that Schiehallion represents to the public.
Since taking ownership of their portion of the ground on Schiehallion I have had nothing but admiration for the hard work done by JMT to mitigate the impact that people visiting the mountain have on the landscape both visually and environmentally. It is counterintuitive therefore to erect a fence in plain view from miles around and your point about how differently each side would evolve in appearance with time and different grazing regimes is well made.
I don’t disagree that rare habitats need both conservation and reinstatement but don’t throw the proverbial baby out with the bathwater. There is a desperate need to preserve the landscape as well. The construction of huge powerlines and substations has been done with very little respect for what was a jewel in the Scottish countryside. The last thing the mountain needs are straight lines up its sides.
Conservation also means protection. JMT’s roots were enshrined in the protection of America’s landscape heritage. I understood this to be at the heart of their mission.
I don’t have any helpful suggestions about how different grazing regimes can be managed without creating an obvious divide. What I can say is that there is precedent from the work of other conservation trusts interested in encouraging specific plant species (and fauna dependant on them) where spot introductions are given specific protection from grazing animals. Of course this would probably be impractical and just as visually invasive.
Lastly, it shouldn’t be overlooked that deer and sheep are not the only browsers. Mountain hares are equally valuable to the natural management of the Scottish upland landscape and they won’t discriminate between species!
PS, T Ratcliffe Barnett and Queen Victoria would not approve.”
Reader Feedback
To give feedback on this article please email: