10.12.3.         Proposed Monitoring

  1. No residual significant effect on marine mammals has been identified in the cumulative assessment provided above (paragraph 477 et seq.). No monitoring as a result of the CEA is proposed.

10.13. Transboundary Effects

  1. A screening of transboundary impacts has been carried out and has identified that there were no likely significant transboundary effects with regard to marine mammals from the Proposed Development upon the interests of European Economic Area (EEA) States. This was due to the relatively limited scale of effects (regional) and appropriately assessed secondary mitigation which would prevent effects occurring in other countries.

10.14. Inter-Related Effects (And Ecosystem Assessment)

  1. A description of the likely inter-related effects arising from the Proposed Development on marine mammals is provided in volume 3, appendix 18.1 of the Offshore EIA Report.
  2. For marine mammals, the following potential impacts have been considered within the inter-related assessment:
  • injury and disturbance from elevated underwater noise during piling (fixed foundations);
  • injury and disturbance to marine mammals from elevated underwater noise during site investigation surveys;
  • injury and disturbance to marine mammals from elevated underwater noise during UXO clearance;
  • injury and disturbance to marine mammals from elevated underwater noise due to vessel use and other activities;
  • increased potential to experience injury by marine mammals due to collision with vessels; and
  • changes in fish and shellfish communities affecting prey availability.
    1. Table 10.65   Open ▸ lists the inter-related effects that are predicted to arise during the construction, operation and maintenance, and decommissioning phases of the Proposed Development (project lifetime effects). Table 10.65   Open ▸ also lists the inter-related effects where stressors may combine to lead to greater effects on marine mammal receptors (receptor-led effects).
Table 10.65:
Summary of Likely Significant Inter-Related Effects for Marine Mammals from Individual Effects Occurring Across the Construction, Operation and Maintenance and Decommissioning Phases of the Proposed Development and from Multiple Effects Interacting Across all Phases (Receptor-led Effects)

Table 10.65: Summary of Likely Significant Inter-Related Effects for Marine Mammals from Individual Effects Occurring Across the Construction, Operation and Maintenance and Decommissioning Phases of the Proposed Development and from Multiple Effects Interacting Across all Phases (Receptor-led Effects)


