Eskdalemuir duck shooting pond plans taken to appeal

The Scottish government has been asked to intervene over a retrospective bid to secure planning approval for two duck shooting ponds.

Dumfries and Galloway Council has failed to give a decision on the plans within the required timescale.

It has prompted Eskdalemuir Forestry to lodge an appeal over the application at Clerkhill.

The site previously hit the headlines when a nearby Buddhist monastery opposed plans for a shooting range.

A variety of duck species can be legally shot in Scotland during a season which runs from September to January.

The application is for retrospective approval of two wildlife ponds associated with shooting which have been created on the site.

It was validated by the council in February but it has not issued a decision in the three-month timescale required.

The applicants said they had not realised the proposal needed planning permission due to its "modest scale".

They have now asked the Scottish government's planning and environmental appeals division (DPEA) to decide its fate.

Eskdalemuir Forestry said it had met with the local community four years ago and agreed to move the shooting into a "more remote" part of the valley further away from the village.

It created two replacement ponds for commercial duck shooting which is held on the land and is now seeking permission for the work.

It added that shooting of pheasant and duck had taken place over many years and remained a "lawful activity".

A number of objections have been lodged to the plan from residents of Eskdalemuir.

"The idea of killing for fun and profit is not popular within the village," said one opponent.

"The noise disturbance adversely affects the quality of life in our community.

"Anyone can see that this proposal forms part of a bigger plan that will inevitably bring more traffic to roads that are already not fit for purpose."

The applicants have argued that it is "entirely separate" from their bid to secure permission for a target shooting range in the area.

They said it should be judged on its own planning merits and its determination should not be held up by any other plans they might have on the land.