Stratherrick and Foyers Community Council Objects
We are writing to formally object to the proposed Glen Earrach Pumped Storage Hydro Scheme. While we recognise the importance of tackling climate change, this proposal—due to its scale, location, and cumulative environmental implications—poses unacceptable risks to the landscape, ecology, and communities around Loch Ness.
This objection draws from both local environmental knowledge and national planning policy, including the Scottish Government’s National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4), and is set out below:
1. Visual Impact – During Construction and After
The visual impact of this development will be both substantial and enduring, affecting a highly valued Highland landscape. The upper reservoir, embankments, spoil deposits, construction tracks, and above-ground structures will irreversibly alter a wild and largely undeveloped area.
Equally significant—but underrepresented in the applicant’s assessments—is the visual impact of the lower control works. These works will be sited along the shoreline of Loch Ness, one of the most internationally recognised landscapes in Scotland. The lower works will require:
• Clearance of mature woodland, resulting in permanent tree loss and the elimination of natural visual screening
• Construction of a large coffer dam in the loch, introducing an industrial structure to the natural shoreline
• Installation of a new access road from the A82, cutting across the hillside and increasing visual disruption in a scenic corridor
• Permanent artificial lighting, visible across the loch and from Lower Foyers, Upper Foyers, Boleskine and Inverfarigaig, introducing light pollution into a dark rural setting
The applicant’s visual assessment from Upper Foyers is inadequate, as it is taken from a location obscured by trees. A proper visual impact assessment should include the Falls of Foyers path, used by approximately 150,000 people per year, which offers views across the loch directly toward the proposed development area. We have requested another visual assessment from the developer.
2. Noise, Dust, and Vibration
Construction will involve large-scale blasting, tunnelling, and excavation using heavy machinery, resulting in noise levels between 80 and 90 decibels—equivalent to a busy motorway or factory floor. Such levels are unacceptable in a tranquil rural setting and will negatively affect residents, wildlife, and the visitor experience.
These works will also generate prolonged dust emissions and ground vibration, particularly impactful given the low ambient environmental baseline.
3. Effect on Aquatic Life in Loch Ness
The lower control works lie just 1.3 km across Loch Ness from Foyers, placing them directly within a sensitive aquatic ecosystem. The loch supports protected species and migration routes, including the salmon smolt population from the River Moriston Special Area of Conservation (SAC). Alterations in water temperature, turbulence, and flow could significantly disrupt their migration, leading to increased mortality.
There is also a serious risk of sedimentation and pollution during construction, including oil or chemical spills, all of which could harm aquatic biodiversity.
4. Water Levels of Loch Ness
The scheme would artificially raise and lower Loch Ness water levels to support energy generation, disrupting natural hydrology and potentially damaging shoreline habitats and aquatic vegetation.
Importantly, Glen Earrach would not operate in isolation. It would add to the cumulative hydrological stress already posed by:
• The existing Foyers Pumped Storage Hydro Scheme
• The consented Loch na Cathrach scheme
• The proposed Loch Kemp scheme, currently under planning review
Combined, these four projects place unacceptable pressure on a natural water body not designed or suitable for such frequent industrial-scale manipulation. The cumulative impact of multiple schemes on water levels has not been properly assessed.
5. Cumulative Effect
This project is one of a growing number of major renewable energy developments in the Highlands. The cumulative visual, environmental, and infrastructural burden of multiple hydro schemes, wind farms, grid works, and roads risks degrading the very landscape that makes the region economically and culturally significant.
Each development compounds the impact of the others. Glen Earrach, in combination with the projects above, would contribute to the gradual industrialisation of Loch Ness and its surroundings.
6. Peat Disruption and Loss
The proposed development area lies on deep peatland, a vital carbon store and internationally important habitat. Disrupting or removing peat not only destroys ecological function but releases large volumes of carbon dioxide.
Claims of future peatland restoration are unreliable at this scale and cannot substitute for the permanent destruction of naturally evolved ecosystems. This undermines both Scotland’s carbon targets and the project’s green credentials.
7. Traffic Disruption on A82 and Southern Roads
It has to be in the considerations that the South Loch ness roads will be affected by construction. The scale of plant and material movement required will necessitate significant use of the A82 and associated rural roads. The plans also include drilling under the A82. Any works on the A82 affect the usage of the roads on the South side of the loch as people go that way to avoid delays.
The narrow, fragile roads on the south side of Loch Ness are highly vulnerable to disruption and damage from increased traffic. This will impact residents, businesses, tourists, and general road safety during the multi-year construction phase.
8. Pollution of Loch Ness
Loch Ness is globally iconic and ecologically sensitive. The risks of sediment runoff, hydrocarbon spills, cement contamination, and waste discharge are not hypothetical—they are common on major infrastructure sites.
An accident or system failure during construction could have irreversible consequences for the ecosystem and reputation of the loch, threatening the tourism economy and public trust in environmental safeguards.
9. Failure to Meet NPF4 Balancing Test
While the project may align with National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) objectives on climate and renewable energy, it fails to meet the full balancing requirements of the framework. Specifically:
• Policy 4 (Natural Places) requires safeguarding nationally important natural assets, which this development compromises
• Policy 5 (Carbon-rich soils and peatlands) discourages development on deep peat, which this proposal disregards
• Policy 11 (Energy) demands sensitive siting and protection of environmental assets
• Policy 20 (Blue and Green Infrastructure) calls for protection of aquatic ecosystems and natural water bodies
NPF4 is explicit: climate action must go hand in hand with nature recovery, placemaking, and community wellbeing. Glen Earrach fails this test. The environmental and social harms are disproportionate to its claimed energy benefits.
Conclusion
For all the reasons above—visual degradation (including from the lower control works), noise and pollution, peat destruction, road impacts, and incompatibility with NPF4—we urge The Energy Consents Unit to refuse planning permission for the Glen Earrach Pumped Storage Hydro Scheme.
This is not about opposing energy schemes; it is about ensuring development is done in the right place, and in the right way, with full regard for Scotland’s environmental and cultural integrity.
Mark Hindley
Stratherrick and Foyers Community Trust