Stressor 1. Injury or disturbance from elevated subsea noise:
  1. During the pre-construction phase activities resulting in elevated subsea noise include UXO clearance, site investigation surveys and vessel movements. These activities are likely to result in disturbance to marine mammals which may be additive if activities are synchronised as it could lead to a larger area disturbed at any one time. Disturbance is likely to occur as short term, localised events for each activity. For example, UXO clearance would result in no more than 14 single events with disturbance occurring mainly during secondary mitigation (ADDs and soft start) rather than the UXO clearance event itself which would be no more than seconds for each. There is also a small potential that animals could experience injury during UXO clearance (due to an accidental a high order detonation). Site investigation surveys are likely to occur over a total duration of up to three months whilst disturbance during vessel activity will occur intermittently throughout this phase with timings linked to the pre-construction activities.
  2. During the construction phase, activities resulting in elevated subsea noise include pile-driving, other construction activities and vessel movements. Since injury to marine mammals will be mitigated through an MMMP, the key focus is on disturbance effects. Disturbance could occur intermittently on a total of 372 days (within a 52-month piling period) during the construction phase of 96 months. Other construction activities (e.g. drilling and cable laying) and vessel movements would occur intermittently within the 96 months construction phase. When piling occurs the disturbance effects are likely to be greater than for any of the other activities contributing to elevated subsea noise so there is less likely to be an additive or synergistic effect during piling. There may, however, be an additive effect spatially where two or more noise-producing activities occur in different parts of the Proposed Development area, or temporally due to ongoing disturbance from activities throughout the construction phase (e.g. if they occur consecutively).
  3. Activities resulting in elevated subsea noise during the operation and maintenance phase include vessel activity and geophysical surveys. These activities are likely to result in disturbance to marine mammals which may be additive if activities are synchronised as it could lead to a larger area disturbed at any one time. Disturbance is likely to occur as short term, localised events for each activity and there may be an additive effect spatially where two or more noise-producing activities occur in different parts of the Proposed Development area, or temporally due to ongoing disturbance from activities throughout the operation and maintenance phase (e.g. if they occur consecutively).
  4. Vessel movements associated with decommissioning activities will result in elevated subsea noise which could lead to disturbance to marine mammals. Disturbance is likely to occur as short term, localised events and there may be an additive effect spatially where vessels are operating in different parts of the Proposed Development area, or temporally due to ongoing disturbance throughout the decommissioning phase.
  5. Marine mammal receptors will experience ongoing disturbance due to elevations in subsea noise from different sources at all phases of the Proposed Development. The sensitivity of key species will be linked to their ability to tolerate the stressor such that their ability to function normally (forage, reproduce, communicate, avoid predators, etc) is not impeded. The assessment – which adopted a highly precautionary approach - has demonstrated that for all impacts, considered in isolation, the residual effects will not be significant (after implementation of secondary mitigation) as either the spatial scale is very localised or where larger scale effects do occur (i.e. during piling) these will be highly reversible with animals returning to baseline levels rapidly. After implementation of secondary mitigation there is, however, potentially a small residual number of harbour porpoise that could experience auditory injury during UXO clearance activities and would represent only a very small proportion of the NS MU population. There are, however, uncertainties as to how all activities interact to contribute to an additive effect from subsea noise as a stressor. In a Before-After-Control-Impact design (BACI) study looking at foraging activity of harbour porpoise between baseline periods and different construction phases of the Beatrice and Moray East Offshore Wind Farms, Benhemma-Le-Gall et al., (2021) found an eight to 17% decline in porpoise occurrence in the impacted area during pile-driving and other construction activities with probability of detection negatively related to levels of vessel intensity and background noise.
  6. To some extent it is anticipated that animals will acclimatise to or compensate for such increases in subsea noise. For example, Graham et al. (2019) demonstrated acclimatisation by showing that the proportional response of harbour porpoise to piling noise decreased over the piling phase; from the first pile to the last pile the proportion of animals disturbed at a received level of 160 dB re 1 µPa decreased from 91.5% to 49.2%. Kastelein et al. (2019b) suggest that harbour porpoise (a species with high daily energy requirements) may be able to compensate for period of disturbance as they can dramatically increase their food intake in a period following fasting within out any detriment to their health. In the Moray Firth, harbour porpoises displaced during wind farm construction of Beatrice and Moray East Offshore Wind Farms increased their buzzing activity, potentially compensating for lost foraging opportunities (although there may be an additional energetic cost from the fleeing and distance travelled to compensate for) (Benhemma-Le Gall et al., 2021).
Stressor 2. Injury due to collisions with vessels:
  1. This stressor is associated with vessel movement, the impact of which was assessed from different types of vessels and at different phases of the Proposed Development. As described in paragraph 404 et seq., over the lifetime of the Proposed Development there will be a longer term risk to marine mammal receptors however, with designed-in measures in place the potential of experiencing injury is likely to be reduced and therefore it is not anticipated that an additive effect will occur. In addition, as mentioned in Table 10.65   Open ▸ to some extent the noise from the vessels themselves would act antagonistically with this impact by deterring animals away from vessels and thereby further reducing the risk of injury due to collision. Furthermore, marine mammals in this area are already accustomed to high level of vessel activity. Buckstaff (2004) demonstrated that bottlenose dolphins increased their rate of whistle production at the onset of a vessel approach and then decreased production during and after it had passed. Increased whistle production may be a tactic to reduce signal degradation to ensure that information is being communicated in noisy environment, but it also demonstrates that animals are aware of approaching vessel from a distance. Findings of this study also corroborated previous research of Nowacek et al. (2001) who found that bottlenose dolphins swim in tighter groups during vessel approaches and that if the vessel is loud enough to be detected by an animal, the likelihood of collision decreases.
