Scotland's nature conservation agency has rejected accusations that it disregarded scientific evidence when it refused to grant a licence for the traditional hunting of gannet chicks on a remote Hebridean island.
NatureScot declined the application in 2026 for the annual guga hunt on Sula Sgeir, an uninhabited rocky outcrop situated 40 miles (64km) north of Ness on Lewis. The decision has sparked debate about the agency's decision-making process, with Western Isles MP Torcuil Crichton questioning whether internal disagreement about scientific conclusions influenced the outcome.
For centuries, hunters have travelled to Sula Sgeir each summer to harvest gannet chicks for their meat, a practice deeply embedded in the culture of the Ness community. The hunt employs traditional methods that have changed little over generations, with hunters using long poles fitted with nooses to catch chicks in their nests before killing them, typically by striking them on the head. The birds are then gutted, plucked and salted on the island before being transported by boat to Lewis, where NatureScot officials count them.
Crichton obtained internal documents through a Freedom of Information request that revealed the complexity of NatureScot's deliberations. The papers showed that staff had initially recommended approving a licence to take 500 birds, concluding that harvesting at that level "will not have an adverse effect on the site integrity of the North Rona and Sula Sgeir SPA, subject to a number of mitigation measures which we can incorporate into licence conditions." However, two weeks later the NatureScot board reversed course and announced it would not issue a licence for 2026. Hunters had sought permission to take either 2,000 or 500 birds.
According to reporting from a Scottish news outlet, NatureScot commissioned an updated population model and concluded that adverse impact on the gannet population was possible at both the 2,000-bird and 500-bird harvest levels. The agency's own paper, published on 29 July 2026, had recommended refusing the licence because it could not conclude beyond reasonable scientific doubt that the harvest would have no adverse effect on site integrity.
The decision reflects broader conservation concerns about gannet populations in Scottish waters. According to environmental reporting, the gannet population had suffered mass mortalities in 2021 through 2023 due to bird flu, a factor that influenced the licensing decision. Harvests did not take place in 2022, 2023 and 2024 due to bird flu concerns, though 485 birds were taken at the 2025 hunt after the ban was lifted that year.
Why did NatureScot change its position?
Crichton has called for greater transparency about the scientific reasoning behind the reversal. He noted that internal debate about the modelling and scientific conclusions occurred just a fortnight before the licence was rejected.
"No-one is saying NatureScot acted illegally, or outwith its bounds, but the FoI shows there was a debate in NatureScot about the modelling, about the scientific conclusion just a fortnight before they rejected the licence,"he said.
The MP has urged NatureScot to detail the "scientific modelling" that led to the decision and has called for the agency to involve more contributions from local communities in future decision-making.
"When NatureScot come to meet with the Ness community and talk to people who are the real experts, I hope they explain how they came to the conclusion, how the modelling works, and how the modelling will work in the future."
Crichton has emphasised the importance of rebuilding trust between the agency and the Ness community.
"We have to build that relationship, that trust between NatureScot and the Ness community to find way ahead. And I think if we do that with an explanation of how this scientific conclusion was reached, we will be on the right road."
How does NatureScot defend its decision?
A NatureScot spokeswoman stated that the board had considered extensive evidence and expert advice before reaching its conclusion. She acknowledged that the decision-making process involved differing professional perspectives and robust internal discussion.
"As with many complex conservation issues, there were differing professional views and robust internal discussion. That is an important part of good governance and decision-making, not proof that scientific advice was ignored."
The agency emphasised that after careful consideration, the board had determined it could not be satisfied that the relevant legal tests had been met for issuing a licence.
"We recognise the deep cultural significance of the guga hunt to the Ness community and understand the strength of feeling surrounding this issue. Reasonable people may disagree with the outcome. However, suggestions that the decision was reached without proper regard to the evidence or expert advice are simply wrong. The board acted lawfully, carefully and in good faith in carrying out its responsibilities."
What is the cultural and practical significance of the hunt?
The guga hunt represents a centuries-old tradition for the Ness community, with gannet meat forming part of the local food culture. Descriptions of the meat's flavour vary widely, from comparisons to kipper and steak or "salty goose" to less favourable characterisations as "rotten leather and fishy beef" or a mixture of anchovy paste and high-strength cod liver oil.
Opponents of the hunt argue that it is no longer necessary to feed islanders and contend that the killing method is cruel. More than 106,000 people signed a petition calling for the Scottish government to prohibit the hunt entirely. According to a Scottish Parliament petition, campaigners want to remove the hunt's licensing exemption, which is rooted in Section 16 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.
What happens next?
NatureScot has stated that the 2026 refusal does not prevent future applications. The Men of Ness, the group that organises the hunt, may apply again in subsequent years. A 2027 licence application is considered possible following the 2026 refusal, and a Scottish Parliament petition to stop the guga hunt remained under consideration in 2026.
The dispute reflects broader tensions between conservation science, cultural heritage and community autonomy in Scotland's approach to wildlife management.
