Drumkinnon Bay which protesters claim will be blighted by Flamingo Land.


The Flamingo Land saga has turned into a PR war with some important legal matters now stirred into it.

Unfortunately for Flamingo Land – or Lomond Banks as they would now have us call them – the alleged breaches contained in a letter from the solicitors for Ross Greer, the Green MSP, who is backing the campaign to Save Loch Lomond, make this look as if this case will run and run.

And most probably cost an awful lot of public money, run out of steam and hit the Balloch buffers, at the end of the day.

This is now, as former SNP leader, Iain Robertson, told Cllr Jonathan McColl in a tweet last week, beginning to look very much like our very own Brexit by yon Bonnie Banks.

It will have cost an incalculable sum of public money to take it to a conclusion.

For example, Flamingo Land’s plans were launched into loquacious flight across the pages of the Glasgow Herald this week with an article by their chief reporter David Leask which began:

“Right in the middle of what was once the railway yards at Balloch, gateway to Loch Lomond, there is a big for sale sign.

“Scottish Enterprise, the jobs agency, is marketing 44 acres of the former industrial site for re-development.

“The billboard, now with ‘under offer’ written in red across it, even suggests some uses for the land: hotel, hostel, lodges, retail, restaurants.”

Miller Andy.jpg 2It was an intro that would pave the way for Flamingo Land spokesperson Andy Miller, left, son of the former minister of Bonhill, to produce a trident in the manner of Neptune and attempt to hold back the tsunami of criticism and complaints that have come his company’s way.

“See,” Andy Miller is quoted in the Herald, “this place has been up for sale for years and it has always been for a tourism development.”

And the report adds: “Mr Miller is the reason why there is a red band across the ‘for sale’ sign. Or rather his employer, Flamingo Land.

“The theme park operator has partnered up with Scottish Enterprise to turn the old railway sidings and part of a former dye works into a new resort, £30 million or so worth of wooden lodges, some low-rise restaurants, a youth hostel and a 60-room apart-hotel.”

An approach less sympathetic to the Flamingo Land/Lomond Banks application might just as easily have said: “Right in the middle of 44 acres of beautiful bluebell woods, much used and admired by the public on the banks of Loch Lomond in Balloch, there is a big for sale sign connected to a plan for a theme park, which has caused fury amongst residents and more than 55,000 others from all across the world who have signed a petition against it.”

Mr Leask’s report went on to say: “Their [Flamingo Land’s] application has provoked what is thought to be the most objections ever in Scottish planning history, more than 55,000. Why? Because the holiday park sits just within the boundary of Scotland’s first national park, Loch Lomond and The Trossachs.”

Others might have recognised the fact that if the site is in the National Park, it is in  fact in it and all the rules and regulations apply. If it’s not, it’s not.

Green MSP Ross Greer is one of them. Mr Leask states Mr Green led the protest. He did not. The Friends of Drumkinnon Bay, the Save Loch Lomond group, a neighbours’ group and Cllr Jim Bollan, of the Community Party, were all there before him.

Balloch resident Kenny Gibson raised the alarm when he saw preparatory work being carried out and reported it to the police and planning authorities.

This was covered exclusively by The Democrat and the evidence for that is on our website.

Mr Greer, writing in the Glasgow Herald last month, said: “The overwhelming majority of the land is currently in public hands, owned by a government agency.

“Putting it simply, this is a plan to sell off public land, in a world-famous national park, for a private developer to profit from.”

Labour MSP Jackie Baillie has raised concerns in the Scottish Parliament about this, particularly in relation to the sale price for the land, which is said to have plummeted from £2 million to £200,000, a pittance given the price of land and sale price of property around Loch Lomond.

If the “sale” goes through then Flamingo Land will in effect have got the land for nothing since much of the preparatory work, admin and legal costs for the anticipated arrival of the theme park has been paid for by Scottish Enterprise and that is likely to have exceeded £200,000.

No doubt Ms Baillie will raise this again with others at a meeting in the White Church in Balloch on Monday, June 24, at 7pm when a panel of politicians and concerned others, including West Dunbartonshire Council leader Jonathan McColl, who has been both for and against the proposals (he says now that he would be more amenable to a scaled down version of what is currently proposed) will be present to answer questions from the public.

The Herald report states: “Mr Miller and his employers at Flamingo Land have stayed out of the politics and did not respond straight away to criticism. But walking around the area – which he called Lomond Banks, to complement Lomond Shores, an earlier stage of Scottish Enterprise’s development of Balloch – he says he believes good people have got the wrong end of the stick.”

Really? Anyone who has been following this story might refute that.

