SCOTLAND’S politicians are today being urged to support Culloden’s bid to become a recognised World Heritage Site and increase protection for historic battlefields.
The call comes on the 275th anniversary of the Battle of Culloden on April 16, 1646, when the Jacobite army of Charles Edward Stuart was defeated by a British government force under the Duke of Cumberland
The National Trust for Scotland (NTS) has outlined proposals for battlefield locations in a new manifesto published ahead of next month’s election.
The paper calls on the country’s political parties to include battlefields in the forthcoming National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4), which maps out a long-term plan for national development and infrastructure. NPF4 will set out a clear plan for Scotland until 2050.
Now, NTS is urging for battlefield landscapes to be afforded the same protections as other historic sites, protecting them from intrusive developments.
READ MORE: ‘Why I care about the Battle of Culloden and the land it was fought on’
The trust is also asking MSPs to support an application from Culloden for UNESCO World Heritage Site status, as the 275th anniversary of the battle is marked.
There are currently six recognised and protected UNESCO World Heritage Sites in Scotland: the Antonine Wall, the Heart of Neolithic Orkney, New Lanark, the Old and New Towns of Edinburgh, St Kilda and the Forth Bridge. “Historic battlefields are hugely important for our sense of identity,” reads the manifesto.
“They also provide us with space to remember and inform what we know about our past. However, they do not enjoy the same protections as other historic sites, such as scheduled monuments or listed buildings.
“Enhanced protections for battlefields should be included in NPF4 to prevent development occurring which has a hugely adverse effect on the sites of historic battle and or the landscapes in which they are situated.”
Diarmid Hearns, head of public policy, risk and compliance at NTS, added: “Historic battlefields are often extensive areas in multiple ownership, which can make them more challenging to conserve.
“We think introducing management plans for these important sites – as has been done in England and in other countries – could be the way to secure them for the future. “In the case of Culloden, a largely intact battlefield and a turning point in Scottish history, it could also be deserving of the accolade of World Heritage Site status.
“This would bring additional protection and a more sustainable approach to the site’s development.”
READ MORE: Why now is the time to act to protect Scotland's historic battlefields
Currently, historic battlefields are part of Scottish Planning Policy, with an expectation that planning authorities should protect and conserve their key landscape characteristics.
However, these protections are weaker than those for altering scheduled monuments or listed buildings.
NTS argues that by introducing management plans for battlefields, the owners, developers and communities would have greater confidence in how the value of the sites would be safeguarded.
Culloden has seen multiple planning applications for residential and holiday accommodation on the historic battlefield, which still contains the remains of many of those who fell on April 16, 1746.
Stone cairns mark the clans who fought in the battle, and the site remains a place of pilgrimage today.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel