THE Scottish Tourist Board has recommended that its 32 area boards be

cut to seven regional boards as part of a plan to restructure the highly

fragmented tourism industry.

The board is understood to have put forward three options -- for 15,

10 or seven area boards -- and is recommending seven as the ideal

number.

The prospect of only seven ATBs has been greeted with horror by some

boards, who have suggested that they would rather act independently than

be part of an area board they see as unwieldy and destructive.

Opponents of the proposal have predicted falling membership, lost

revenue, and job losses.

Scottish Secretary Ian Lang has already indicated that he would find

it difficult to understand why Scotland should need more ATBs than

England -- which has 10 -- and he is believed to be trying to match the

new ATB map with local authority reorganisation.

A spokeswoman for the Scottish Office said yesterday the proposals

were being considered and an announcement would be made in due course.

The new ATB structure is expected to be in place by the spring of 1995

and most expect a final decision on the shape and size by early next

year.

STB chairman Mr Ian Grant said the proposals were ''a private matter

between ourselves and the Scottish Office''.

Strong opposition to the plan came last night from Mr Josh Gourlay,

Orkney's director of tourism. ''It is an absolute, utter, totally

unbelievable disaster and I view it with great incredulity,'' he said.

''I find it an incredible recommendation because we certainly have a

different tourism product from the rest of Scotland, in fact from most

of the island areas. Scotland in the main is a touring destination and

we are very much a resort destination but it is also a fact that we are

very much different.

''In a sense, tartan land and kilts stop at the Pentland Firth. There

are cultural differences, historic differences, economic differences,

and political differences. I think that essentially we try and get the

AB markets to a larger extent than Scotland does as a whole,'' he said.

Amalgamation into a tourist area stretching from Fort William to the

Western Isles and up to Shetland would mean a substantial reduction in

the number of trade members in Orkney, and a diminished economic value

to the tourism industry on the island, he warned.

''I could recommend four area tourist boards -- the three island

authorities and Scotland,'' he said.

However, reaction to the new structure, which represents half of the

STB's earlier proposal of 15 ATBs, has been positive in some quarters.

Mr Gordon Henry, chief executive of Grampian, Highland and Aberdeen

Tourist Board, said the five ATBs in his area were already operating as

a voluntary consortium. The recommendation left his area much as it is

already and he was ''delighted'' with that.

Mrs Elizabeth Dunlop, chairman of St Andrews and North-east Fife

Tourist Board, described the Tayside merger as ''an opportunity we can

grasp and build on''. She said: ''If we can all work together the sky is

the limit. I am positive we can reach more people more easily.''

Mr James Fraser, director of Loch Lomond, Stirling, and Trossachs

Tourist Board, said the majority of members had favoured a link with

Argyll because it meant that the whole of Loch Lomond was under the

umbrella of one tourism unit.

Other board directors were less enthusiastic, especially those whose

rural territory was being merged with a city. Mr Scott Armstrong, Clyde

Valley director of tourism, said he had hoped that Lanarkshire would be

left as a separate entity.

''This area has a population of half a million, and is sufficiently

different from Glasgow to be marketed separately. We can work with the

Glasgow Tourist Board in certain initiatives but marketing a city

product requires a different format than marketing Lanarkshire,'' he

said.

His views were broadly echoed by Mr Riddell Graham, director of the

Scottish Borders Tourist Board. He was involved in drafting the ATBs'

own joint submission to the Scottish Office, which largely coincided

with the STB's original proposal of 15 ATBs. He said his own tourist

board's views had clearly been ignored and questioned the purpose of the

STB's consultation process.

''My committee will be very disappointed at a merger of the Borders

and Edinburgh. There may have to be some kind of amalgamation but the

link with Edinburgh was never ever in the field. Edinburgh made it very

clear that it was a unique unit, a capital city, and quite different

from the hinterland.

''My main concern is the likely reaction from local authorities and

the trade. One of the reasons we have got thousands of trade members

supporting tourism in Scotland is because they can identify with a

locally-based organisation. That would still have been true at 15.''

Dr Roger Carter, chief executive of Edinburgh Tourist Board, said:

''We see some disadvantages in being linked administratively to the

surrounding area. The majority of our visitors come for conferences or

from overseas. Visitors tend to come to Edinburgh for this very specific

product, and I think one is concerned about a potential loss of focus.''

Dumfries and Galloway Tourist Board appeared determined to retain its

independence from neighbouring Ayrshire. Mr Douglas Ritchie, tourism

director, said: ''Dumfries and Galloway will be one unitary authority,

we have one local enterprise board, one health authority serving us, and

there should be one tourist board.''

Mr Charles Currie, the Isle of Arran's tourism manager, said he felt

the island could merge with Ayrshire, with its largely coastal tourism

product, but that inclusion with Dumfries and Galloway would ''dilute

the product with something completely different''. He warned that if the

purpose of the STB's restructuring was to increase private sector

funding, it would not achieve this by alienating trade members.

If the 32 ATBs at present are reduced to less than a quarter of that

number, a question mark will inevitably hang over tourism jobs in

Scotland.

The areas covered by the proposed boards:

1. Orkney, Shetland, Ross and Cromarty, Caithness and Sutherland,

Skye, Western Isles, Aviemore area, Inverness, Fort William.

2. Moray, Banff and Buchan, Gordon, Aberdeen, and Kincardine and

Deeside.

3. Perthshire, Angus, Dundee, and Fife.

4. Argyll, Cowal and Bute, and Loch Lomond, Stirling and Trossachs.

5. Glasgow and Clyde Valley.

6. Edinburgh, East Midlothian, Forth Valley, and Borders.

7. Ayrshire and Arran, and Dumfries and Galloway.