Ecology - penmanshiel-windfarm.co.uk 2... · 8-1 Volume 2: Main Report Chapter 8: Ecology 8 Ecology...

Penmanshiel Wind Farm RES

8-1 Volume 2: Main Report

Chapter 8: Ecology

8 Ecology Introduction and Overview

8.1 This chapter describes and evaluates the current nature conservation interest of the site, presents the mitigation measures incorporated in the proposed Penmanshiel Wind Farm design, and assesses the predicted residual effects. By its nature ecology is closely inter-linked with a number of environmental topics which are more fully addressed in other chapters. Cross-references are made where appropriate, but it is worth noting that ornithological interests are considered in Chapter 9: Ornithology, hydrological issues are addressed in Chapter 11: Geology, Hydrology and Hydrogeology and Chapter 13: Forestry deals specifically with forestry issues.

8.2 The site is dominated by commercial conifer forest plantation and rolling farmland (predominantly comprising arable and improved pasture). The Broad Bog Burn, Blegdon Burn, Winding Burn and Harelaw Burn (and tributaries) are located within the site. The Howpark Burn flows along the south-eastern boundary and the Redclues Cleugh flows close to the north-western boundary. All these watercourses are within the catchment of the Eye Water; the Howpark Burn flows into the Eye Water some 500 m to the east of Grantshouse and the Redclues Cleugh flows into the Eye Water some 2.5 km north of Grantshouse (see Chapter 11: Geology, Hydrology and Hydrogeology).

8.3 The site boundary follows the edge of Penmanshiel Wood to the north-west and Winding Plantation to the south-east; both are listed on the Ancient Woodland Inventory. Elsewhere the site boundary generally follows agriculturally improved field boundaries or conifer forest plantation. The site is generally surrounded by a mosaic of rolling farmland and small woodland blocks criss-crossed by a network of burns. The exception is an extensive area of heath, marshy grassland, acid/neutral grassland and scrub to the north of the site on Greenside Hill and Meikle Black Law.

8.4 Harelawside is the only occupied dwelling within the site boundary, whilst the village of Grantshouse lies immediately south of the site. There are a number of scattered hamlets and farmsteads in the surrounding area.

Methodology

Policy and Guidance

8.5 The general methodology of the EIA takes account of the Scottish Planning Circular 3: The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2011. The 2011 Regulations consolidate, update, and replace Part II of the Environmental Impact Assessment (Scotland) Regulations 1999

8.6 This chapter pays regard to the requirements of, and advice given in:

• The EC Habitats Directive (Directive 92/43/EEC) as translated into UK law by the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended);

• Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, as amended (WCA);

• The Protection of Badgers Act 1992;

• Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004;

• The EC Water Framework Directive (Directive 2000/60/EC) with regard to Groundwater Dependent Terrestrial Ecosystems;

• Consolidated Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) (February 2010);

• Planning Advice Note (PAN) 60: Planning for Natural Heritage;

• Nature Conservation: Implementation in Scotland of the Habitats and Birds Directives: Scottish Executive Circular 6/1995 as amended (June 2000);

• Scottish Executive Guidance on Protected Species (SE, 20011);

• Scottish Borders Council Structure Plan Policies (N1 Local Biodiversity Action Plan, N2 International Sites, N3 National Sites, N4 Precautionary Principle, N5 Local Biodiversity Action, N6 Environmental Impact and N7 Protection of Nature Conservation Interest);

• Scottish Borders Council Local Plan Policies (G1 Quality Standards for New Developments, G8 Development outwith Development Boundaries, NE1 International Nature Conservation Sites, NE2 National Nature Conservation Sites, NE3 Local Biodiversity and NE4 Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows);

• The UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UK BAP);

• The Scottish Biodiversity List (SBL);

• The Scottish Borders Local Biodiversity Action Plan (LBAP);

• Scottish Borders Council Supplementary Planning Guidance for Biodiversity2;

• Land Use Planning System - SEPA Guidance Note 4: Planning Guidance on Wind Farm Developments; and

• Good Practice during Wind Farm Construction (Scottish Renewables et al, October 20103)

8.7 Baseline surveys follow nationally recognised guidelines4 and the ecological impact assessment takes into account the recognised Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management guidelines5 (the “IEEM Guidelines”).

The Scoping Process

8.8 The initial scope of this assessment was derived from a general knowledge of wind farm/ecology interactions and the potential for nature conservation receptors to be significantly affected, combined with a desk study and consultation exercise.

1 European Protected Species, Development Sites and the Planning System: Interim guidance for local authorities on

licensing arrangements. Scottish Executive 2001.

2 http://www.scotborders.gov.uk/pdf/18498.pdf

3http://www.snh.org.uk/pdfs/strategy/renewables/Good%20practice%20during%20windfarm%20construction.pdf

4 Institute of Environmental Assessment (1995) Guidelines for Baseline Ecological Assessment

5 Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (2006) Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United

Kingdom


Volume 2: Main Report 8-2 Chapter 8: Ecology

8.9 The proposed scope of the ecology surveys was initially detailed in a Scoping Request to Scottish Borders Council (SBC) (27 November 2009). SBC and Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) provided opinions on the proposed methodology, the programme of proposed ecological surveys and the proposed development in responses dated 11 January 2010 (SBC) and 11 December 2009 (SNH). SNH also noted that the site lies within Zone 1 of their Strategic Locational Guidance – an area of low natural heritage sensitivity6.

8.10 SNH indicated that the scope of works should include:

• Methods of forest clearance, details of how timber is to be disposed of and outline proposals in the EIA for managing the land post-construction to improve its nature conservation value;

• Phase 1 Habitat Survey and National Vegetation Classification (NVC) survey of any important semi-natural habitats encountered on the development site;

• Any secondary effects on vegetation interests should be considered, assessed and any mitigation proposals presented in the ES; and

• An assessment of impacts upon European Protected Species (EPS), including otters and bats.

8.11 The scoping response from the SBC Ecology Officer indicated that the assessment should be informed by reference to SBC’s Supplementary Planning Guidance for Biodiversity, the Scottish Borders LBAP and Borders Species and Habitats of Conservation Concern (available from The Wildlife Information Centre [TWIC]7). The scope of works should additionally include:

• An assessment of impacts upon badgers, water vole and red squirrel;

• Information on habitat corridors and links to local habitat network;

• Details of how avoidance, mitigation and compensation are to be implemented;

• Proposals for the long-term management of habitats and species; and

• Details of any proposed off-site planting to compensate for any felling of woodland on the site.

8.12 A meeting was held with SNH Area Officer (Anne Brown) and SBC Ecology Officer (Dr Andy Tharme) on 16 December 2010 to discuss the scope of ecological works and preliminary results of ecological studies undertaken.

8.13 Further meetings were held with the SBC Ecology Officer on 13 April 2011 and 8 June 2011 to discuss off-site compensatory woodland planting (the latter meeting including representatives of the Borders Forest Trust and Scottish Agricultural College).

Desk Study

8.14 Baseline data on the nature conservation interest of the site and its surroundings, including information on designated nature conservation sites8 and protected species records were sought from the following sources:

6 http://www.snh.gov.uk/policy-and-guidance/policy-documents/document/?category_code=Policy&topic_id=1122

7 The Wildlife Information centre is the Biological Records Centre for Lothian and Borders

8 e.g. Statutory designated sites include European designated Special Protection Areas (SPAs), Special Areas of

Conservation (SACs), Ramsar sites, nationally designated Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) and Local Nature

Reserves (LNRs). Non-statutory designated sites include Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs), Local

Biodiversity Sites (LBSs), Local Wildlife Sites, Scottish Wildlife Trust (SWT) Reserves, SWT Wildlife Sites, Borders Wetland Inventory

Sites and woodland listed on the Ancient Woodland Inventory (AWI).

• Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) website (http://www.jncc.gov.uk/) – accessed June 2011;

• SNH Site Link website (http://gateway.snh.gov.uk) – accessed June 2011;

• The National Biodiversity Network website (http://data.nbn.org.uk/) (NBN Gateway) – accessed June 2011;

• TWIC provided information regarding local “non-statutory” designations, areas on the Ancient Woodland Inventory and notable and protected species9- consulted November 2010;

• Scottish Borders Badger Group – consulted December 2010;

• The Tweed Foundation provided information relating to fisheries interests in July 2011; and

• Large-scale 1:10,000 Ordnance Survey (OS) maps in conjunction with colour 1:25,000 OS map (to determine the presence of ponds and other features of nature conservation interest).

8.15 Aerial web-based photos10 were used to identify the suitability of habitats for roosting, commuting and foraging bats within 10km of the site boundary in all directions.

8.16 A 2km search area from the boundary of the site was specified when requesting baseline data, which was increased to 10km with regard to bat roost records received from TWIC. Desk-based research was undertaken to identify any possible receptors outside of this zone, for example, areas which are hydrologically linked to the site outside the 2km search area. Since there is no operational Local Bat Group, TWIC was the main source of information relating to bats. These distances were considered adequate in terms of mobility of species outside the site boundary which could be affected by the proposed wind farm.

8.17 Further information relevant to the scoping process, the evaluation of the nature conservation features that could be affected by the development and the assessment of its effects upon them, was obtained through searches of internet sources (e.g. UKBAPs, LBAPs) and the relevant published literature (i.e. relevant guidance documents and scientific papers).

Result of the Scoping Process

8.18 The net result of the consultations and collation of baseline data was a scope that encompassed the following:

• Consideration of how the development may affect the ecological interest features of nearby statutory and non-statutory designated sites of nature conservation importance;

• An Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey and a range of surveys for protected species that may be present at the site (bats, otter, great crested newt, water vole, badger, red squirrel and reptiles);

• An assessment of the impacts of construction, operation and decommissioning of the wind farm upon protected species and sensitive habitats (such as watercourses, wetlands, woodlands) and design of appropriate mitigation if impacts are predicted to occur;

• Consideration of how the development would affect habitats and species identified in the UK BAP and LBAP, together with Borders Species and Habitats of Conservation Concern, as identified by TWIC;

• Incorporation of habitat management / enhancement objectives;

9 Including Borders Species and Habitats of Conservation Concern.

10 http://www2.getmapping.com/

http://www.jncc.gov.uk/

http://gateway.snh.gov.uk/

http://data.nbn.org.uk/



Chapter 8: Ecology

• Identification of a mechanism for compensatory woodland planting; and

• Identification of the need for any ecological survey / monitoring prior to or during construction and / or operation.

Field Survey Methods

8.19 Full details of the ecological surveys undertaken are provided in Appendix 8.1 (Baseline Ecology (Excluding Bats) and Breeding Birds 2009) and Appendix 8.2 (Bat Surveys 2010) and survey dates and standard guidance documents referred to are provided in Table 8.1. The survey area covered an appropriate area around the site boundary, depending upon the ecological feature being surveyed and landowner access as described in Table 8.1.

Table 8.1: Ecological Surveys Undertaken and Survey Dates

Ecological Survey Date (s) Surveyor(s) and Methodology

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey (included site boundary and habitats directly adjacent to site boundary as far as access allowed - see Appendix 8.1 and Figure 8.2).

October 2009 3 September 2010 12 November 2010 The October and November survey dates are generally sub-optimal for Phase 1 habitat survey, but considered to be acceptable on this site due to the nature of the habitats present.

Ecology Consulting (original site boundary plus 500m buffer where access was permitted). Jenny Sneddon MSc MIEEM (Amec E&I, Consultant Ecologist). Extended site boundary area around Harelawside plus 500m buffer where access was permitted). Both Phase 1 surveys followed standard guidance11 12. In addition the October 2009 survey (which includes all areas where turbines are proposed to be located) included identification (but not detailed mapping) of the dominant NVC habitats13 14 15 16

Great Crested Newt Survey (included six ponds within the site and a surrounding zone of 500 m,

Presence : Absence Survey (2010): Visit One 21 April 2011

Jenny Sneddon, MSc MIEEM and Rachel Finan MSc Graduate Member of IEEM. A Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) was

11 JNCC, (2007), Handbook for Phase 1 habitat survey - a technique for environmental audit, Revised reprint 2003,

reprinted 2007, 8 pages A4 softback, ISBN 0 86139 636 7

12 Sniffer (2009) WFD 95 – A Functional Wetland Typology for Scotland

(http://www.sepa.org.uk/science_and_research/what_we_do/biodiversity/wetlands.aspx)

13 Rodwell J S (1991). British Plant Communities: Volume 1 Woodlands and Scrub. Cambridge University Press,

Cambridge

14 Rodwell J S (1992). British Plant Communities: Volume 2 Mires and Heaths. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

15 Rodwell J S (1992). British Plant Communities: Volume 3 Grasslands and Montane Communities. Cambridge

University Press, Cambridge

16 Rodwell J S (1995). British Plant Communities: Volume 4 Aquatic Communities, Swamps and tall-Herb Fens.

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

17 Oldham R.S., Keeble J., Swan M.J.S. & Jeffcote M. (2000) Evaluating the suitability of habitat for the great crested

newt (Triturus cristatus). Herpetelogical Journal, Vol. 10 pp.143-155

18 English Nature (2001). Great Crested Newt Mitigation Guidelines. English Nature, Peterborough


identified as being suitable to potentially support this species – see Appendix 8.1 and Figure 8.3).

Visit Two 12 May 2011 Visit Three 18 May 2011 Visit Four 9 June 2011

calculated in accordance with standard guidance17. The subsequent survey followed standard guidance18 19.

Bat Surveys (included suitable habitat within the site boundary – see Appendix 8.2 and Figure 8.4).

Activity Transects (2010): Visit One- 2nd and 5th June; Visit Two- 22nd July; Visit Three- 20th August; and Visit Four- 24th September

Peter Leach, independent ecologist. The survey followed adopted standard guidance20 21. The level of survey effort was based upon the guidance in place at the time22 adapted to reflect the emerging findings from each survey visit.

Otter Survey (included all suitable habitats within the site and extended to a minimum of 250 m from proposed turbine locations and watercourse crossing points – see Appendix 8.1 and Figure 8.3).

1 & 2 September 2010 Jenny Sneddon, MSc MIEEM and Joanne Ellam MSc, Graduate Member of IEEM (both AMEC E&I Consultant Ecologists). The survey followed standard guidance23.

Water Vole Survey (included all suitable habitats and extended a minimum of 100 m from proposed turbine locations and watercourse crossing points – see Appendix 8.1 and Figure 8.3).

1 & 2 September 2010. Jenny Sneddon, MSc MIEEM and Joanne Ellam MSc, Graduate Member of IEEM (both AMEC E&I Consultant Ecologists). The survey followed standard guidance24.

Red Squirrel (included all suitable habitats and extended a minimum of 100 m from proposed turbine locations where accessible - see Appendix 8.1 and Figure 8.3).

21 April 2011 Jenny Sneddon, MSc MIEEM (Amec E&I, Consultant Ecologist). The survey followed standard guidance25.

Badger Surveys (included all suitable habitats within the site and extended to a minimum of 100 m from proposed turbine locations and access tracks) – see Appendix 8.1 and Figure 8.3 (NB sensitive information regarding the location of badgers setts is excluded on

3 September 2010 2 October 2010 12 November 2010

Jenny Sneddon MSc MIEEM (Amec E&I, Consultant Ecologist). The survey followed accepted standard practice26.

19 Langton T, Beckett C and Foster J (2001). Great Crested Newt Conservation Handbook. Froglife, Suffolk 20 Bat Surveys – Good Practice Guidelines, Bat Conservation Trust, 2007

21 Mitchell-Jones, A. J. & McLeish, A. P. (Eds) 2004 The Bat Workers’ Manual (3rd Edition)

22 Natural England Technical Information Note TIN051 - Bats and onshore wind turbines Interim guidance First edition 11

February 2009 (http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/C245244.pdf)

23 Chanin, P. 2003. Monitoring the Otter Lutra lutra. Conserving Natura 2000 Rivers Monitoring Series No. 10. English

Nature: Peterborough

24 Strachan, R. & Moorhouse, T. (2006). Water Vole Conservation handbook, Wildlife Conservation Research Unit

25 Gurnell J, Lurz P and Pepper H (2009). Practical Techniques for Surveying and Monitoring Squirrels. Forestry Commission, Surrey

http://www.sepa.org.uk/science_and_research/what_we_do/biodiversity/wetlands.aspx

http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/C245244.pdf

http://www.forestry.gov.uk/PDF/fcpn011.pdf/$FILE/fcpn011.pdf




welfare grounds – this has been provided in a confidential annex to SBC and SNH). Reptile Surveys (included all suitable habitats within the site boundary– see Appendix 8.1 and Figure 8.3).

Presence : Absence Survey (2010): Visit One - 26th & 27th July; Visit Two - 2nd and 3rd August; Visit Three - 5th August; Visit Four - 18th August; Visit Five - 9th & 10th September; Visit Six - 14th & 16th September; Visit Seven - 6th & 7th October

Peter Leach, independent ecologist The survey followed accepted standard practice 27

Assessment Methodology

8.20 The assessment of the significance of predicted impacts on ecological receptors is based on both the ‘value’ of a receptor and the nature and magnitude of the effect that the development will have on it. Effects on biodiversity may be direct (e.g. the loss of species or habitats), or indirect (e.g. effects due to noise, dust or disturbance, on receptors located within or outside the application area).

Valuation of Receptors

8.21 The evaluation methodology has been adapted from the IEEM Guidelines5. A key consideration in assessing the effects of any development on flora and fauna is to define the areas of habitat and the species that need to be considered. This requires the identification of a potential zone of influence, which is defined as those areas and resources that may be affected by biophysical changes caused by project activities, however remote from the site.

8.22 In identifying these receptors, it is important to recognise that a development can affect flora and fauna directly (e.g. the land-take required) and indirectly, by affecting land beyond the development site (e.g. through noise generation or hydrological impacts). The approach that has been undertaken throughout this EIA process is to identify ‘valued ecological receptors’ (species and habitats that are both valued in some way and could be affected by the proposed development – as explained more fully in the remaining paragraphs of this section), and separately, to consider legally protected species.

8.23 It is impractical for an assessment of the ecological effects of a development to consider every species and habitat that may be affected; instead it should focus on valued ecological receptors. These are species and habitats that are both valued in some way and could be affected by the proposed development. Where there is no potential for valued ecological receptors to be affected significantly, it is not necessary for them to be considered.

8.24 The value of species populations and habitats is assessed with reference to:

26 Surveying Badgers, An Occasional Publication of the Mammal Society No. 9 (Harris, Cresswell and Jefferies, 1989)

27 Reptile Survey (1999). An Introduction to planning, conducting and interpreting surveys for snake and lizard

conservation. Froglife Advice Sheet 10

• Their importance in terms of ‘biodiversity conservation’ value (which relates to the need to conserve representative areas of different habitats and the genetic diversity of species populations);

• Any social benefits that species and habitats deliver (e.g. relating to enjoyment of flora and fauna by the public); and

• Any economic benefits that they provide.

8.25 Both species’ populations and habitats have been valued using the following scale: International; National (UK); Regional; District; Local; Less than Local. The approach taken in this assessment is that a species population that is considered to be of District or greater importance in biodiversity conservation terms is considered to be a valued ecological receptor. Therefore, if a species population is considered to be of local value or less, the proposed development will not have a significant effect on the receptor in question. Exceptions are if the species population has been identified as having a high social or economic value or if the species is legally protected.

8.26 A similar approach is adopted for habitats i.e. if a habitat is considered to be of local value or less, the proposed development will not have a significant effect on the receptor in question. The exception to this would be if the habitat has economic or social value (e.g. an open space that is used extensively for informal recreation by local people, where the area’s wildlife is an important contribution to this value). Species’ populations and habitats have been valued using the scale set out in Table 8.2, with examples provided of criteria used when defining the level of value.

Table 8.2: Nature Conservation valuations together with examples of the criteria used to define the value of ecological receptors

Level of Value Examples of Criteria

International An internationally important site e.g. Special Protection Area (SPA), Special Area of Conservation (SAC), Ramsar (or a site proposed for, or considered worthy of such designation); A regularly occurring substantial population of an internationally important species (listed on Annex IV of the Habitats Directive).

National (UK) A nationally designated site e.g. Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), or a site proposed for, or considered worthy of such designation; A viable area of a habitat type listed in Annex 1 of the Habitats Directive or of smaller areas of such habitat which are essential to maintain the viability of a larger whole; A regularly occurring substantial population of a nationally important species, e.g. listed on Schedules 5 & 8 of the 1981 Wildlife and Countryside Act; A feature identified as a priority species/habitat in the UK BAP.

Regional (Scotland) Areas of internationally or nationally important habitats which are degraded but are considered readily restored; A regularly occurring, locally significant population of a species listed as being nationally scarce.

District (Scottish Borders)

Viable areas of priority habitat identified in the LBAP or smaller areas of such habitat which are essential to maintain the viability of a larger habitat as a whole; A site designated as a non-statutory designated site e.g. Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC), Scottish Wildlife Trust Reserve/Wildlife Site, Borders Wetland Inventory Site, or a site listed on the Ancient Woodland Inventory (AWI) or Semi-natural Ancient Woodland Inventory (SNAWI); A regularly occurring, substantial population of a nationally scarce species, including species listed on the UK and Local BAPs e.g. common frog (a UK BAP species).



Chapter 8: Ecology

Level of Value Examples of Criteria

Local (site and its vicinity, including areas of habitats contiguous with or linked to those on site)

Areas of internationally or nationally important habitats which are degraded and have little or no potential for restoration; A good example of a common or widespread habitat in the local area, e.g. those listed as broad habitats on the LBAP; Species of national or local importance, but which are only present very infrequently or in very low numbers within the subject area.

Less than local Areas of heavily modified or managed vegetation of low species diversity or low value as habitat to species of nature conservation interest; Common and widespread species.

8.27 It should be noted that the approach of this assessment is to consider the value of the site for the

species under consideration, rather than the nature conservation importance of the species itself. To illustrate this rationale with reference to Table 8.2, while otter as a species could be considered to be of international value by virtue of being listed on Annex IV of the Habitats Directive, the value of a site with a small and shallow water course which was only used very occasionally by a single otter would be limited28. Therefore, in this case, nature conservation importance of that site would be assessed as being of ‘Local’ value for otter.

8.28 Therefore, while the importance of the species present is taken into account, in order to assess nature conservation importance, the number of individuals of that species using the site, and the nature and level of this use, is also taken into account. An assessment is then made of the value of the site to that species, based upon professional judgement.

Legal Protection of Species

8.29 Notwithstanding what has been said above, there is also a need to identify all legally protected species that could be affected by the proposed development in order that measures can be taken to ensure that contravention of the relevant legislation is avoided. This may include the adoption of mitigation which is acceptable to SNH. By implication, therefore, it is inappropriate to assess the significance of effects within the context of species’ legal protection – measures to avoid or reduce effects on such species are legally required to avoid contravention of the law, otherwise the development cannot be taken forward.

8.30 In certain situations, however, adherence to measures that are designed to ensure that the law is not contravened may not prevent a significant effect relating to a species’ biodiversity conservation, social or economic value (i.e. in the context of the species being a ‘valued ecological receptor’ – see above).

8.31 Even where a protected species is not considered to be a valued ecological receptor, for example badgers which are protected on animal welfare grounds rather than nature conservation value, the measures that will be taken to ensure compliance with the legislation are documented within this chapter.

Nature and Magnitude of Effect

8.32 Effects can be permanent or temporary; direct or indirect; adverse or beneficial, and can be cumulative. These factors are brought together to assess the magnitude of the effect on the

28 The exception may be if the site was located outside the known range for the species.

‘conservation status’ of the particular valued ecological receptors, and on the ‘integrity’ of the habitats that support them:

• Integrity is the coherence of the ecological structure and functions of a site or habitat that enables it to sustain its plant and animal communities and populations

• Conservation status is the ability of a habitat, a plant or animal community or population to maintain its distribution and/or extent/size.

8.33 Conservation status is therefore largely determined by the extent to which integrity is maintained. It follows that habitats may or may not be valued ecological receptors in their own right.

8.34 Wherever possible, the magnitude of the effect is quantified. Professional judgement is then used to assign the effects on the receptors to one of four classes of magnitude, defined in Table 8.3.

Table 8.3: Definition of Magnitude Table

Magnitude Definition

High A permanent or long-term effect on the integrity of a site or conservation status of a habitat, species assemblage/community, population or group. If adverse, this is likely to threaten its sustainability; if beneficial, this is likely to enhance its conservation status.

Medium A permanent or long-term effect on the integrity of a site or conservation status of a habitat, species assemblage/community, population or group. If adverse, this is unlikely to threaten its sustainability; if beneficial; this is likely to be sustainable but is unlikely to enhance its conservation status.

Low A short-term but reversible effect on the integrity of a site or conservation status of a habitat, species assemblage/community, population or group that is within the range of variation normally experienced between years.

Negligible A short-term but reversible effect on the integrity of a site or conservation status of a habitat, species assemblage/community, population or group that is within the normal range of annual variation.

Significance of Effects

8.35 The significance of an effect is largely a product of the value of the ecological receptor and the magnitude of the effect on it, moderated by professional judgement. Table 8.4 illustrates a matrix based on these two parameters which is used for guidance in the assessment of significance. It should be noted that in terms of the EIA Regulations, it is only impacts that are likely to have significant effects that require detailed assessment. Those effects which are shaded in Table 8.4 equate to those considered significant under the EIA Regulations with the others constituting an insignificant effect. The use of the category of ‘minor’ is used in acknowledgement that there are instances whereby there may be an effect, albeit that this is not likely to be significant. It is also used to facilitate assessment of cumulative effects e.g. where cumulatively several minor effects could be significant.