Mr Miller told the Herald there were two main “misconceptions”, as he sees it: that the land was previously some kind of “public” nature reserve teeming with wildlife, and that what is proposed is a theme park.

He said, some might say rather patronisingly: “Far from it. This is not a place for a theme park. People are signing up to things that they are not fully understanding.

“They see something being posted on social media which says, ‘theme park operator developing Loch Lomond’ and ‘sign this petition to stop this petition to stop that happening’. But people don’t know what is actually happening.”

The Leask report adds: “As he shows The Herald around the site, Mr Miller pulls from a folder artists’ impressions of Lomond Banks. There is a boardwalk along the banks of the Leven, an urban-looking square next to Balloch Station (now a car park) with a micro-brewery and a youth hostel and wooden lodges nestled below a canopy of trees. He does point to one planned large structure, a step-shaped hotel with an indoor pool on the opposite bank to an existing animal attraction, Drumkinnon Tower. Overall, he suggests, the resort is more Centre Parcs than Disneyland.”

New information from elsewhere seems to suggest that there will be problems with the boardwalk going back almost a century when “riparian owners” were oft mentioned in court cases.

It was in one of those cases around 1960 that Sheriff Lionel Daiches referred to “bureaucratic bumbledom” on the part of the authorities who were handling a dispute over the land.

Drumkinnon and Maid 2

Drumkinnon Bay in the Sixties when the factory and the railway yard was still there and visitors and local people enjoyed themselves by the Bonnie Banks.

Anyone who has had any dealings with public bodies in recent times will be able to tell you that the bumbledom in question has not gone away.

The Leask report asked: “Does it matter that people think he [Mr Miller] is building a theme park? After all, the national park authority will make its decision based on evidence, not public opinion.

“[Mr Miller] says it does because the perception of the public is really important given they are the people who will be holidaying here. We want them to be convinced this is a good thing.”

“Opposition has focused on wildlife. An environmental impact study found development would be bad for iconic Loch Lomond species like red squirrels or otters. That is another misconception, Mr Miller says. The report said squirrels and other animals exist in the Loch Lomond area, but that there were no signs of them on this site. While the habitat here is probably suitable, there are too many humans nearby for them.”

Again the Leask report refers to the Drumkinnon Bay site as an “old railway yard,” which makes it sound as if it would not be much of a loss to the community.

And concludes: “If it gets the go-ahead, Lomond Banks will join the centre of Balloch, through the old railway yard, to the mooring of the now ground Maid of the Loch paddle steamer and on across the former dye works to Lomond Shores. Work would take place from 2021 to 2024.

“Nothing will be blocked off,” Mr Miller says. “There will be no wall, no fence. Effectively, if you really wanted to walk up to the front door of a lodge, you could do it. We want to let people enjoy what they already enjoy.

“Will the site – which has gone wild since the 1980s – be as green as it is now? Yes, said Mr Miller.”

Cllr McColl and Jackie Baillie MSP.

Others are more sceptical than Mr Miller, however. Now that the national press and media have at last taken an interest in one of the most important environmental stories on Loch Lomondside for many years, they will be turning up in large numbers at the meeting in the White Church on Monday, June 24, at 7pm.

As former councillor and SNP old hand Iain Robertson told Cllr Jonathan McColl on twitter, this story could run longer than Brexit.


  1. Extremely patronising to say protesters do not know what they are signing. This piece of land is the last piece of public land owned and used daily by the public west of the River Leven in Balloch and should not be sold off to Flamingo Land to make profits for their shareholders.

  2. Really! I think we do know. You may have grown up here Mr Miller but you obviously don’t live here. It’s not just about the desecration of a much loved national area of natural beauty, it is the effect this project will have on the local community and residents. This land belongs to the people of Scotland. If there was ever any chance of a Community buy out the £2 million price tag would have been an obstacle. If £200k is the new price it may have been a viable option. Hardly value for money is it Scottish Enterprise?
    Ever been stuck on the A82? Not just on a bank holiday. Congestion is a major issue. Also all of these proposed jobs. Constructors will be bussed in. Jobs lost when Balloch businesses close down may be re employed by you. Hardly new jobs.
    Heavy plant will destroy the woods. Replanting is not the same. There IS wildlife in the woods and the amazing birdsong will be gone disturbed by the plant equipment.
    As for the LLTNP. If the number of protests don’t count against the planning permission application why invite them?

