§ Mr. Home Robertsonasked the Secretary of State for Transport how many applications for consent to develop fish farming sites are being blocked as a result of objections lodged at his Department by the Royal Yachting Association; if he will list the locations and the grounds for such objections; which other organisations are able to object to such developments; and why they are consulted.
§ Mr. RidleyUnder Section 34 of the Coast Protection Act 1949 my consent is required for any work in tidal waters that may be a danger to navigation. Fish farming projects may come within the scope of this provision. In considering whether consent should be given to such work in Scottish waters, I normally consult the Royal Yachting Association for Scotland, the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland, and (where appropriate) the port or harbour authority concerned. I may consult other bodies—for example, the Northern Lighthouse Board in some circumstances, and I also ask for a report from the coastguard officer responsible for the area. The purpose of these consultations is in part to secure the views of those who may be affected by the proposals, and in part to obtain a professional opinion on those effects. I consider any objections that may be made by any of those consulted and may accept or reject them: but the fact that an objection has been made does not of itself block the project.
Forty five applications for consent to fish farming projects are at present before me for my consent. In one case, an application for seven sites in Argyll, the Royal Yachting Association for Scotland has objected to three of the sites (two in Loch Melfort and one in the sound of Luing) because of possible obstruction to anchorages. In another case at East Loch Tarbert in Harris, the Association has objected to any development that would restrict the narrow approach to a sheltered anchorage. I shall reach conclusions on these cases shortly.