"I do not have any agenda here; I genuinely want to know what people think, and I really hope that people will engage in that process."
Íæż½ã½ã and landowners in Scotland have aired their concerns about the potential of a third National Park in the country.
Surveys from Scottish Land and Estates (SLE) and NFU Scotland over the last month have seen a majority voting in opposition to proposals for the creation of a National Park in Galloway.
NFUS said 73% of those quizzed had provided a 'clear mandate' in rejecting the proposals, while SLE said 91% had shown opposition to the plans.
READ NOW: Farming matters: John Thorley - "National Parks bring no benefits"
Back in July, the Scottish Government had confirmed Galloway had been chosen as a preferred location for a proposed new National Park, with a consultation period set to open in November for three months.
Scottish Environment LINK, a forum of 40 member bodies including NatureScot, has claimed National Parks provide 'socio-economic benefits' to Scottish businesses alongside opportunities for 'valuable investment and development' for rural communities.
The forum's new report has highlighted the potential benefits of National Parks, claiming that Scotland's two current parks have generated an annual economic benefit of more than £700 million between them to boost job creation and new skills.
Deborah Long, director of Scottish Environment LINK, said Scotland's National Parks can provide sustainable economic and social development for communities with affordable new housing while promoting responsible recreation and tourism.
Nikki Sinclair, project manager for the Scottish Campaign for National Park, said the report had set out how existing National Parks could deliver for people, businesses, nature and the climate.
Craig Mills, chief executive of the Cairngorms Business Partnership, said being part of the Cairngorms National Park significantly boosts local businesses by leveraging the park's branding and reputation.
Morven Taylor, acting chief executive of The Communities Housing Trust, said affordable housing projects within the Cairngorms National Park Authority area have been at the forefront of National Park planning.
Gordon Mann, trustee at the Galloway National Park Authority, said farmers could reap the rewards of the proposals.
However, Finlay Carson, MSP for Galloway and West Dumfries, was concerned about the timescale involved in the current consultation period.
"The formal consultation that will advise you on your decision on whether to designate a National Park will run for only 12 weeks," he added.
"That is incredibly short.
"With Christmas and New Year slap bang in the middle of that, the consultation period will be significantly less than 12 weeks.
"In Galloway, there are real concerns that the process is now being rushed, given the uncertainties about the park boundaries and the planning authority status of the National Park, along with a whole list of other concerns."
Dumfriesshire MSP Oliver Mundell said there is growing concern and opposition to the SNP's plans for a third park.
Mr Mundell said: "(First Minister of Scotland) John Swinney and his ministerial colleagues need to accept that local people and local farmers are hugely worried about what is being proposed.
"They will be the ones who will be affected every single day if it goes ahead.
"I hope everyone who is concerned about the proposals makes their views known in the consultation and I urge the SNP to engage with my constituents and others fully."
Stephen Young, director of policy at SLE, said the survey would help the organisation form its position on the proposals.
"What has become clear is that there is very little support from land-based businesses in Galloway and they are the ones who will be most affected by a new National Park being formed," he added.
"In our view, the unsound proposals fail to demonstrate how the creation of this National Park will deliver positive outcomes for people, jobs and nature.
"There are already a number of designations in the area such as the biosphere and dark sky park plus organisations such as South of Scotland Enterprise (SOSE), all of which are delivering results for wildlife, the environment and the economy.
"Why a National Park is needed on top of that, and where it will deliver where others cannot, is as yet unclear.
"Public spending is hugely constrained at present and we see no suggestion that the National Park will unlock funding for the region that would not be possible otherwise.
"Indeed, a National Park designation will almost certainly increase pressure on existing infrastructure if it leads to increased traffic and footfall.
"Greater opportunities for visitors and tourism are generally a plus but as we have seen in other parts of Scotland, it can also bring environmental issues of pollution, littering, irresponsible behaviour and wildfires as well as pressure on housing that would require further investment to be dealt with.
"Galloway is one of the most productive areas of Scotland in terms of agriculture and forestry, and it is important that we ensure the region is able to thrive whilst also looking at how to deal with other issues such as depopulation by younger people.
"We are deeply concerned that new cost pressures will be brought to bear on businesses through having to comply with national park regulations.
"We have seen very little on how the National Park will engage and benefit farming businesses in a region that is vitally important for Scotland's food production.
"A National Park needs to be an enabling force for the people who live and work in the area but we hold concerns that this has been hugely overlooked when drawing up these plans.
"We will continue to engage with our members, businesses, stakeholders and communities as the 12-week public consultation begins in the autumn and we would urge people within the region to participate in that process."
Sir David Hope-Dunbar, chairman at SLE's South-West Region, said he had 'grave concerns' about the proposals from his perspective as a business owner and employer.
"The proposal pays little attention to those who live and work within the region and places greater importance on the views of environmental campaigners who have little or no connection to the area," he added.
"Farming and forestry are particularly vital land uses in the South-West and significant progress and contributions have been made - and will continue to be made - by these businesses towards helping nature, habitat and the wider environment, not to mention the jobs and economic impact they already provide.
"That will happen without the bureaucracy a National Park will bring.
"Nowhere have the local businesses and organisations I have spoken to been given an adequate answer on why a National Park, with an uncertain level of funding, is the mechanism this region needs to prosper.
"The consultation process will shortly begin and I would urge local people and businesses to have their say on this matter and to engage with councillors and MSPs to make their views known."
Jamie Blackett, a sixth-generation dairy farmer at Arbigland Estate in Dumfries and Galloway, said he was concerned about the potential strain a National Park may cause in the region between farmers and those who are responsible for managing them.
"Galloway is one of the most productive milk fields in the world," he added.
"This is very important for the local economy and our food security.
"Imposing a National Park in Galloway on one of the most important agricultural areas in the UK could set the National Park on a collision course with its farmers who are managing the landscape and biodiversity within it.
"I foresee years of friction if this goes ahead as it has happened in every National Park in Scotland who are at loggerheads with farmers.
"I believe passionately in maintaining the landscape, producing milk and enhancing biodiversity.
"It is one of a few reasons why I oppose Galloway National Park.
"Mairi Gougeon (Rural Affairs Secretary) must respect the wishes of people who live and work in Galloway by rejecting these plans."
Pete Rawcliffe, Nature Scot's head of people and places, said the organisation has been 'busy listening and discussing' its reporting plans with community councils, farmers, land management groups, politicians and public bodies.
Mr Rawcliffe added: "Ahead of the formal consultation in November, we are looking forward to hearing more from individuals in Galloway and beyond, either through this new online hub or in person at meetings and drop-in sessions, about what they value in the area, and how they feel about the potential of a National Park."
Rural Affairs Secretary Mairi Gougeon said engagement was critical throughout the process of potentially creating Scotland's third National Park.
She added: "We want to know what people in Galloway think about all sorts of issues, including the boundary, governance, any potential powers that the park might have and, indeed, whether people in Galloway want a National Park, which is one of the key questions that we want to get to grips with.
"I have been perfectly open and transparent about that.
"I do not have any agenda here; I genuinely want to know what people think, and I really hope that people will engage in that process.
"Although there might be a formal consultation period, there will be further engagement opportunities throughout that process.
"If it transpires through that process that more time is needed, I will have to consider that.
"However, I encourage everyone to ensure that they make their views known throughout the process."
A has reached over 3,000 signatures so far calling on the Scottish Government to stop the process for a third National Park in Scotland.
READ NOW: Íæż½ã½ã call out 'unacceptable' proposal for a new National Park in Galloway
