Source · SPSO (Scottish Public Services Ombudsman)

Scottish Government

SPSO (Scottish Public Services Ombudsman) Not Upheld Reference 201100943 Sector Scottish Government Category policy/administration Decided 01 May 2012

View Scottish Government scorecard

Full decision

Summary

Mr C, an MSP, complained on behalf of his constituent Mr A about the Scottish Government's (SG) Sea Eagle Management Scheme. He said that it failed to allow Mr A to adequately protect livestock from sea and/or golden eagles and to compensate for lost stock.

Our investigation found that the scheme (operated on behalf of the SG by Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH)) provides grants for measures to protect livestock from predation from sea eagles where there is known to be a nest site for a breeding pair of sea eagles within five kilometres of a croft, farm or other land used for livestock. Grants are paid in arrears for certain relevant work. Individuals or groups can make an application for funding and the money is paid on completion of the work. The scheme does not provide compensation for lost livestock.

Evidence provided by the SG showed that SNH did not have evidence of a nest site within qualifying distance of Mr A's croft. The nearest known nest site was some ten to eleven kilometres away. Mr A had suggested that there might be nests on platforms set up on private or Forestry Commission Scotland land nearer to Mr A's croft but SNH were not aware of any such sites. They had asked Mr A to provide them with information about any nests that he knew of but he did not appear to have done so.

SNH said that there were known to be two successfully breeding pairs of golden eagles within five kilometres of Mr A's croft but that the scheme did not cover these birds. SNH had offered to send a vet, at no cost to Mr A, to examine any carcasses to try to establish if the predation was from sea or golden eagles or other predators such as foxes or ravens but he had declined. They had also offered to send an officer to advise Mr A on the measures he could take to protect his livestock but again he declined. We found, therefore, that the SG had made reasonable efforts to assist Mr A and that they had acted appropriately. We did not find any evidence of maladministration or service failure.

We found that it was clear that the scheme does not provide compensation for lost livestock. It is for the SG to decide whether or not a compensation scheme should be available, and we are not an appeal body for their decisions. We were not able to reach a decision on this aspect of the complaint.

Related reading

View Decision Report 201100943 as a PDF (18.59 KB) Updated: March 13, 2018

View original on SPSO (Scottish Publ… website

Other decisions involving Scottish Government

Reference Date Summary Outcome
202005412 01 May 2022 C was a grower of seed potatoes. They complained about the actions of the Scottish Agricultural Science Agency (SASA), a … Partly Upheld
201904053 01 May 2021 C complained the Scottish Government had repeatedly failed to provide them with accurate information about agricultural grants that they were … Partly Upheld
201905247 01 Nov 2020 C joined the Fair Start Scotland programme (an employment support service which aims to help voluntary participants find work). Fair … Upheld
201609429 01 Jan 2018 Mr C's complaint concerns an application he made to the government's Rural Payments and Inspections Division for payments under the … Not Upheld
201507681 01 Aug 2017 Ms C complained on behalf of Mrs A, who is the director of a company. Ms C complained about the … Upheld
View all decisions for this organisation