Table 8.4: Evaluation of Effects Matrix

Magnitude of Impact Value of Receptor

High Medium Low Negligible

International Major Major Minor Negligible National Major Major Minor Negligible Regional Major Major Minor Negligible District Major Minor Minor Negligible Local Minor Minor Negligible Negligible Less than Local Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Key Significant in terms of the EIA Regulations Not Significant in terms of the EIA Regulations

Baseline Information

8.36 Figure 8.1 identifies the boundaries of statutory and non-statutory sites of nature conservation interest within 2km of the site boundary. Figures 8.2 to 8.8 show the results of ecological field surveys carried out for the proposed wind farm. Ecology baseline reports are provided in Appendices 8.1 and 8.2.

Nature Conservation Designations

8.37 There are a number of internationally and nationally designated nature conservation sites within a 2km radius of the site boundary. In addition TWIC provided information on the location of one large potential Local Biodiversity Site (pLBS)29 within the site boundary and one non-statutory SWT Site located 1.9 km north-west of the site at its closest point. The Council’s Ecologist, in his scoping response, provided information relating to Borders Wetland Inventory Sites (BWIS) and Natural Heritage Sites (classified for the purpose of this assessment as pLBSs), both local designations (further information on the reason for designation of these sites was requested from TWIC, but none was available). Two areas listed on the Ancient Woodland Inventory were also recorded within the 2km search area. Details of all these sites are provided in Table 8.5.

Table 8.5: Statutory and Non-Statutory nature conservation sites potentially connected to the site

Site Name Description Possible effects resulting from proposed wind farm

Pease Bridge Glen SSSI This SSSI is notified for its diverse, intact ancient woodlands and its nationally important bryophyte flora. The site comprises steep valley woodland, ancient and well-documented throughout the last 500 years. The woodland has vascular plant communities typical of northern oakwoods which grade from acid, species-poor upland communities to more diverse oak/ash/elm communities.

Located 1.7 km north-west of the site at its closest point. Connected via the Pease Burn which drains the north-west of the proposed wind farm via the unnamed watercourse that flows through Redclues Cleugh. Effects possible, included for further assessment.

St Abb’s Head to Fast Castle SAC

Designated on account of vegetated sea cliffs, which are steep slopes fringing hard

Located 1.8km north-east of the site at its closest point. There is no

29 The potential LBS status means that it has not been assessed and, as such, its nature conservation interest is unknown.


or soft coasts, created by past or present marine erosion, and supporting a wide diversity of vegetation types with variable maritime influence. St Abb’s Head to Fast Castle SAC includes sections of high cliffs and rich vegetated areas in more sheltered localities. While some sections are dominated by large seabird colonies which restrict the vegetation in their vicinity, elsewhere extensive vegetated areas are found. A very high number of flowering plant species are present, including many of local distribution, reflecting the range of micro-habitat conditions.

pathway for effects on the interest features of this site. Site scoped out of further assessment.

St Abb’s Head to Fast Castle SPA

This is a 10 km stretch of cliffs backed by areas of grassland, open water, flushes and splash zone communities. The site is important for large numbers of breeding seabirds, especially guillemots and kittiwakes, which feed outside the SPA in surrounding marine areas.

Bird interests are addressed in Chapter 9: Ornithology.

St Abb’s Head to Fast Castle SSSI

This site extends for over 10 km along the Berwickshire coast from Lansey Bank, 2.5 km west of Fast Castle Head, to Starney Bay, just north of the village of St Abbs. This site is notified for its geological, botanical and breeding seabird interests. The series of sea cliffs and wave-cut platforms present an outstanding diversity of habitats including scrub woodland, tall herb grassland, coastal grassland, coastal heath, running and standing water, flushes, rock face seepage, and splash zone communities on a variety of rock and soil types derived from Lower Old Red Sandstone andesites, marl and ash beds, and strongly folded Silurian greywacke, shale and grits. Of particular interest is the coastal grassland and heath. Over 360 plant species have been recorded from the site including several which are rare in south east Scotland or are at the edge of their British distribution.

Located 1.8km north-east of the site at its closest point. There is no pathway for effects on the interest features of this site. Site scoped out of further assessment.

Drone Moss SSSI This SSSI has remained relatively undisturbed and represents the best example of raised bog in Berwickshire. It is of further interest due to its extreme easterly and therefore relatively dry location. The site exhibits a typical raised bog structure, characterised by a pronounced cupola or dome with a steep edge (rand) and birch/willow colonised peripheral lagg

Located 1.4 km south-east of the site at its closest point. There is no direct connectivity between the site and this SSSI, which lies close to the head of the Howpark Burn into which watercourses from the proposed wind farm site flow. Site scoped out of further assessment



Chapter 8: Ecology


burn. Due to the lack of disturbance at this site, in places the dome structure reaches some 3 m in height above the outflow burn.

Old Cambus Quarry SSSI

Notified solely for its geological interest. Located 1.8 km north-west of the site at its closest point. There is no direct connectivity between the site and this SSSI which is, in any case, notified solely for its geological interest. Site scoped out of further assessment

Berwickshire Coast (Intertidal) SSSI

This is an intertidal site extending between Mean High Water Springs and Mean Low Water Springs, including offshore intertidal rocks and islets. The site supports a complex of extensive and diverse littoral reef habitats of international importance associated with good examples of partly submerged sea caves.

Located some 1.9 km north of the site at its closest point. There is no direct connectivity between the site and this SSSI. Site scoped out of further assessment

Pease Dean Reserve - SWT Local Wildlife Site

This is a SWT reserve which has two distinct arms: Pease Burn and Tower Burn. The area beside Pease Burn is an open valley with grassland, gorse and alder. Upstream from where the two burns merge, the valleys become steeper and more wooded. Tower Burn has extensive areas of mixed woodland which supports attractive ground flora. Part of the reserve is included with the Pease Bridge Glen SSSI

Located 1.9 km north-west of the site at its closest point. Connected via the Pease Burn which drains the north-west of the proposed wind farm. Effects possible, included for further assessment.

Penmanshiel Moor pLBS

No further information provided. Within Site. This site extends over a large part of the proposed wind farm site. During a meeting in April 2011 with the SBC Ecology Officer (Dr Andy Tharme) it was agreed that the non-statutory pLBS “designation” for this and other sites has no supporting evidence. Effects possible, included for further assessment.

Redclues Cleugh Oakwood Cleuch pLBS

No further information provided. Directly adjacent to the north-west boundary of the site. Connected with site via an un-named burn which flows through this cleugh (valley) Effects possible, included for further assessment.

Aikieside Wood pLBS No further information provided. Located approximately 1km north-west of the site at its closest point. Connected via the Pease Burn which drains the north-west of the


proposed wind farm. Effects possible, included for further assessment.

Old CambusTownhead Pond pLBS

No further information provided. Located approximately 500 m to the north of the site at its closest point. No connectivity (hydrologically) between the site and this pond. Site scoped out of further assessment.

Old Cambus Moss former raised bog pLBS

No further information provided. Located adjacent to eastern boundary of site. Separated from site by a road, but potential connectivity with Penmanshiel Moss. Effects possible, included for further assessment.

Winding Burn Grassland pLBS

No further information provided. Within Site. Effects possible, included for further assessment.

Broad Bog Lowland Raised Bog Borders Wetland Inventory Site (BWIS)

No further information provided. Within Site. Effects possible, included for further assessment.

Houndslow West Wood SWT Wildlife Site

No further information provided. 1km to the north. No connectivity (hydrologically) between the site and the SWT Wildlife Site. Site scoped out of further assessment.

Penmanshiel Wood ancient woodland site of semi-natural origin

No further information provided. Located immediately to the west of the site boundary. Connected via the Pease Burn which drains the north-west of the proposed wind farm. Effects possible, included for further assessment.

Winding Hill Plantation ancient woodland site of semi-natural origin

No further information provided. Within site Effects possible, included for further assessment.

Protected Species

8.38 A search at TWIC revealed a number of notable species records within the search area, including:

• Conifers (Scot’s pine and juniper);

• Flowering plants (purple milk-vetch, Scottish scurvy grass, harebell, heather, northern hawk’s-beard, maiden pink, wall whitlow grass, eyebright, black-bindweed, common cudweed, red hemp-nettle, heath cudweed, smooth rupturewort, bluebell, twinflower, annual beard-grass, slender-leaved pondweed, intermediate wintergreen, northern dock, hairy stonecrop, charlock, corn spurrey, field woundwort, slender trefoil and wood bitter-vetch);

• Stag’s-horn clubmoss;



• Various mosses, liverworts and lichens;

• Butterflies (northern brown argus, small heath, small blue and grayling);

• Various beetles (Coleoptera) and true flies (Diptera);

• Smooth stonewort;

• Reptiles (adder, common lizard and slow-worm);

• Amphibians (common toad); and

• Mammals (otter and badger).

8.39 TWIC had no bat records within 2 km of the site. Within 10km there were four common pipistrelle records and one brown long-eared bat record. The nearest bat record was a common pipistrelle 6.1 km from the site.

8.40 The Tweed Foundation advised that there are salmon, trout, minnows, stone loach and lamprey present at Grantshouse in the Eye Water, which flows through Grantshouse following the A1 and the East Coast mainline railway to the south of the site. There are no survey data for other watercourses including the Pease Burn and the Howpark Burn; however, in its response, the Tweed Foundation suggests that the Howpark Burn may support trout.

8.41 A search of the NBN gateway website returned records of common frog, slow worm, badger and red squirrel within the 10km square (tetrad) in which the site is located.

8.42 Given the nature of the habitats and plant communities present within the site it was considered that sufficiently detailed botanical information was gathered during the Phase 1 Habitat Surveys of the site to assess the botanical value of the site. A more detailed botanical survey (NVC) was not deemed to be necessary.

8.43 Taking into account the scoping response, results of our desk assessment and the nature of the habitats present on the site, it was considered that the initially proposed scope of surveys (i.e. Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey, great crested newt, bats, otter, water vole, red squirrel, reptiles and badger) would be sufficient to form the basis of the ecological impact assessment and no other detailed surveys were considered necessary.

Local Biodiversity Action Plan

8.44 The Scottish Borders LBAP sets out 14 Habitat Action Plans (HAPs)30. A number of these habitats are present within (or directly adjacent to) the site and the assessment takes these into account (e.g. Coniferous Woodland, Marsh, Upland Heath, Grassland and Enclosed Farmland plus Rivers and Burns). Reference has also been made to the Scottish Borders Species of Conservation Concern in this assessment.

Field Survey Results

8.45 The full Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey and protected species (excluding bats) survey results are provided in a Baseline Ecology Report within Appendix 8.1 (this includes Target Notes [TNs]). Figure 8.2 shows Phase 1 Habitat Survey results and detailed Species Survey results are shown on Figure 8.3.

30 Habitat Actions Plans: Blanket Bog; Coniferous Woodland; Fens, Marsh, Swamp and Reedbed; Grassland and Enclosed

Farmland; Lowland Raised Bog; Maritime Cliff and Slope; Montane; Native Woodland; Rivers and Burns; Standing Open Water;

Upland Cleuch and Scrub Woodland; Upland Heath; Urban; Wood Pasture and Parkland.

The Bat Survey Report is included as Appendix 8.2 together with all bat survey figures (Figures 8.4 to 8.8).

8.46 A summary of the habitats identified within and adjacent to the site is provided in Table 8.6. The scientific names of species recorded are provided in Appendix 8.1 and are only included in the table below where no recognised English versions exist.

Table 8.6: Summary of Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Results

Habitat Description31

Coniferous Plantation Woodland

There is a large block of coniferous plantation on Penmanshiel Moor (189 ha) dominated by Sitka spruce (146 ha) with the remainder of the plantation comprising Scots pine (13 ha), European larch (4 ha), other pines (1 ha), broadleaves (7 ha) and open ground (18 ha). In addition to the main Penmanshiel woodland block, there are several smaller areas of woodland which contain productive conifers and will be affected by the development. These are Penmanshiel Moss (14 ha of mixed conifers), Old Cambus Wood (1 ha of Sitka spruce and broadleaves) and Purdie’s Grave and Lady’s Folly shelterbelts (5 ha of mixed conifers – Sitka spruce, Scots pine and European larch). In total the area of coniferous woodland affected by the development amounts to 207 ha).

Mixed Plantation Woodland

There are areas of mixed plantation woodland along field boundaries (e.g. TN 12 and 14). Trees present in these areas are a mixture of Sitka spruce, alder, grey willow and silver birch.

Semi-Natural Broadleaf Woodland

Semi-natural broad-leaved woodland is present in the north-west and the south-east of the survey area. “The Beeches” and “Windings Plantation” are located in the south-east corner of the site includes sycamore, beech, ash and rowan with occasional mature Scot’s pine (TNs 15 and 17). There is abundant wood rush, male fern, red campion and dog’s mercury in the ground flora. The semi-natural broadleaf woodland located in the north-west is part of Penmanshiel Wood and is dominated by oak and ash with wood rush dominant within the ground flora forming a dense carpet throughout the wood (TN 9). There is also locally abundant ground ivy, cock’s foot and common bent together with occasional fox glove, herb Robert and wood sorrel. The banks of this wooded area are steep and border the Redclues Cleugh watercourse. This broadly equates to the NVC Community W4, Betula pubescens - Molinia caerulea woodland.

Broadleaved Plantation Woodland

Broadleaved plantation woodland planted within neutral grassland was recorded along the banks of the Winding Burn (TN 16). The plantation comprises alder, rowan and silver birch with a ground flora, including abundant fox glove and Yorkshire fog, which forms a dense ground cover reaching 1m in height. Has a rather weak affinity to NVC Community W4 Betula pubescens - Molinia caerulea woodland. Birch and alder plantation woodland was also recorded as a narrow belt of wet woodland on the edge of Penmanshiel Moss (TN 1).

Dry Dwarf Shrub Heath

The rides running through the coniferous plantation on Penmanshiel Moor and areas to the north of the site are composed of dry dwarf shrub heath and support abundant heather. A peat study has been carried out (see Appendix 11.1) to determine the extent of peat deposits within the site. This reveals small areas of peat around Broad Bog which coincides to some extent with the presence of dry dwarf shrub heath, although it is mainly mapped as marshy grassland. It is likely that peat deposits were more

31 TN refers to Target Notes in the Phase 1 Habitat Survey (Figure 8.2) Protected Species TNs are designated with a “P” (see Figure 8.3)



Chapter 8: Ecology


extensive in the past and possibly supported both bog and heath vegetation, but agricultural improvements and the establishment of forest plantation are likely to have caused changes in the plant communities to those seen now. Broadly equates to NVC Community H12, Calluna vulgaris – Vaccinium myrtillus heath. In its present form, this habitat has limited botanical value due primarily to its isolation. However, it offers some connectivity to similar habitats within the area and is therefore of potential importance to species which may be commuting and/or foraging across the study area, including bats and reptiles.

Marshy Grassland

Areas of marshy grassland are commonly restricted to pond and watercourse margins where the NVC community M23 Juncus effusus / acutiflorus – Galium palustre rush-pasture is common. Most other areas of marshy grassland are dominated by NVC Communities MG9 Holcus lanatus – Deschampsia cespitosa grassland and MG10 Holcus lanatus – Juncus effusus rush-pasture. The exception is the area of marshy grassland at Moss Maw (TN 5), which supports abundant purple moor grass together with tufted hair grass, heather, heath rush and common bent. This equates to NVC community M25 Molinia caerulea – Potentilla erecta mire.

Dense and Scattered Scrub

Areas of dense continuous and scattered scrub habitat comprising, in the main, gorse were identified across the survey area (especially to the north of the site) and are commonly associated with watercourses. This habitat offers potential for providing connectivity within the area and is therefore of potential importance to species which may be commuting and/ or foraging across the study area. Broadly equates to NVC Community W23 Ulex europaeus – Rubus fruticosus scrub.

Swamp This is a small area comprising a former pond that seems to be drying out and is dominated by great reedmace with soft rush (TN 7). Broadly equates to NVC Community S12 Typha latifolia swamp.

Acid Flush This is located at the southern tip of Penmanshiel Moss supporting abundant soft and articulated rush with a bog moss understorey (TN 4). This is most closely associated with NVC plant community M6 Carex echinata – Sphagnum recurvum / auriculatum mire.

Acid Grassland A quite extensive area of unimproved acid grassland is located in the north of the survey area and outwith the site. This forms a mosaic with dry dwarf shrub heath, marshy grassland and dense scrub and supports abundant mat-grass and soft rush. There is some affinity with NVC Community U5 Nardus stricta – Galium saxatile grassland.

Semi-Improved Neutral Grassland

Small areas of semi-improved neutral grassland are located to the north of Moss Maw (TN 6) and in the north of the survey area (TN 10). These areas support abundant cocks’ foot, Yorkshire fog and white clover but also lesser quantities of heath rush, soft rush, bell heather and sweet vernal-grass. These have some affinity with NVC Communities MG1 Arrhenatherum elatius grassland and MG10 Holcus lanatus – Juncus effusus rush-pasture.

Arable Land There are several arable fields within the site boundary (including cereal, rape and fodder beet) and more were identified immediately surrounding the site boundary. The arable margins support a diverse range of grasses and herbs and generally equate to NVC Community MG1.

Improved Grassland

There are several improved fields within the site boundary and within the surrounding area. Improved grassland areas are sheep and cattle grazed with dominant species including abundant perennial rye grass, timothy, crested dog’s tail and white clover. These broadly equate to NVC


Community MG6 Lolium perenne – Cynosurus cristatus grassland or MG7 Lolium perenne leys and related grasslands. Improved grassland is of limited habitat value for protected species, however, may offer potential for ground nesting birds and foraging badger, should they occur in the wider area.

Boundary Features

The majority of the boundaries within the site comprise post and wire fencing although there are occasional stone walls, particularly to the south and west of the site. Some of the stone walls provide good crevices and potential cover for reptiles and hibernating amphibians. There are a small number of hedgerows around Harelawside and outwith the site itself.

Water Bodies Five ponds occur within the site boundary, and a further pond is located adjacent to the site boundary alongside the Harelaw Burn: Pond 1 (TN P5). This is a large pond, approximately 40 by 30m. At the time of survey there was pond weed covering the entire water surface. Ruderal vegetation surrounds the margins of this pond, and there is also an island in the middle of the pond with dense ruderal and bulrush cover. The sides of the pond are relatively steep (approximately 45°). There is a small wooded area in the north-west corner with semi-mature willow, alder and sycamore. The pond is surrounded by improved fields on three sides and there is a cottage garden at the south end of the pond.

Pond 2 (TN P4). This pond is surrounded by grazed semi-improved neutral grassland. It lies adjacent to the Harelaw Burn. At the time of survey (October 2010) there was little emergent vegetation. However, bulrush was abundant at the eastern end of the pond.

Pond 3 (TN P3). This pond is used to attract wildfowl for shooting. There were decoy ducks in the water and shooting butts surrounding the pond. The pond has potential to support newts; however its’ suitability is decreased by the presence of wildfowl. The pond is surrounded by marshy grassland with abundant rush and tufted hair grass. The banks of the pond have a shallow gradient which is suitable for amphibians (newts) with plenty of marginal vegetation suitable for egg laying. There is also suitable newt foraging and over-wintering habitat adjacent to the pond.

Pond 4 (TN P7). This pond is located in the corner of an improved field where it is surrounded by broadleaved plantation that runs along the edge of the field, offering suitable great crested newt habitat. Immediately surrounding the pond, there is marshy grassland vegetation including soft rush and tufted hair grass.

Pond 5 (TN P8). This area of standing water is located adjacent to Moss Maw. It is not a pond, rather the end of a man-made ditch but it was assessed as having potential to support great crested newt. The water survey was covered with vegetation, including bottle sedge and soft rush.

Pond 6 (TN P6). At the time of survey, there was no standing water in the pond and it has been mapped as swamp. There was a dense cover of moss species in the wet areas together with bulrush, soft rush and locally dominant nettles. This area is surrounded by coniferous plantation.

Watercourses Six burns and a number of drainage ditches traverse the site and ultimately flow into the Eye Water via the Howpark Burn. The Eye Water flows to the south and south-east of the site meeting the North Sea some 15 km to the south at Eyemouth:

1. The Howpark Burn (TN 22) is approximately 3m wide and




approximately 0.5m deep from the road through the woodland; however, it becomes narrower and shallower after this point, becoming 1.5m wide and 0.2m deep. The bottom substrate is rocky and the banks along the section of the watercourse after the woodland have dense gorse with grey willow and nettle. There are multiple possible otter holt/rest-up areas along this section of the watercourse.

2. The Harelaw Burn (TN 26) is approximately 2m wide and 0.2m deep. It runs through semi-natural broadleaf woodland. There is ash, beech and sycamore in the canopy and wood rush and dog’s mercury in the ground flora. The watercourse runs through a gorge where there are high-sided rock faces. There are multiple sites that could potentially be used by otters for laying up.

3. Blegdon Burn (TN 19) joins Broad Bog Burn at the southern side of the conifer plantation. It is very overgrown from the banks with 100% vegetation cover in places. The watercourse runs through steep sided banks through the conifer plantation. Soft rush, tufted hair grass and false oat grass are abundant along the watercourse banks. It is a narrow watercourse, approximately 0.5m wide and there is no water in places. This watercourse offers potential for otter and water vole; however, a mink scat was found which reduces the likelihood of water vole being present.

4. Broad Bog Burn (TN 18) runs below improved fields (probably through a drain) before surfacing as it enters the conifer plantation. Fairly steep sided ditch, heavily vegetated with soft rush, sharp flowered rush, cock’s foot, tufted hair grass, water mint and sweet vernal grass. The bank-side vegetation is approximately 1.5m in height. The watercourse is shallow averaging about 0.1m and is approximately 1m wide. The bottom substrate is comprised of stones and bank sides are composed of soil. There is often no visible open water due to abundant overhanging vegetation. Midway through the conifer plantation there is a culvert where the watercourse deepens and widens, reaching around 3m wide and 0.75m deep. The water is open (less overhanging vegetation) and slow flowing at this point with banks that are less steep. However, it becomes enclosed again after a few metres. The burn runs the whole length of the conifer plantation and, at the southern end, again becomes more open with less overhanging vegetation. It is very shallow at this point with only 1-2cm of water with a stony bottom. This watercourse offers potential habitat for both otter and water vole.

5. The upper reach of the Winding Burn (TN 21) runs through conifer plantation and is very overgrown with abundant soft rush and marsh thistle. This section offers suitable habitat for water vole. The middle section (TN 24) is choked with meadow sweet and soft rush but becomes suitable for water vole as it progresses through a broadleaf plantation. Bank tops provide ample cover and the ditch is approximately 30 cm wide and 15 - 30 cm deep. An old otter spraint was recorded at TN P2. The watercourse is slow moving and steep sided in this section. As it progresses further south (TN 25) the watercourse flattens out and widens to approximately 2 m. There are numerous boulders along the watercourse bed and the banks are steep, approximately 1 - 1.5 m high. The water is


shallow here, approximately 10 cm.

6. The Longstruther Burn (TN 20) flows into the Winding Burn and appears to be a manmade ditch, the sides of which are vegetated with soft rush, and is grazed up to the edges. The water channel is narrow and shallow, being approximately 0.25m wide and 2cm deep. It is considered to be suitable for both water vole and otter.

7. There is one un-named watercourse that follows the north-western boundary of the site through Redclues Cleugh and drains into the Pease Burn, which flows north for approximately 2.3 km to the North sea at Pease Bay (TN 30). The channel flows through steep sided wooded banks, is approximately 1m wide and 0.1m deep. It is quite fast flowing with pebbles and boulders on the watercourse bed. It is considered to be unsuitable for water vole but has good otter potential with many potential rest up areas recorded along the banks.

Bats

8.47 Full details of bat surveys undertaken are provided in Appendix 8.2, with only a summary provided in the following sections.

8.48 The site and study area contains reasonably well-connected foraging habitat such as woodland edge, semi-improved grassland, marshy grassland, watercourses and boundary features. Penmanshiel Wood, the Pease Burn Valley and wooded cleughs (steep-sided valleys) to the west and north-west of the site are considered likely to offer the most productive foraging habitat within the immediate vicinity of the site. There is reasonable habitat connectivity throughout the site and wider area.

8.49 There are limited bat roosting opportunities within the site due to the lack of mature trees and buildings, although there are occasional broad-leaved trees that have better potential for roosting bats (hollows, cracks, dead limbs and standing dead wood, loose bark). No sign of use by bats of these features was evident during the Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey or subsequent bat surveys.

8.50 There are also several buildings and structures to the west of the site at Penmanshiel farm and to the south east of the site at Harelawside, Renton Barns, Renton House and Howpark which have some potential for roosting bats.

8.51 The manual activity (transect) surveys revealed low levels of bat activity. The highest number of bat passes was recorded in the third visit (August) when a total of 17 bat passes were recorded (ten soprano pipistrelle, five common pipistrelle, one Myotis sp. and one unidentified). Six passes were recorded in the first survey (June/July), ten were recorded in the second (July) and a single pass was recorded in the final visit (September).

8.52 Common and soprano pipistrelle bats were by far the most frequently recorded bat species. The total number of soprano pipistrelle contacts recorded was 21, whilst common pipistrelle contacts totalled seven. The earliest common pipistrelle activity throughout all of the surveys was recorded 41 minutes after sunset during the August survey, and the earliest soprano pipistrelle was also 41 minutes after sunset during the August survey. Throughout the remaining surveys, the earliest activity was recorded over 60 minutes after sunset.

8.53 Two noctule passes were recorded during the July survey. The earliest record was 29 minutes after sunset.



Chapter 8: Ecology

8.54 The level of Myotis spp. activity was similarly low with only two records in July and one in August. The earliest record was 1 hr 25 minutes after sunset in August.

8.55 As a result of the low levels of activity recorded during the manual activity surveys and the lack of any evidence of bat roosts in the area, it was not considered necessary to carry out passive (often referred to as static) monitoring (Anabats).

8.56 Bat activity was low overall; no regular or major commuting routes were identified and most of the activity related to low-level foraging activity of one or two individuals at any one time. The earliest records for each species suggest that none were roosting nearby. Noctules are wide-ranging species and the two noctule records are likely to be one or two individuals foraging briefly over the site or, more likely, en-route to foraging grounds elsewhere.

Otter

8.57 No otter holts or resting places were identified in the survey, but all of the five flowing watercourses within the study area are considered to be suitable for foraging and commuting. Otter spraints were identified along the Howpark Burn and the tributary of the Howpark Burn (see Figure 8.3). In addition, the habitat corridors provided by the watercourses make it likely that they will be used by otter on occasions. Habitat within the site is generally of low potential for holts and/or resting sites. Exceptions are Redclues Cleugh and Howpark Burn which both offer suitable opportunities.

Great Crested Newt

8.58 The Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) for ponds 1-4 classified these as having ‘below average’ suitability for great crested newts while pond 6 was assessed as having ‘poor’ suitability for great crested newt32. Pond 5, located adjacent to Moss Maw (TN P8), was assessed as being of ‘average’ suitability for great crested newts; however, it was noted that the water levels in this pond had dropped significantly by June and some areas had become completely devoid of water, making the pond less suitable for the species.

8.59 No great crested newt records were returned from the presence/absence surveys undertaken at the ponds on site and, taking into account the HSI scores, it is considered that this species is currently absent from this site.

Reptiles

8.60 Although our survey was limited to determining presence/absence and it is not therefore possible to extrapolate the findings to provide a population estimate, it is of interest that a total of 37 adult common lizards and 101 juvenile common lizards were recorded. These were predominantly within marshy grassland at Moss Maw and Broad Bog, whilst occasional individuals were recorded along rides within the forest plantation (Figure 8.3). No adders or slow-worms were recorded.

Red Squirrel

8.61 No signs of any squirrel activity were recorded during the survey.

Badger

8.62 There is an abundance of suitable habitat for badger sett locations and foraging within the site and the surrounding area. The semi-natural broadleaf woodland and coniferous plantation bordering the

32 With reference to the National Amphibian and Reptile Recording Scheme (NARRS)

http://www.narrs.org.uk/Documents/nasdocuments/NAS%20form.pdf

site is regarded as offering the most suitable badger habitat together with the coniferous plantation on Penmanshiel Moor.

8.63 A total of 16 setts were recorded during the survey. These are concentrated in three locations and include a complex of setts which collectively is likely to form a main sett. Due to the possibility of persecution, the location of these setts is not included in this ES. However, this information has been passed separately to SBC and SNH in a confidential annex to the ES.

8.64 In addition to the 16 setts recorded on site, other signs of badger activity included latrines, badger paths and prints. Latrines were recorded in Winding Plantation, the young broadleaf plantation adjacent to the tributary of the Howpark Burn and also at locations surrounding the conifer plantation on Penmanshiel Moor along with snuffle holes and fresh digging. Badger footprints were noted at a location crossing a dry stone wall leaving the conifer plantation on Penmanshiel Moor and entering an adjacent arable field. Badger hair was also found on a fence east of Moss Maw.

8.65 It is clear from the level of activity recorded, that the site is well-used by badgers.

Water Vole

8.66 Although suitable habitat for burrowing was present along a number of watercourses within the site boundary, no signs of water vole were recorded during the survey for this species. Evidence of mink was found along Blegdon Burn and the presence of this species, which predate on water vole, decreases the likelihood of water vole being present.

Valuation of the receptors in the baseline condition

8.67 No signs of the presence of water voles were recorded and this species is therefore not considered further in this assessment. However, the evaluation of their watercourse/water body habitats (see below) takes into consideration its restricted distribution in the UK33 in the context that the Broad Bog Burn and Blegdon Burn, together with two unnamed watercourses/drainage ditches and the ponds may be colonised in the future by water vole.

8.68 Based on the fact that the site surveys recorded no great crested newts, the comparatively low suitability of water bodies for breeding and the general lack of records of great crested newts in the surrounding area, this species is not considered further in this assessment. However, the evaluation of their water body habitats takes into account the fact that the ponds may be colonised in the future by great crested newts.

8.69 The red squirrel survey found no evidence of this species within the site. In addition the desk study found no records of this species in the immediate area, which does not fall within the Red Squirrel Priority woodland in southern Scotland34. The main block of conifer woodland (Penmanshiel Moor) also offers rather poor quality habitat for red squirrels (see Chapter 13: Forestry):

• It is even-aged having been planted in the late 1980’s and therefore lacks the varied age structure of trees favoured by red squirrels;

33 Water voles have suffered a long-term decline in the UK since the 1900s due to habitat destruction which has

accelerated in the last 20-30 years and due to the release of the non-native mink. It is estimated that over a seven

year period (1989/90 – 1996/98) there was a reduction of 67.5% of occupied sites and 88% of the remaining populations

in the UK. The species is a priority species under the UKBAP. 34 http://www.red-squirrels.org.uk/images/PriorityWoodlandsSouthernScotland.jpg

http://www.narrs.org.uk/Documents/nasdocuments/NAS%20form.pdf

http://www.red-squirrels.org.uk/images/PriorityWoodlandsSouthernScotland.jpg



• It is dominated by Sitka spruce, which occupies 85% of the planted area (i.e. excluding open ground), which means that red squirrels would be susceptible to poor cone years; and

• Its size is at the low end for this species - blocks of conifer woodland over 200 hectares, and ideally over 2000 hectares, offer the best opportunity for long term red squirrel conservation35.

For these reasons, red squirrels are not considered further in this assessment.

8.70 The desk study identified no potential fisheries interest within the site, the scoping response did not raise any concerns about potential impacts upon fish and the Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey did not identify any particularly suitable habitat that could be used by lamprey or migratory fish (such as salmon and trout) for spawning. For these reasons, fish are not considered any further in this assessment.

8.71 This section evaluates the nature conservation interest of the site for its habitats and for the species it supports in terms of its relative importance in a geographical context. Valued ecological receptors (VERs) are defined as those which have a value of at least District level (noted in bold). All other ecological receptors are henceforth not considered further in this ES, apart from where legal considerations need to be taken into account, for example, where badgers are considered of Local value, but due to legal considerations need to be further assessed in the ES (such receptors are identified with an asterix [*] in Table 8.7 below).

Table 8.7: Evaluation of Nature Conservation Interest

Ecological Receptor Evaluation Rationale Site Value

Designated Sites for Nature Conservation Pease Bridge Glen SSSI SSSIs have been designated by statutory bodies because

of the important habitats and species they support and are therefore of national value.

National

Pease Dean Reserve SWT Local Wildlife Site

LWSs are designated at the District (Scottish Borders) level for the habitats and species they support and are therefore important in the Scottish Borders Region.

District

BWIS - Broad Bog lowland raised bog

This is classed by SBC as being of value in the Scottish Borders context, thus making them District importance under the valuation framework used in this assessment.

District

Ancient Woodland of Semi-Natural Origin - Penmanshiel Wood and Winding Hill Plantation

These are sites where woodland has been present on old maps and they therefore have nature conservation value due to the potential for supporting an old woodland seed bank as well as the trees that they may currently support. They are therefore considered to be of District importance.

District

pLBSs - Penmanshiel Moor, Redclues Cleugh / Oakwood Cleuch, Aikieside Wood, Old Cambus Moss and Penmanshiel Moss former raised bogs and Winding Burn Grassland

These have been identified by SBC as possible sites of nature conservation importance but have yet to be assessed. No information is available on the potential ecological features that would justify designation and no standard valuation is therefore applied within this assessment. Instead, the ecological features of each site are evaluated in their own right to determine an appropriate valuation.

Valued according to features present

Habitats

35 Red Squirrels in South Scotland “Woodlands for Red Squirrels” - http://www.red-squirrels.org.uk/habitat.asp


Semi-Natural Broadleaf Woodland This habitat is restricted to Redclues Cleugh, which is a steep-sided wooded valley in the north-west of the site. It forms part of Penmanshiel Wood, which is listed as an Ancient Woodland of Semi-Natural Origin. There are affiliations with the UK BAP habitat Wet Woodland, it is listed on the SBL and is also of relevance to the LBAP habitats Native Woodland plus, potentially, Upland Cleuchs and Scrub Woodland. Although covering just 5 ha, Redclues Cleugh is potentially an important linkage between Penmanshiel Wood to the west and the heath, scrub and acid grassland mosaic habitat of Greenside Hill to the east. For these reasons the site is considered to be of Local value for semi-natural broadleaf woodland.

Local

Coniferous Plantation Woodland Coniferous plantation woodland is the dominant habitat on Penmanshiel Moor (where most of the turbines are proposed to be located) and also covers several other small areas around the site (in total amounting to 181.5 ha). Affiliated with a LBAP priority habitat (Coniferous Woodland) but this habitat is considered to be of limited ecological value, being densely planted with little or no understorey. The rides retain some botanical interest.

Less than Local

Mixed Plantation Woodland Mixed plantation woodland is present in small, often isolated, compartments within the site (total area within the site amounting to 6.2 ha). It also occupies the riparian corridors alongside the Harelaw and Howpark Burns in the south-east corner of the site. Although affiliated with the UK BAP priority habitat (Lowland Mixed Deciduous Woodland) and the LBAP habitat Native Woodland, this habitat is considered to be of rather limited ecological value due to its isolation. The riparian corridors and mature trees offer habitat opportunities for a range of small mammals (including bats), birds and invertebrates.

Local

Broadleaved Plantation Woodland and Mixed Semi-Natural Woodland

There is one section of immature broadleaved plantation which extends for approximately 500 m along the steep banks of the Winding Burn in the south of the site. Broadleaf plantation is also present as wet woodland at Penmanshiel Moss. Mixed semi-natural woodland is present along riparian corridors in the south and east of the site. The total area of these habitat amounts to 68.9 ha). As a result of the affiliation with the UK BAP Wet Woodland, the LBAP habitat Native Woodland and inclusion on the SBL, the site is considered to be of Local value for mixed semi-natural and broadleaved plantation woodland.

Local

Dry Dwarf Shrub Heath This plant community has a restricted distribution within the site being largely confined to the rides of the commercial forest plantation on Penmanshiel Moor. It is considered to be attributable to upland heath, which is a UK BAP habitat as well as a LBAP habitat. It is also listed on the SBL and overlaps with the EU Habitats Directive Annex 1 habitat Dry Heaths. However, the

Local

http://www.red-squirrels.org.uk/habitat.asp



Chapter 8: Ecology


areas on site amount to just 22.9 hectares, which are isolated within the commercial forest plantation and largely surrounded by improved grassland in the wider area. The exception is to the north where there is a link with the heath, grass and scrub mosaic on Greenside Hill. Upland heath is widely distributed in both Scotland (where it covers between 1.7 and 2.5 million hectares36) and the Scottish Borders is said to support 5% of Scotland’s heathland i.e. between 85,000 and 125,000 hectares. The site supports between 0.018% and 0.027% of the total area of upland heath in the Scottish Borders and is therefore considered to be of no more than Local value for dry dwarf shrub heath.

Acid Flush Acid flush has been mapped in one small area (0.7 ha) in the south of Penmanshiel Moss. By their nature flushes are often relatively small and intimately associated with hydrological features such as bogs or burns. In this case it seems to be closely linked with the Blegdon Burn and Penmanshiel Moss. Although not specifically identified as a UK BAP or LBAP habitat in its own right, the NVC community M6 is listed on the SBL and the intimate link with the moss means that the site is considered to be of Local importance for acid flush.

Local

Acid Grassland There is no acid grassland within the site, with the only mapped areas being to the north of the site on Greenside Hill. Listed on the SBL, upland acid grassland is also included within the Grassland and Enclosed Farmland LBAP habitat, where it is noted that acid grassland often forms from poor management of priority habitats such as upland heath and is often of rather low biological interest. This seems to be the case here where it forms a mosaic with heath and scrub. The site is considered to be of Less than Local importance for acid grassland.

Less than Local

(Semi-improved) Neutral Grassland

Although included on the Grassland and Enclosed Farmland LBAP habitat, the small area (5.6 ha) of neutral grassland within the site supports an unremarkable species assemblage. Semi-improved neutral grassland is located offsite to the north and seems to comprise an area of former heath that has been agriculturally improved. The site is considered to be of Less than Local importance for neutral and semi-improved neutral grassland.

Less than Local

Marshy Grassland Marshy grassland has some overlap with the UK priority habitat Purple Moor-Grass and Rush Pasture together with the LBAP habitats Fen, Marsh, Swamp and Reedbed together with Grassland and Enclosed Farmland. Purple

Local

36 http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/Docs/UKBAP_BAPHabitats-61-UplandHeathland.doc UK Biodiversity Action Plan: Priority Habitat Descriptions –

Upland Heathland (2008)


moor-grass and rush pastures are included within the publication “A Borders Wetland Vision”37 which aims to guide the future conservation of multi-benefit wetlands at a landscape scale and to facilitate the delivery of the Scottish Biodiversity Strategy, UK Biodiversity Action Plan and Scottish Borders Local Biodiversity Action Plan objectives. However, it is considered that the identified areas, which amount to 36 ha, are too small and isolated for targeting under this strategy. The plant communities recorded indicate that these areas are groundwater dependent terrestrial ecosystems38. In addition to their botanical value, these habitats also offer suitable habitat for wading birds and amphibians and the site is therefore considered to be of Local value for marshy grassland.

Dense and Scattered Scrub

There are small areas of scrub within the site (total 12 ha), although the largest areas lie to the north. Scrub is not notable in biodiversity terms and does not have any direct affiliation with BAP priority habitats, although it provides shelter and food sources for a number of species (e.g. badgers for sett creation and breeding birds and potentially lay-up sites for otter). It is included as part of the LBAP habitat Upland Cleuch and Scrub. The site is considered to be of Local value for dense and scattered scrub.

Local

Standing Freshwater / Swamp Standing freshwater is a Priority UK BAP habitat (Ponds) and is also listed in the LBAP (Standing Water - Fens, Marsh, Swamp and Reedbed). Five ponds are located within the site and a further pond lies nearby. There is also one small area (0.5 ha) that has been mapped as swamp. These areas have some ecological value, notably for birds, amphibians and invertebrates, but none have been identified as pLBSs. The site is considered to be of Local value for standing freshwater (ponds) and swamp.

Local

Arable Land

Arable land is a UK Broad Habitat Type (Arable and Horticultural) and is identified as important in the LBAP (Grassland and Enclosed Farmland). Despite this, the habitat is very common locally and nationally, and the arable land on site is extensive (151 ha) and was not noted to generally have ecologically important margins, largely being planted up to field margin edges. The site is therefore considered to be of Less than Local value for arable land.

Less than local

Improved Grassland

Improved grassland is a UK Broad Habitat Type and identified as locally important in the LBAP (Grassland and Enclosed Farmland). Despite identification as a locally important habitat, the habitat is very common both locally and nationally. The habitat on site is

Less than Local

37 The Macaulay Institute (2006) A Borders Wetland Vision: Development of a Strategic Planning Tool for Wetland Biodiversity

Conservation. http://www.scotborders.gov.uk/pdf/15388.pdf 38 Land Use Planning System - SEPA Guidance Note 4: Planning Guidance on Wind Farm Developments

http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/Docs/UKBAP_BAPHabitats-61-UplandHeathland.doc

http://www.scotborders.gov.uk/pdf/15388.pdf




extensive (175 ha) and considered to warrant evaluation of Less than Local value for improved grassland.

Boundary Features (scattered trees, stone walls, hedgerows)

Scattered broadleaved trees are affiliated with the UK BAP priority habitat (Lowland Mixed Deciduous Woodland) and Local Habitat (Native Woodland). In the context of the surrounding area the mature specimens offer good quality ecological habitat and, accordingly, the site is considered to be of Local value for scattered broadleaved trees as boundary features. Hedgerows are a UK BAP Priority habitat but those on site lack diversity, being dominated by hawthorn. The hedgerows provide habitat for breeding birds, small mammals and a limited plant understorey. However, the representation of this habitat on site is not notable in biodiversity terms and the site is therefore considered to be of Local value for hedgerows. Stone walls provide suitable habitat for reptiles and offer connectivity, particularly where grass margins are associated with them.

Local

Running Water

Watercourses are listed as a UK BAP Priority habitat and an LBAP habitat. All of the watercourses within the site are small and are not particularly notable in intrinsic ecological terms, since many are closely linked with the commercial forest plantation. The lower reaches of the Winding Burn and the Harelaw Burn together with the Howpark Burn and the unnamed burn that flows through Redclues Cleugh on the north-western boundary of the site are exceptions, as these areas support more interesting riparian corridors, which are potentially of greater value to a number of mammals (including otters, water voles and foraging / commuting bats), birds and invertebrates. However the site is considered to be of no more than Local value for running water.

Local

Fauna Bat Bats recorded during surveys at the site are listed on

the SBL. Common and Soprano pipistrelles are also listed as priority species on the UK BAP. All bat species receive full legal protection via inclusion on Schedule 2 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.) Regulations 1994. Current population estimates are39: Common pipistrelle: Native, common across the UK.

Population estimate: UK 2,430,000; GB 1,280,000 - breakdowns not available.

Soprano pipistrelle: Native, common across the UK. Population estimate: UK 1,300,000; GB 720,000 - breakdowns not available.

Natterer’s bat: Native, fairly common throughout much of the UK. Population estimate: UK 148,000; Scotland 17,500.

Daubenton’s bat: Native, common throughout much of the UK. Population estimate: UK 560,000; Scotland 40,000.

Local*

39 Battersby J. (Ed) (2005) UK Mammals: First Report by the Tracking Mammals Partnership: Species Status and

Population Trends

Ecological Receptor E luava tion Rationale Site Value

Noctule: Native, generally uncommon, but more numerous in well wooded areas. Population estimate: UK 50,000; Scotland, 250. Scottish population is regarded to be an under-estimate, mainly owing to the lack of reliable survey data.

The bat activity was deemed to be low overall, dominated by common and widespread species, though there were two records for the rarer noctule. Despite the low number of bats recorded, there was deemed to be reasonable habitat connectivity and, in recognition of this, the site is considered to be of Local value for bats.

Otter Otters are a UK BAP priority species and listed on the SBL. They also receive full legal protection via inclusion on Schedule 2 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.) Regulations 1994. Otters are found throughout most of Scotland, but with reduced numbers in areas of intensive agriculture and the industrial central lowland belt40 . Scotland is considered as a principal British stronghold for the species with an estimated 90% of the total British population resident here41. While the species is considered relatively widespread and common in Scotland, the evaluation must reflect the importance of the Scottish population in the UK context. The site provides suitable habitat for otter and this species currently uses the site, although only for moving through. The site is considered to be of Local value for otter.

Local*

Badger In the UK, badgers are a relatively common species and there are a reported 25,000 individuals in Scotland31. They are listed on the SBL. The survey for this species recorded quite high levels of badger and the site is located within an active badger territory. In the context of the legal protection afforded to badgers (albeit in respect of persecution) and the fact that the site is located within an active territory, the site is considered to be of Local value for this species.

Local*

Reptiles The reptile survey recorded common lizard within and around the plantation forestry. This is listed in Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) together with slow-worm, adder and grass snake (the latter is generally believed to be absent from Scotland although recent evidence records indicate that it is now present in southern Scotland42). These species

Local*

40 Harris, S., Morris, P., Wray, S. & Yalden, D. (1995). A Review of British Mammals: Population Estimates and Conservation

Status of British Mammals other than Cetaceans. Peterborough: JNCC

41 Scottish Natural Heritage (2007). Otters and Development 42 For Example The Annandale Observer News 16th July 2011 -

http://www.annandaleobserver.co.uk/story.php?pheader=1&id=1912

http://www.annandaleobserver.co.uk/story.php?pheader=1&id=1912



Chapter 8: Ecology


are afforded limited protection under Section 9 of this Act, which makes it an offence, inter alia, to intentionally kill or injure any of these species. Common lizard is included within the Widespread Reptiles Species Action Plan, developed by the Amphibian and Reptile Conservation Trust as part of the UK BAP. The site offers limited areas of good habitat for reptiles within the dry dwarf shrub heath along forest rides and the marshy grassland. Common lizards are fairly widespread and common in the UK although it is believed that the population is declining primarily due to habitat degradation43 44 . The reptile survey recorded small numbers and the habitats within the site are considered to be rather sub-optimal for common lizards (Peter Leach member and former chairman of the Lothian Amphibian and Reptile Group, pers comm.). Taking all this into account, the site is considered to be of Local value for reptiles.

Amphibians Although no great crested newts were recorded during the survey for this species, a number of smooth and palmate newts were identified, together with common frog and common toad. The site is considered to be of Local value for amphibians.

Local

Other Fauna The site offers good habitat for deer, in particular roe deer, which were frequently seen during surveys. Deer numbers are unknown but numbers could be expected to range between 10 to 15 animals per square kilometre (pers comm. Jim Reilly, Scottish Agricultural College, Aberdeen). The site is also likely to support low numbers of other common mammals such as fox and brown hare. Brown hare is a UK BAP species although it is common nationally. The site is considered to be of less than Local value for other fauna.

Less than Local

Trends in the Absence of Development

8.72 In the absence of the development, the site is likely to remain as predominately forestry and agricultural land with a mixture of stock grazing and arable fields.

8.73 Current forest practice would be to manage the commercial woodlands on a clear fell silvicultural system (for more details see Chapter 13: Forestry)

8.74 The range of faunal species present at the site would probably vary through time in response to the changing forest habitat. The badger population is likely to continue to use the site for foraging and may colonise the site further with more setts being established as the forest area opens out for a while. Likewise, otters may increase their use of the site as they expand in number throughout the region, and water vole may colonise suitable habitat in the site in the future. Bats, in particular, may

43 http://www.froglife.org/animals/commonlizard.htm

44 Edgar, P. ,Foster, J. and Baker, J. (2010) Reptile Habitat Management Handbook. Amphibian and Reptile

Conservation, Bournemouth.

make more use of the site as the trees begin to mature, but this is likely to change as trees are felled and re-planted.

8.75 The site is not managed under any Scottish Rural Development Programme (SRDP) schemes. However, small areas of woodland have been planted under Woodland Grant Schemes 1, 2 or 3 (see Figure 8.9) and some of these woodlands would be affected by the proposal to fell the site for the proposed wind farm. In the absence of development these areas would continue to be managed under the terms of the relevant Woodland Grant Scheme.

8.76 In summary, in the absence of development, it is considered that there is unlikely to be any substantial change in the ecological value of the site over the next 25 years.

Information Gaps

8.77 Penmanshiel Moor commercial forest plantation is at dense thicket stage and is impenetrable. This area could not therefore be accessed fully to carry out the badger survey. As a result the survey was restricted to surveillance of the perimeter of the forest and rides, which provided an indication of presence within the forest. This, together with results from elsewhere, was used to determine the likely level of badger activity within this area.

8.78 No other information gaps affecting the assessment of the potential effects of the wind farm have been identified.

Design Evolution

8.79 Potentially significant effects that were considered during the scope of the investigation, following the establishment of baseline conditions, were:

• Temporary and permanent habitat loss associated with access tracks, wind turbine locations, the construction compound and other associated infrastructure;

• Habitat damage of areas surrounding construction sites through changes in the hydrological regime and pollution with dust, silt or chemical contaminants;

• Forest clearance and the resultant effects on habitats and their associated fauna;

• The disturbance and/or damage to watercourses and potential injury, death or disturbance of their associated fauna (e.g. otter) through the construction of infrastructure with close proximity to the bank side;

• The damage/destruction and /or disturbance of active badger setts; and

• The potential to injure or kill reptiles during vegetation clearance.

Layout Response of the Proposed Wind Farm to Potentially Significant Effects

8.80 In order to eliminate the potential for some/all of the potentially significant effects, the following design measures were adopted:

• With the exception of watercourse crossing points, application of a stand-off of development to all watercourses of at least 20 m (the minimum is actually 70 m) to ensure that adequate measures to control site run-off can be implemented and to minimise disturbance to bank side habitats;

• The layout avoids the watercourse that flows into the Pease Burn sub-catchment

• The track design minimises the number of watercourse crossings required and avoids locations where otter spraints have been found;

http://www.froglife.org/animals/commonlizard.htm



• The control building and sub-station compound have been located in arable fields with minimal ecological interest;

• Upgrading of existing access tracks (700 m) and use of existing field accesses where possible to minimise habitat loss;

• New access tracks and turbine locations within the plantation forestry avoid existing rides where possible. These rides generally support dry dwarf shrub heath or marshy grassland, which is expected to provide a useful source of seed for helping to naturally re–colonise the area following de-forestation;

• Marshy grassland has been avoided where possible to minimise the potential for effects on groundwater dependent terrestrial ecosystems; and

• Where possible, infrastructure has been sited away from areas where badgers setts are known to be present.

Construction Specification Response of the Proposed Wind Farm to Potentially Significant Effects

8.81 In order to minimise the effects of construction (e.g. disturbance from works), all activity will be limited to clearly defined working areas, and the storage of surplus materials will be confined to areas of hardstanding. An Ecological Clerk of Works (ECoW) will be appointed to provide advice in the event of any unforeseen protected species issues that arise during the construction and to oversee the implementation of mitigation requirements.

8.82 Watercourses will be protected during construction through the adoption of a range of mitigation measures (see Chapter 11: Geology, Hydrology and Hydrogeology).

8.83 Watercourse crossings will be designed according to best practice45. The exact designs for upgraded/new culvert structures required will be agreed with SEPA prior to construction, and will be designed to allow the through passage of fish and otters, being no less than 400mm in diameter.

