Continued Petitions

PE2151 is on granting protected status to primitive goat species in the Scottish Borders. There is considerable public interest in this petition; indeed, I know that there is considerable interest in the public gallery, from the Scottish media more generally, from members of Parliament and from members of the Scottish Parliament who live in areas where this is an issue.The petition, which has been lodged by Kenneth Erik Moffatt, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to help ensure the survival of primitive goat species in the Scottish Borders by granting them protected status. We previously considered the petition on 10 September 2025, when we agreed to write to the Scottish Government, the UK Joint Nature Conservation Committee, NatureScot and the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service.We are aware, through written evidence and other correspondence, of the strength of feeling on the issue and how it affects the Langholm and Newcastleton goats in particular. The response that we received from the JNCC explains that, according to its policy guidance, species are eligible for inclusion under legal protection only if they are both native to Great Britain and endangered. It states that feral goats are understood to be non-native to the UK and are therefore ineligible under current guidance. The JNCC further notes that it would be difficult to define and enforce protection for British primitive goats as distinct from more modern variants, because they are taxonomically—a word that I have not deployed previously—the same species, and there is no commonly accepted subspecies status for feral populations.However, submissions from the Wild Goat Conservation Trust and the petitioner argue that the Langholm and Newcastleton goat is distinct of type. We understand that there is some academic interest in studying its DNA, although the funding is not necessarily available to undertake that work.The Scottish Government reiterates that it has no plans to provide full legal protected status or increase regulatory protection for feral goats because, under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, they are considered to be outwith their native range in Scotland. Additionally, both the Scottish Government and NatureScot reiterate concerns about the impact of grazing pressure on the environment, although the submission from the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service suggests that goat grazing could contribute to wildfire control.Finally—and this, I am afraid, is the clincher for us in the Parliament—members might be aware that our MSP colleague Rachael Hamilton lodged stage 2 amendments to the Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill in relation to the protection of wild goats and, specifically, the goats of the Langholm and Newcastleton hills. After the debate on those amendments, the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee voted against them.Bearing in mind that the issue has now been debated and voted on by a committee of the Parliament, do we have any comments or suggestions for action?

First, I would like to say that the goats are very cute, and I find it bizarre that we are protecting seagulls, which attack humans, and not these lovely, cute goats.Unfortunately, I believe that the committee has no choice but to close the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders on the basis that, as the convener has highlighted, amendments relating to the petition were lodged at stage 2 of the Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill and, ultimately, the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee decided that these precious little animals required no additional protection. That, along with the Scottish Government’s view that it has no plans to provide full legal protected status for feral goats, means that we have no other choice, unfortunately, but to close the petition.

I think that, had Parliament not expressed a view, we might have been in a different position.It has been a recurring feature in my education as convener of this committee over this parliamentary session, but I wish that NatureScot would become a more proactive organisation and not resemble a dead sheep with its legs up in the air. It seems to parrot desktop surveys and other party-political things—actually, I do not want to use the term “party political”. Time and again, I have found it depressing.As Mr Golden suggested, we are in the ridiculous position where the urban gull population, which is terrorising the community, is subject to statutory protection, but the goat population, which the community is actively seeking to support and sustain, is not being protected in any way. The whole thing seems to be the wrong way round—there is another expression, which I cannot use because it is not appropriate.No colleague has indicated that they have comments or suggestions other than Mr Golden’s proposal, so we have no other option. That is where we are at. I do not think that it will satisfy anybody locally—whereas we brought relief to Stanley the eagle, we have not been able to do much for the goat population.The issue might be raised again in other ways—and who knows what the composition of the next Parliament might be—but what seemed like a widely supported view from people who represent the community locally has been set aside in favour of a rule book.

However, that is where we are at. Are colleagues content that that is the position that we are in?Members indicated agreement.10:45