Seòmar agus comataidhean

Sarah, I will come back to you briefly. Is anything else missing from the bill? A few anomalies have arisen as a result of the Wildlife Management and Muirburn (Scotland) Act 2024 and they are not covered by the bill that is before us. Are there any loose ends that the bill should cover and which it could include as we move forward?

I will pose my question only to Sarah, then.

I will bring you in, Rob, on where you see the boundary. We could talk about local place plans and the urban environment, but then all the land management decisions are up in the straths and in the hills and really have little to do with the community. In taking evidence, we have spoken to communities around Aberfeldy, for example—Forestry and Land Scotland is doing a consultation in the surrounding area. There is genuine community interest there in, say, forest crofts, as well as in people taking smaller lots, which might well fit with wider management objectives for forestry in the area. Where do you see local place plans fitting into that?

You make a case for a blanket exemption for commercial forestry, but is it possible that there might be an element of seminatural or ancient woodland in a commercial forestry holding that could be lotted off to a community interest or another interest that has a completely different type of objective?

I am trying to think of an example where potentially—it is all about potential—it would make sense for ministers to step in and say that a piece of land could be brought into wider conservation. It might not be relevant to the restructuring or commercial development of the forest, but they would see it as a potential lotting decision.

Max or David, do you have anything to add?

Would you be concerned about reaggregation of land after lotting?

Yes. We have heard that point.

That is about housing, ultimately, as well as management—

Dr Tara Wight, do you have anything to add to that? Can you hear us?

Finlay, do you have any reflections on local place plans?