³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

I ask Jackie Hughes to come in if I have missed anything, but, as far as I understand it the ECP had made recommendations in previous years. This year, its advice was unchanged from that in previous years.

I am happy to go through the issues that the member has raised.

Bracken is only carcinogenic to humans if we consume it. That is not a practice in Scotland. In some parts of the world, people eat young fronds, but that is not a tradition in Scotland. Bracken does not have that effect unless you eat it. If, for example, animals eat bracken regularly as fodder and humans eat the meat of those animals regularly, there is the potential for that to be the case. Equally, however, that does not happen in Scotland; our animals do not eat bracken as their main food source. The issues that the member raises in relation to bracken being carcinogenic do not apply here, as we do not consume bracken in that way.

The James Hutton Institute report has come back, and it has identified evidence gaps. As I said to Mr Carson, it is up to the Scottish Government to decide what research projects to undertake to fill those gaps. I have already committed to Mr Carson that I will write to the committee. In that letter, I will set out what research is needed to fill those gaps, and—

I do not mean to suggest that the solution to all situations is to plant trees. That might be appropriate in some cases. We definitely need a suite of tools to manage bracken.

As for tree growth, commercial forestry interests like to clear the bracken to allow seedlings to come up straight, but they can use other mechanisms for that, such as mechanical mechanisms or ground spraying of other chemicals. The big difference with Asulox was that it allowed for aerial spraying. Other chemicals are authorised for use in ground spraying, so that can continue as it always has.

There is an interesting point about tree growth for those who are looking for natural regeneration. The rewilding group that I met said that, although it does not manage its bracken, the trees still come through. They are a bit stunted and twisted, which is fine for regeneration, albeit that it is not good for commercial forestry.

The choice of mechanism therefore depends on the desired land use, the available tools and the topography of the land in question. We need that suite of guidelines so that each land manager can make the right choice for their land.

I have never advised anyone on bracken control.

Yes. The key reason is that Asulam is considered by the European Food Safety Authority to be an endocrine-disrupting chemical.

Do you mean with the chemical?

Yes, that is correct. The convener has understood it well. The ECP looks at the chemical. There was no new information about the chemical in question. The HSE looks at things much more in the round. I have the full report with me. I will not inflict that on you, but I note that the HSE’s assessment must include a series of tests, and the application must pass those tests. The application did not pass all the tests. For example, the test on the need for special circumstances was not met. Some tests were met, such as the danger test—we know that bracken is a hazard. The reasonable alternatives test was also met.

Another test is whether the emergency authorisation appears necessary to address the danger. That test was not met, because the danger from the 75,000 hectares of bracken, or however many there are, is not being met by treating only around 2,000 hectares of it.

The HSE looks at applications in the round. It agrees that bracken is a danger, but the application did not meet all the tests.

I can ask.

The deer management roundtable members include: Lantra Scotland, Mountaineering Scotland, the British Deer Society, the Confederation of Forest Industries, the Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust, Trees for Life, the Scottish Gamekeepers Association, the Scottish Association for Country Sports, the Scottish Crofting Federation, the British Association for Shooting and Conservation, Woodland Trust Scotland, Lowland deer groups, Transport Scotland, Forestry and Land Scotland, Scottish Wildlife Trust, Police Scotland, Food Standards Scotland, Country Sport Scotland, NatureScot, the National Trust for Scotland, various departments within the Scottish Government including the veterinary adviser, RSPB Scotland, the Scottish Venison Association, Scottish Land & Estates, the John Muir Trust, the Association of Deer Management Groups, the Scottish Countryside Alliance, Scottish Environment LINK, NFU Scotland, SSPCA, wild deer best practice guides, the Veterinary Deer Society, the National Wildlife Crime Unit, the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Community Land Scotland, Scottish Forestry, Cairngorms National Park Authority, Loch Lomond and Trossachs National Park Authority, the James Hutton Institute, the Forest Policy Group and the Ramblers.

As we have said already, stalking at night can be done only under authorisation, and people doing that stalking have to pass the fit and competent test. We have not specified the types of scopes that can be used, because technology is always evolving, and there are many scopes on the market. The specific authorisation for night shooting is the mechanism for ensuring that people who are doing it are fully qualified to do so. Of course, as with all these matters, it is up to the operator—the person who is pulling the trigger—to correctly identify the target animal, identify potential risks and ensure a safe backstop. That remains true whatever equipment anyone is using at any time.