  3. I’d go as far as saying, most local folk who really enjoy Loch Lomond, simply enjoy the peace of both sides of the Leven at Balloch. That is Balloch Park and the other is the part known to local folk as Drumkinnon Bay. No big drive up the Loch through heavy traffic, with all that implies, but the simple peace of enjoying ‘their’ wee bit of Loch Lomond, any time they feel like it.
    Now, that is something which can’t actually be measured, but has to be known to be safely there, when and if we want it. It’s more than going, ‘Down the bay’ every day, 365 days days a year. It’s about being able to go ‘Down the Bay’ when and if you want to.
    It is great that some things don’t change and that wee bit of the south shore of the Loch has, more or less and certainly recently, been available,with the implied promise, that, being part of a National Park, it is safe.
    That is really what the objection is about and local people want to be certain that it will be safe now and in the future.
    The worst thing about all these proposals is the fact that public money has been used to prepare a site for something which has not yet been approved and in the face of local objections and on a National Park, which was thought to be safe, from the very kind of development which is now proposed
    ‘They’ managed to get away with the present ‘taming’ of the shore at the southwest corner and many who said then, it was the thin edge of the wedge of ‘development’ have now been proven to be correct.
    Someone has to say, ‘STOP!’
    When someone comes to a beautiful place and shows an artist’s impression of how it will be ‘improved’, you have to ask, ‘Who is saying this is an improvement and will he be receiving any recompense (justified, or otherwise) for promoting the idea?’
    Given that the person is trying to do a deal, with what is effectively public land, you have to perceive there is the scent of a rodent in the atmosphere.
    People who see a way of making money, don’t seem to realise the value of free beauty.
    Let’s hope the people of the Vale and Balloch see and know the real value of Drumkinnon Bay, without ‘development.

  4. My understanding of public access to Loch Lomond, for local folk has always been, that it is flawed. The only places where local people can actually easily access Loch Lomond, have been Balloch Park and – across the mouth of the Leven at Drumkinnon Bay. After that, there really is no easy public access, until eastwards at the SNH Reserve at the River Endrick area.
    Now, I always found it strange, that, to access Loch Lomond after the places mentioned above, I had to go up to Duck Bay and there, I could go on to the gravel shore. Thereafter it became harder and harder, apart from places like Aldochlay.
    That is why Drumkinnon Bay is so important!
    It gives public access to Loch Lomond for local people. No fees, no entrance – just go, when and if, you want to.
    For Vale and Balloch folk (who are sometimes the same folk and sometimes are different – and I could never REALLY work it out) anytime we wanted to go down to the Loch, we wandered down, with the weans, or the dog, or all of that, if and when we wanted.
    Not every day for some – but the beauty of it all was there: every day for everyone – if they wanted!
    Simply because we all had access.
    Now, comes the odour of rodents: what was once available to all, will change and no matter what the protagonists say about anyone will still be able to walk down to the Loch, realistically, that will not happen, because it has suddenly and at great public cost, been handed – on a plate- to folk who don’t know thew Loch, but do know a brilliant business opportunity when they see it.
    Where else, on an internationally known place, could you buy a bit of the action and get the public purse to pay for it?
    Well indeed: where else?
    A National Park, by definition is just that.
    Now I know the local folk don’t mind sharing, but National Parks, come with restrictions and objectives and the development proposed at Drumkinnon Bay, will actually undo the whole access ethos of a National Park for local folk and (let’s think really big!) and for the rest of the world to come and see and dip their toes in and wander about and freely partake of all of that.
    That’s what our National Park really should be about and if it has drifted away from that simple principle, it is time to stop.
    And the place to stop that is – at Drumkinnon Bay.
    The crime being committed at Drumkinnon Bay, is actually so big, it defies credibility and still it continues and we have someone wandering around a very, very lovely place, with an ‘artist’s impression’ of how beautiful it is all going to look AND NO ONE LAUGHS! (or cries!)
    Honestly, it is beyond comic and has become tragic, that the local councillors of whatever political parties are divided on this.
    This is about access to our countryside and lochside.
    An artist’s impression held up against the real thing and no one seems to see the absurdity of it all, apart from the Friends of Drumkinnon Bay.
    Has the Vale gone mad?

  5. I apologise to the Editor of the Dumbarton Democrat for writing twice on the subject of Drumkinnon Bay.
    Basically, my technological skills are poor and when I wrote my original comment, I did not see it again and thought it had simply been rejected by the editor. Feeling so strongly on the matter, I opted for trying again and thus, there are now two letters/comments by me and for overspeaking (not for the first time) I apoplogise!

  6. I find absolutely ridiculous that our local Community Council, gave their total support to Flamingo Lands initial proposal at the very outset, without consulting the community they are supposably represent. They supported the scheme without having seen plans or details. It all very well thinking of the jobs benefits this May bring however they should have consulted the community.

Leave a Reply