Threats facing our mountains, forests and national parks are increasing, but the level of monitoring of our “protected sites” has almost halved in five years, Scottish Environment LINK has found.
The Scottish Government has been supportive of controversial green data centres and is liaising with the industry. But critics argue there are environmental considerations and companies must not be allowed to “write the rules”.
Loyalist paramilitary groups in Northern Ireland murdered hundreds of people during The Troubles. But far right activists flew their flag at an anti-immigration rally despite terror laws banning public support for terrorists.
Threats facing our mountains, forests and national parks are increasing, but the level of monitoring of our “protected sites” has almost halved in five years, Scottish Environment LINK has found.
Only a tiny percentage of Scotland’s most fragile natural environments are being monitored by the national agency tasked with protecting them, The Ferret can reveal, with the number of inspections on the decline.
Just 54 protected sites, which include national parks, mountains, wetlands, forests, ancient woods and peatlands, were monitored in 2025 by NatureScot, according to details released under freedom of information legislation.
The figure makes up less than three per cent of protected sites, which often support diverse and endangered flora and fauna.
The new data reveals that the extent of monitoring has declined to almost half what it was in 2021, when 97 sites – just over five per cent of the network – were monitored.
According to Scottish Environment LINK, which obtained the figures and is today launching its nature protection scorecard scheme, the lack of monitoring means authorities could be missing threats to the ecological health of our most pristine environments.
You don’t get stories like this elsewhere
The Ferret publishes investigations that go beyond the daily news cycle, dig deeper, and ask difficult questions. Help us stay independent.
Campaigners are calling for “a gear change” in terms of monitoring, with opposition politicians warning “Scotland’s nature is too important to be trashed or discarded”.
NatureScot said it was in the process of reforming its approach to protected area monitoring, with a new system due to be introduced next year. It recognised that it was falling behind targets that aim to protect 30 per cent of Scotland’s natural environment by 2030.
There are almost 2,000 existing protected areas in Scotland. They include the Cairngorms National Park, which is home to a quarter of the UK’s rare and endangered species, Glen Affric with its ancient pinewoods, and the Nevis network, which includes Ben Nevis, the UK’s highest summit, and rare species including golden eagles, red squirrels and Atlantic salmon.
Others include parts of the Loch Lomond and The Trossachs National Park, which aims to protect species such as the white-fronted geese and native oakwoods species.
While some sites, such as Ben Nevis, have been subject to recent and regular monitoring, many have not. The most recent monitoring carried out in Edinburgh’s volcanic Arthur’s Seat was in 2016. The site supports rare flora including the maiden pink wildflower, and bird species such as kestrels and fulmars.
Forest of Clunie in Perth and Kinross, which supports many important bird species, was assessed for black grouse in 2017. However, monitoring has not considered hen harriers since 2010, or osprey since 2011, despite both species being last assessed as “declining” in Scotland. Some other sites haven’t been assessed since 2007, according to research by Scottish Environment LINK.
Stuart Spray
Monitoring allows important issues such as the encroachment of invasive species, including rhododendron, to be highlighted, or the degradation of important habitats. Environmental groups argue this allows for targeted support to be enacted before it is too late.
The global biodiversity framework goal, which the Scottish Government is committed to, is built on the premise that 30 per cent of a habitat in a landscape usually provides enough space and connection between patches of habitat for wildlife to survive and travel.
Dan Paris, director of policy and engagement of Scottish Environment LINK said: “Protected sites include many of our most important sites for nature. Without sufficient monitoring we can never have a full picture of the ecological health of these sites.
“We know from site monitoring that invasive non-native species, overgrazing from deer, and water management are among the biggest pressures. The stronger the data, the better placed we are to target an effective response, not just on individual sites but nationally.”
He claimed that the additional threats posed by climate change required more rather than less monitoring and called for a “gear change”. Scottish Environment LINK’s scorecard data showed, Paris added, that “while there are some signs of progress in areas like peatland restoration” there was a “worrying lack of capacity to get the basics right”.
“With public sector reform likely to be the dominant issue of this parliament, we must make sure that our environmental agencies are given the people and resources they need to halt and reverse the decline of our environment,” he said.
Ailis Watt, senior policy officer at RSPB Scotland, said: “As well as taking better care of the protected areas we already have, we need the Scottish Government to expand Scotland's network of protected areas. With the right ambition, we can meet the 30 by 30 target – but we need a real gear change now.”
Jamie Mann
Mark Ruskell MSP for the Scottish Greens agreed that more monitoring was urgently needed. “You can’t protect what you don’t properly monitor,” he told The Ferret. “These protected sites are supposed to safeguard our most important nature, but that can’t happen if the number of sites is small and declining.
“Our nature is too important to be trashed or discarded. We all rely on clean water and air and a thriving natural environment. LINK is right to call for a gear change. We need to have a proper picture of the ecological health of these sites and can put effective remedies in place before damage becomes irreversible.”
Claire Baker, Scottish Labour environment spokesperson, claimed the low level of monitoring was “unacceptable” and called for the Scottish Government to “get serious about protecting ecology and promoting biodiversity in Scotland.”
A NatureScot spokesperson agreed that monitoring was “vital so that we understand the health of these sites, the pressures affecting them and the management underway or needed to ensure that they can most effectively protect and restore nature”.
They added: “NatureScot is in the process of reforming our approach to protected area monitoring. We recognise that a monitoring gear change is absolutely necessary to achieve the commitment to have at least 30 per cent of Scotland safeguarded by 2030, and to ensure that these areas will be effectively managed and will deliver great things for nature.”
The new system – monitoring to deliver healthy ecosystems – is due to start next year. It will be “more effective and efficient” and “consider land and seascape-scale threats” like invasive species, claimed the spokesperson. This, they said, was “a critical step if we are to halt the loss of nature by 2030”.
Go beyond the headlines with us
Deeper investigations, clear explainers, and reporting with real impact all depend on your support.
The Scottish Government has been supportive of controversial green data centres and is liaising with the industry. But critics argue there are environmental considerations and companies must not be allowed to “write the rules”.
Loyalist paramilitary groups in Northern Ireland murdered hundreds of people during The Troubles. But far right activists flew their flag at an anti-immigration rally despite terror laws banning public support for terrorists.
Two salmon farming companies have been accused of allowing fish to die in pain at three farms in Scotland, after the release of covert video footage.
Only one in eleven major summer festivals analysed by The Ferret has a 50/50 gender split, with representation across all festivals declining at headline level.