8.84 Habitats which are to be subject to temporary loss (e.g. construction compound) will be re-vegetated as soon as possible after construction, to replicate the habitat that was temporarily lost.

8.85 Potential effects on otters will be mitigated through adoption of the following measures:

• In order to ensure that otters have not established holts, shelters or resting places along the burns (particularly in proximity to watercourse crossings) during the intervening period before construction, a pre-construction otter survey will be carried out within 6 months prior to works beginning. These surveys will include a search of all suitable habitats within 250m of turbine locations and 100m of all access tracks. If a place of shelter for otter is identified then SNH will be consulted and a mitigation plan and licence application (if required) will be submitted to the Scottish Government.

• In its publication considering potential effects on otters due to wind farm developments34 SNH suggests that, while it should be consulted to determine whether any proposed measures incorporated into a scheme are sufficient to avoid the need for a licence, the disturbance during development works can be minimised by declaring an area within at least 30m of an otter shelter, out of bounds to all site users at all times.

• Even if works will not disturb an otter holt or resting place, there is potential for otters to be harmed during the construction period if they are present at that time. To minimise the potential risk of harm, the following measures will also be employed:

45 CIRIA Culvert Design and Operation Guide [C689] and Scottish Executive River Crossings and Migratory Fish: Design

Guidance (http://www.scotland.gov.uk/consultations/transport/rcmf-03.asp)

site compounds where lighting is used will be located well away from any of the watercourses and directed away from watercourses, so that it does not disturb otter activity during the hours of darkness;

should evidence of otters be found on site during pre-construction surveys, a suitable means of escape from any exposed trenches and other excavations will be provided (such as a long wooden or metal plank). Deeper excavations will be fenced off to prevent wildlife access; and

if holts/rest areas become established in the future, all contractors will be briefed regarding their locations to avoid any accidental damage or disturbance.

8.86 Potential effects on bats will be mitigated through adoption of the following measures:

• While no bat roosts were recorded on site, there are several mature trees offering potential roosting habitat within the site boundary and these may be used in the future. A number of these may need to be felled as part of the de-forestation requirement. This tree felling work will be undertaken in winter, where possible, to reduce the potential for adverse effects upon bats and breeding birds. In advance of any tree removal, an initial appraisal of the potential to support a bat roost will be made by the Ecological Clerk of Works (ECoW). Should any trees be assessed as having moderate-high bat roost potential, a thorough search of the tree in question should be undertaken by a licensed bat worker in advance of any tree being felled. Only when this survey has been carried out on moderate-high potential trees would the felling works proceed (no longer than 48 hours after the tree check has been carried out).

• In the context of its EPS status, works that can be expected to cause disturbance to bats or which may damage or destroy their places of shelter (irrespective of when the roost has last been used), should only proceed after an appropriate licence has been issued by the Scottish Government. In this context, should a bat roost be confirmed within any tree that requires removal, all possible alternatives will be considered prior to the decision to go ahead with tree-felling. Should the felling be progressed, SNH will be consulted, a Method Statement agreed and an appropriate licence sought from the Scottish Government.

8.87 Potential effects on reptiles will be mitigated through adoption of the following measures:

• Common lizards are active during the warmer months and hibernate in winter, often in rubble piles where sheltered crevices exist. Forest clearance work should ideally avoid the winter period (generally November to March, although this is dependent upon the weather conditions in any one year) when any movement of their hibernacula46 may have a negative impact on their survival.

• Removal of any existing piles of spoil (brash, logs or rocks) should take place prior to hibernation (i.e. before the end of October) or following hibernation in the latter weeks of March (weather dependent) onwards.

• Areas of suitable common lizard habitat within the development footprint (particularly tufted grasses and heather) should be mown short outwith the winter period under the supervision of a suitably qualified ecologist and thereafter maintained at a short sward in order to discourage lizards from these areas for the duration of the construction period.

• Any scrub clearance should be undertaken outside of the breeding bird season (March to August inclusive) and the scrub must only be cut low to the ground during this period, not removed by the roots as this has the potential to impact upon hibernating lizards.

• For the duration of any earthworks, any trenches or excavations which are left open overnight should be inspected for lizards prior to in-filling, if dug during the lizards’ active period (generally accepted as being late March until the end of October). Any reptiles found should

46 Hibernacula are places where reptiles will spend the winter

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/consultations/transport/rcmf-03.asp



Chapter 8: Ecology

be removed from the trench and placed in suitable reptile habitat away from the construction works.

• Temporary piles of rubble / hardcore associated with construction offer potentially ideal refuges for lizards and should be stored away from the commercial forest where lizards have been recorded.

8.88 Potential effects on badgers will be mitigated through adoption of the following measures:

• A pre-construction badger survey of areas that will be directly affected by construction, together with a 100 m buffer, will be carried out ideally within 6-8 weeks of the start of construction (no more than 12 weeks) to ensure that no new setts have been established within 30m of the proposed wind farm infrastructure. This will identify any new badger setts that have been established and, if necessary, mitigation proposals will be prepared and the requirement for licensing determined through consultation with SNH.

• It is believed that there is an outlier sett present within the commercial forestry plantation although the exact location is unknown as a result of the lack of accessibility caused by dense forestry planting. Felling within this area should ideally be undertaken between July and November in order to avoid the sensitive badger breeding period, in the unlikely event that the sett is being used for breeding. This area will need to be carefully checked prior to felling, with consideration given to felling by chainsaw moving from the outer perimeter of the forestry until the sett is located or until it is clear that no sett is present. All felling should be carried out in accordance with standard forestry practice when badgers are present47.

• Even if works will not disturb a badger sett there is potential for badgers to be harmed during the construction period. To minimise the potential for this happening a number of measures will be employed as follows:

• All contractors will be briefed regarding the badgers at the site and the locations of any setts to avoid any accidental damage or disturbance; and

• a suitable means of escape (e.g. a long wooden or metal plank) from any exposed trenches and other excavations will be provided. Deeper excavations will be fenced off to prevent wildlife access.

8.89 Mitigation measures to protect ecological resources during forest felling are set out in Chapter 13: Forestry.

Operational Controls Response of the Proposed Wind Farm to Potentially Significant Effects

8.90 During the operation of the wind farm, the potential for chance pollution incidents during routine maintenance activities has been minimised by incorporation of the buffer zone around all watercourses and water bodies. SEPA pollution prevention guidance will also be implemented (further details are included in Chapter 11: Geology, Hydrology and Hydrogeology).

8.91 All working areas will be clearly defined and storage of materials will be restricted to areas of hardstanding. Any maintenance works will take place during the day to minimise the potential for disturbance to protected species on site (since these are mostly nocturnal - otter, bat and badger).

Decommissioning

8.92 During the eventual decommissioning of the site, potential impacts on nature conservation would be expected to be similar to those during the construction phase and thus similar mitigation measures are

47 The Forestry Authority (2009) Forestry Practice Guide 9: Forest Operations and Badger Setts

likely to be required. Any new legislation or guidelines published prior to decommissioning will be adhered to and incorporated into mitigation design prior to decommissioning taking place.

Predicted Effects of the Proposed Wind Farm

8.93 The potential effects of construction, operation and decommissioning of the proposed wind farm that remain for evaluation, following implementation of the measures outlined in paragraph 8.79 to 8.90, are those that may arise from direct or indirect residual impacts upon VERs (i.e. District level and above) and legally protected features (identified in Table 8.7):

• Statutory designated site: Pease Bridge Glen SSSI;

• Non-statutory designated sites: Pease Dean Reserve SWT Wildlife Site; Broad Bog BWIS; Penmanshiel Wood Ancient Woodland of Semi-Natural Origin and Winding Hill Plantation Ancient Woodland of Semi-Natural Origin; and

• Protected species: bats, otter, badger and reptiles.

Assessment of Effects

Construction

8.94 Pease Bridge Glen SSSI is located 1.7 m north-west of the site at its closest point and connected via the Pease Burn, which is the receiving watercourse for an unnamed burn that flows through Redclues Cleugh on the north-western boundary of the site. The proposed wind farm has been designed in such a way that the layout is all located within the Eye Water sub-catchment, avoiding the Pease Burn sub-catchment, with the result that there is no pathway for effects on the Pease Bridge Glen SSSI, which is not considered further in this assessment.

8.95 Pease Dean Reserve SWT Wildlife Site potential effects on this site is located 1.9 km north-west of the site at its closest point and connected via the Pease Burn, which is the receiving watercourse for an unnamed burn that flows through Redclues Cleugh on the north-western boundary of the site. The proposed wind farm has been designed in such a way that the layout is all located within the Eye Water sub-catchment, avoiding the Pease Burn sub-catchment, with the result that there is no pathway for effects on the Pease Dean Reserve SWT Wildlife Site, which is not considered further in this assessment.

8.96 The construction process will lead to the permanent loss of some 0.2 ha of the more sensitive habitats (dry dwarf shrub heath and marshy grassland) within the Broad Bog BWIS due to the construction of a turbine, crane pad and access track. A further 0.1 ha will be temporarily disturbed and the works have the potential to have an indirect effect on the hydrological features of this site. This site is surrounded by commercial forest plantation and agriculturally improved grassland which has already affected the hydrological status of this site with the result that it no longer supports much bog vegetation. The excavated material will be used to help reinstate heath habitats elsewhere within the felled forest as part of an enhancement programme (see Appendix 8.3). Infrastructure in this area has been located within the dry dwarf shrub heath habitat and away from the Broad Bog Burn and surrounding marshy grassland. This, together with the other hydrological protection measures outlined in paragraph 8.81, will minimise the potential for adverse impacts on the more sensitive habitat features of this site. Taking this into account, it is considered that the construction of the proposed wind farm would have a low magnitude of effect on the ecological features (heath and



marshy grassland) of this BWIS of Local Value, resulting in a minor adverse effect, which is not significant.

8.97 Construction works will have no direct effects on the ancient woodland sites at Penmanshiel Wood and Winding Hill. The only burn that flows through Penmanshiel Wood and potentially connects the site to the Eye Water is Kitchencleugh Burn. However this emerges on a steep slope to the south-west of Penmanshiel Farm more than 500 m from the closest infrastructure of the proposed wind farm. It is considered that there is no pathway for effects on the ancient woodland at Penmanshiel Wood, which is not considered further in this assessment. However it is possible that the Winding Hill Plantation may suffer indirect effects if there are any adverse effects on the Harelaw Burn. In the absence of any further mitigation, the most likely cause of any effects on this watercourse would be upstream access track crossings, the closest of which is the Blegdon Burn more than 1 km from the Winding Hill Plantation. Due to the distance involved and the fact that the watercourse in itself is unlikely to have any significant influence outwith the water channel, it is considered that the potential magnitude of any effect is Negligible resulting in no significant effect on this ancient woodland receptor of District Value.

8.98 Noise and human presence have the potential to disturb otter using the watercourses. Construction activity also has the potential to injure or kill otter. However, the implementation of a minimum 20 m stand-off (in reality 70 m see Chapter 11: Geology, Hydrology and Hydrology) from watercourses (except at crossing points) together with specific mitigation measures outlined in paragraph 8.85 will minimise these risks. No holts or laying-up sites were found on the site and, in addition, otters have large home ranges and are able to adapt to human disturbance48. Taking these factors into account, it is therefore considered that the magnitude of any effect on this species due to construction activities would be Negligible resulting in no significant effect on otter, a receptor which has been assessed as being of Local Value on this site.

8.99 No bat roosts were identified within the site. Taking into account the mitigation measures outlined in paragraph 8.86, it is considered that there will be no construction effects on bats.

8.100 Construction and forest felling activities have the potential to injure or kill reptiles whilst noise and human presence also have the potential to disturb reptiles that are present on site. Common lizards were recorded at many sites around the perimeter of the commercial forest plantation. The complex of scrub, heath and grassland habitats to the north of the site on Greenside Hill offer potentially good reptile habitat, but this area is likely to have been a much larger site before the planting of the commercial forest on Penmanshiel Moor and, as such, could be at or close to its carrying capacity for reptiles. It is possible, therefore, that reptiles disturbed from the site may have limited capacity to move to alternative habitat in the surrounding area. However, taking into account the mitigation measures outlined in paragraph 8.87, it is considered that the magnitude of effect due to construction activities will be low on a receptor of Local Value resulting in no significant effect on reptiles.

8.101 Construction and forest felling activities have the potential to require the destruction of badger setts and badger foraging areas which could result in injury or death to badgers. Noise and human presence also have the potential to disturb badgers that are present on site. The location of the working areas is at least 100 m away from most known badger locations should ensure that the species is not disturbed during the construction period. However, the survey found the potential presence of a sett within the forestry plantation which could need to be destroyed or, at least disturbed, due to the

n these species.

48 Chanin, P. (2003). Monitoring the Otter Lutra lutra. Conserving Natura 2000 Rivers Monitoring Series No. 10. English

Nature: Peterborough

forest felling operations associated with the proposed wind farm. It is believed that any sett within the forestry plantation is an outlier as there are a number of larger sett complexes nearby. There is a considerable amount of alternative good sett-building habitat and foraging opportunities within the local area with the result that small-scale movements should be sufficient to negate any ill effects. In addition there are a number of measures outlined in paragraph 8.88, which will reduce the risks to this species. As a result, the potential magnitude of effect is likely to be Low on a receptor of Local Value resulting in no significant effect.

Operation

8.102 There will be a loss of a maximum of 8.9 ha of potential foraging area for badgers as a result of site infrastructure construction, although it should be noted that most of this is currently under commercial forest plantation and therefore likely to be of little value for foraging. There is an abundance of similar habitat for badgers in the wider area and therefore the magnitude of effect is considered to be Negligible resulting in no significant effect. Similarly, operational effects upon otter and reptiles are considered to be Negligible resulting in no significant effect on these receptors.

8.103 There is a risk of impacts upon individual bats and populations of bats from direct collision with the turbine blades or barotrauma49. In terms of collision risk, guidelines issued by Natural England50 include an assessment of the relative level of risk to individuals of each bat species from wind turbines, based on what is known of their flight patterns, foraging strategies and echolocation calls. It also estimates likely risk to bat populations, based on level of risk to individuals and species population size. The guidance places bat individuals and populations into one of three risk categories: low, medium and high.

8.104 Both soprano and common pipistrelle individual bats are classed as being at medium risk of collision with turbines, while their populations are assessed of being at low risk only. In terms of turbine collision risk specific to pipistrelles, the majority of pipistrelle collisions occur where turbines are located within forests rather than the open landscape of the type that will be present at the proposed Penmanshiel wind farm following de-forestation. For example, in a study of pre- and post-construction bat activity in open farmland in relation to wind turbines in northern Germany, Bach & Rahmel51 found that pipistrelles adjusted their flight height along hedges so that they flew lower when the blades were rotating perpendicular to the hedge than when they were parallel to it. The best available evidence indicates, therefore, that pipistrelles using the site are unlikely to be at significant risk of turbine collision and the surveys carried out on the site, in any case, indicate that site usage by pipistrelles is low. Taking all this into account, it is therefore considered that the magnitude of effect will be Negligible in terms of common and soprano pipistrelle populations, for which the site iis assessed as being of Local Value, resulting in no significant effect o

49 Barotrauma refers to internal bleeding in bats due to rapid air pressure changes caused by the slipstream from the

blades (Baerwald E. F, D'Amours, G. H, Klug, B. J and Barclay R. M. R (2008). Barotrauma is a significant cause of bat

fatalities at wind turbines. Current Biology, 2008; Vol 18, R695-R696)

50 Natural England Technical Information Note (11 February 2009) TIN051 - Bats and onshore wind turbines Interim

guidance First edition (http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/C245244.pdf)

51 Bach, L & Rahmel, U (2004) Summary of wind turbine impacts on bats – assessment of a conflict. Bremer Beiträge für

Naturkunde und Naturschutz, 2004, Volume 7, pp. 245-252

http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/C245244.pdf



Chapter 8: Ecology

8.105 Myotis bats are classed as being at low risk of collision at both the individual and population level and Rydell et al52 report that they are generally not at risk, as they fly below rotor height. In view of the small amount of activity detected on site, it is unlikely that any Myotis populations will be adversely affected by the proposed wind farm. In recognition of the low risk of collision categorisation of these species, it is therefore considered that the effect magnitude will be Negligible in terms of Myotis bats resulting in no significant effects on these species.

8.106 Bat surveys undertaken at the site recorded occasional noctules, which are classed as being at high risk from wind farms both at the individual and population levels. These are wide-ranging species that will forage and commute across open landscapes and the very low levels of activity recorded together with the timing of the records (in terms of sunset) suggest that the site is an occasional feeding area or lies en route to more productive feeding areas. In view of the small amount of activity detected on site, it is considered unlikely that any noctules will be adversely affected by the proposed Penmanshiel wind farm at either the individual or the population level. In recognition of the low use of the site, but the high risk of collision categorisation of the species, the potential magnitude of effect is considered to be Low resulting in no significant effects on these species.

Decommissioning

8.107 The potential effects of the eventual decommissioning of the proposed wind farm may involve some disturbance during the dismantling of the turbines. This may result in potential disturbance to vegetation and protected mammals, although it should be possible for most activity to be restricted to existing tracks and hard-standing, which are anticipated to be left in place. This should avoid impacts on vegetation. The magnitude of any potential effects is anticipated to be negligible.

Cumulative Effects

8.108 The impact of the proposed wind farm on the ecological value of the site is not anticipated to extend beyond the site boundary. Of the species recorded during the surveys, bats are the most likely species to be affected by an additional wind farm development in the area (including Drone Hill and Blackburn) or other developments within the potential zone of influence. However, it is considered that this is unlikely due to the low levels of bat activity recorded at the proposed Penmanshiel wind farm. The habitats and other species present at the site are not anticipated to be affected by Cumulative impacts. Cumulative effects in relation to birds are discussed in Chapter 9: Ornithology.

Mitigation and Enhancement Measures

8.109 No further mitigation is proposed over and above the measures outlined in paragraphs 8.80 to 8.91. However, there are a number of enhancement opportunities that are briefly set out below and explained in more detail within an Outline Habitat Management Plan (Appendix 8.3).

8.110 The replacement of predominantly commercial plantation with off-site broadleaf and / or mixed woodland (see Chapter 13: Forestry) offers good opportunities for biodiversity gain. However, there is insufficient information at this stage to quantify the potential benefits that may accrue.

8.111 Within the site itself, tree-felling over such a large area offers the opportunity to deliver ecological improvements through restoration of the area to habitats that will deliver a range of ecological enhancements compared to the current position.

52 Rydell,J, Bach,L, Dubourg-Savage,MJ, Green,M, Rodrigues,L & Hedenström,A (2010) Bat mortality at wind turbines in

northwestern Europe. Acta Chiropterologica, 12(2): 261-274

8.112 It is likely that the area was previously heath and bog based upon the remnant habitats along forest rides as well as the historic features in the immediate vicinity of the site, including Penmanshiel Moor, Penmanshiel Moss and Broad Bog. Agricultural improvements and the establishment of a commercial forestry plantation will clearly have caused some changes in the underlying environmental conditions and it is considered that re-establishment of widespread bog habitats will not be possible, although Penmanshiel Moss appears to still support some bog vegetation.

8.113 However, there seems to be sufficient evidence from the vegetation mapped, that it should be possible to re-establish heath vegetation across parts of the site that are currently under trees. It should also be possible to establish marshy grassland, acid and neutral grassland subject to ground conditions (specifically soil and microtopography).

8.114 It is likely that scrub will also establish well in this area with the result that the area is likely to develop in much the same way as the mosaic of habitat that are present on Greenside Hill to the north of the site. In the longer run this offers a potentially significant ecological improvement both in terms of the habitats themselves and the small mammals, reptiles, amphibians and invertebrates that they are likely to support (see Chapter 9: Ornithology for consideration of the potential benefits for birds).

Assessment of Residual Effects

8.115 No residual effects that would be judged to be significant in terms of the EIA process have been identified (i.e. major significance as defined by the matrix presented in Table 8.4). This has been achieved largely by locating the infrastructure within agriculturally improved fields or within commercial forestry plantation, but avoiding the more valuable forest rides).

8.116 The adoption of measures outlined in paragraphs 8.80 to 8.84 will minimise the potential for direct and/or indirect effects upon the groundwater that is important for the marshy grassland within the Broad Bog BWIS. The proposed wind farm is still predicted to have a minor significant effect on the sensitive habitat features of the Broad Bog BWIS.

8.117 Mitigation outlined in paragraphs 8.80 to 8.91 will minimise the potential for adverse effects on protected species. No significant effects are predicted.

8.118 The potential death or injury of bats due to collision with wind turbines will result in the permanent loss of these individuals from the population. However, such losses are predicted to be small and are unlikely to result in any detectable change in the current level of background bat mortality.

Summary and Conclusions

8.119 Table 8.9 summarises the ecological effects of the proposed wind farm development and assesses their significance on the basis of the criteria set out in Tables 8.2 to 8.4.

8.120 An assessment of the ecological value of the site has been undertaken.

8.121 No adverse effects are predicted on statutory sites that are designated on nature conservation grounds.

8.122 The non-statutory nature conservation site, Broad Bog BWIS, is located within the site and a minor adverse effect, which is not significant, is predicted on the ecological features for which this site is likely to have been designated (there is no citation to explain the interest features).

8.123 No adverse effects are predicted on any other non-statutory sites of nature conservation interest.



8.124 One ancient woodland site of semi-natural origin is located within the site and a further site is located on the western boundary of the site. No adverse effects are predicted on either of these sites.

8.125 No Valued Ecological Receptors (habitats and/or species with a valuation of District of higher) have been identified. Several legally protected species are, however, present within the site and mitigation has been set out which will ensure that effects on these are not significant in EIA terms.

8.126 There is a requirement to fell some 204 ha of trees in order to ensure the efficient operation of turbines within the site. Most of this is commercial plantation forestry dominated by Sitka spruce. Off-site planting of woodland is proposed to compensate for the loss of these trees (see Chapter 13: Forestry). The felled area within the site offers the potential for habitat creation which will be of greater ecological value than the plantation forestry that it will replace. The aim is to create a mosaic of heath, grassland (acid, neutral and marshy) together with scrub, further details of which are set out within an accompanying Outline Habitat Management Plan (see Appendix 8.3). It is predicted that this habitat creation with have a minor beneficial effect, which is not significant in EIA terms.



Chapter 8: Ecology

Table 8.9: Likely Effects on Valued Ecological Receptors and/or Legally Protected Species together with an Evaluation of Significance

Effect Type of Effect

Probability of Effect Occurring

Value Magnitude of Effect

Level of Effect

Rationale

Design / Construction

Loss of 0.2 ha and temporary disturbance of 0.1 ha of dry dwarf shrub heath in Broad Bog BWIS

Negative Certain District Low Minor (Not Significant in EIA terms)

Area of heath affected is small and it is isolated within plantation forestry and agriculturally improved grassland. Seed from excavated material will be used in heath restoration as part of site reinstatement

Indirect effects on hydrology and plant communities of Broad Bog BWIS

Negative Unlikely District Low Minor (Not Significant in EIA terms)

Minimum 20m Buffer Zone around watercourses. Adherence to SEPA Pollution Prevention Guidance (PPGs). Site Drainage Plan/Construction Method Statement (approved by SNH/SEPA)

Disturbance of Bats

Negative Unlikely Local* Negligible Negligible (Not Significant in EIA terms)

No roosts identified on site. Check trees for possible bat roosts prior to felling. Prepare Method Statement or apply for licence if necessary.

Disturbance, Injury and/or death of Otter


Pre-construction surveys in line with SNH guidance. Environmental measures implemented during construction period

Disturbance, Injury and/or death of Reptiles

Negative Possible Local* Negligible Negligible (Not Significant in EIA terms)

Timing of forest clearance to avoid winter (November to March). See Chapter 9: Ornitholgy for Breeding Birds constraint Environmental measures implemented during construction period

Disturbance, injury and/or death of Badger


Design avoids badger setts as far as possible. Pre-construction survey to be carried out and hand felling of sensitive

Effect Type of Effect

Probability of Effect Occurring

Value Magnitude of Effect

Level of Effect

Rationale

area within thicket forestry where signs of badger were found around the perimeter but which could not be fully surveyed. Environmental measures implemented during construction period

Adverse impacts relating to general site practices

Negative Likely Varies Negligible Negligible (Not Significant in EIA terms)

Employment of ECoW. Site induction for contractors. Construction Method Statement. Environmental measures implemented during construction period.

Habitat creation – heath, scrub and grassland mosaic – to replace commercial forest plantation

Positive Likely Local Medium Minor (Not Significant in EIA terms)

Target creation of UK BAP, LBAP and SBL habitats. Created habitats likely to be of benefit for a range of species. Beneficial in terms of ecological enhancement, but not significant in EIA terms.

Operation

Adverse Operational Impacts upon Species VERs: Otter, Badger


Minimum 20m Buffer Zone around watercourses. Adherence to SEPA PPGs. Clearly defined working areas for operation maintenance. Environmental measures implemented during operational maintenance, similar to construction period

Collision risk for Bats

Negative Unlikely Local* Low Negligible (Not Significant in EIA terms)

Low levels of bat activity. Extremely low activity of high risk species.

Decommissioning

Disturbance of Protected Species, Sites and Habitats


Environmental measures implemented during decommissioning to be similar to construction period. Refer to any new legislation/guidance.

Ecology - penmanshiel-windfarm.co.uk 2... · 8-1 Volume 2: Main Report Chapter 8: Ecology 8 Ecology...

Documents

Transcript of Ecology - penmanshiel-windfarm.co.uk 2... · 8-1 Volume 2: Main Report Chapter 8: Ecology 8 Ecology...