Stressor 3: Changes in prey communities:
  1. The assessment considers overall effect on fish and shellfish communities from multiple stressors (i.e. habitat loss, SSC, subsea noise, EMF etc) and therefore, in this respect, has taken an ecosystem-based approach. For some, stressors (e.g. subsea noise the effects on fish and shellfish) will be over the same timescales as marine mammals whilst for others, such as temporary habitat loss, timescales may be different (e.g. low mobility or sessile species may recover slowly). The assessment of effects, however, demonstrated that due to high mobility of marine mammals and ability to exploit different prey species, and small scale of potential changes in context of wider available habitat, the changes to fish and shellfish communities are unlikely to have an effect even from multiple stressors.
Multiple stressors: inter-related effect of all stressors
  1. Arrigo et al. (2020) studied synergistic interactions among growing stressors to an Arctic ecosystem and found that synergistic interactions amplify adverse stressor effects and the impact of synergy is predicted to increase with the magnitude of stressors. Findings of this study suggest that although large organisms at higher trophic levels, such as marine mammals, tend to be generally negatively impacted by increasing stressor interaction strength, the variability in the response to stressor is small and therefore reduces the probability of population collapse.
  2. For stressor 1 (increase in subsea noise), the potential for marine mammals to forage in different habitats and to compensate for reduced foraging time was discussed. The ability of displaced animals will therefore depend on the availability of prey resources in the habitat to which the animals are displaced. Studies have shown that for small, localised marine mammal populations with high site fidelity, there may be biological risks posed by displacement (Forney et al., 2017). Namely, due to the importance of the areas for survival, (i.e. high resource availability), animals may be highly motivated to remain in an area despite adverse impacts (Rolland et al., 2012). Thus, the inter-related effects of subsea noise and changes in fish and shellfish prey resources needs to be considered. Impacts on fish and shellfish prey resources (stressor 2) were predicted to be localised and short-term and therefore unlikely to contribute to an inter-related effect where animals are displaced beyond the boundaries of the Proposed Development area. Within the boundaries of the Proposed Development there may, however, be short term inter-related effects of noise disturbance and reduced fish and shellfish prey resources. For example, for animals remaining in proximity to the Proposed Development a disruption in foraging may not be easy to compensate for where there are shifts in the species composition or localised reductions of fish and shellfish communities. Gordon et al. (2013) suggested that it might be possible that damaged or disoriented prey could attract marine mammals to an area of impact, providing short term feeding opportunities but increasing levels of exposure, however, there have as yet been no attempts to investigate such indirect effects on marine mammals.
  3. The assessment has described only potential adverse effects but there is also potential for some benefitial effects on marine mammal receptors. The introduction of hard substrates in offshore wind farms can lead to the establishment of new species and new fauna communities which may in turn attract marine mammals (Lindeboom et al., 2011; Raoux et al., 2017; Fowler et al., 2018). Thus, even where there is potential for an inter-related effect between ongoing vessel noise during the operation and maintenance phase this may be compensated for, to some extent, by an increase in available prey resources. Russell et al. (2014) demonstrated that harbour seals and grey seals moved between hard structures at two operational wind farms and used space-state models to predict where animals were remaining at these locations to actively forage and where they were travelling to the next foundation structure. Lindeboom et al. (2011) studied the ecological effects of the Offshore Wind Farm Egmond aan Zee and reported that even though the fish community was highly dynamic in time and space and only minor effects upon fish assemblages were observed during the operation and maintenance phase, some fish species, such as cod, positively benefited from the ‘shelter’ within the wind farm due to reduced fishing activity and the new hard substratum with associated fauna. Increased echolocation activity of harbour porpoise within the wind farm may be correlated with presence of additional food sources, suggesting that more harbour porpoises were found within the wind farm area compared to the reference areas due to increased food availability (Lindeboom et al., 2011).
  4. Inter-related effects between subsea noise and collision risk have been discussed previously and it is considered likely that marine mammals will move away from moving vessels in response to engine noise therefore reducing the risk of collision (classed as an antagonistic interaction). Alternatively, marine mammals may tolerate and persist in a highly stressed state (as a result of injury caused by underwater noise) while the vessels are approaching (Muto et al. 2018) and/or become habituated to vessel noise, not moving away from the vessel (McWhinnie et al., 2018), which would result in a synergistic interaction (Weilgart, 2011). Subsequently, the outcome will depend on the degree of habituation and a number of acoustical properties that allow an approaching vessel to be detected by a marine mammal species (Gerstein et al., 2005). However, with designed-in measures in place it is likely that any risk of injury from collision with vessels will be negligible.
  5. Evidence for the potential long-term effects of wind farms on marine mammals, related to all potential stressors, comes from monitoring programmes comparing baseline levels of abundance to construction and post-construction (operation and maintenance) phases. It is not common to prescribe impact monitoring studies with regard to marine mammals as a part of licence conditions in the UK and therefore data is sparse. A synopsis of the available evidence is provided in paragraph 763 et seq.
  6. At Scroby Sands Offshore Wind Farm, off the coast of Norfolk, aerial survey haul-out counts were conducted before, during and after the construction phases in order to monitor harbour and grey seal counts at haul-out site, located less than two kilometres away from the offshore wind farm array (Skeate and Perrow 2008; Skeate et al., 2012). Studies reported a decline in harbour seal numbers during construction, with numbers remaining lower over several subsequent years. However, the numbers of grey seals increased dramatically year after year throughout the construction and early operational periods. It has been suggested that it is possible that changes in harbour seal numbers may be linked to rapid colonisation of competing grey seal (Skeate et al., 2012). Regional changes in patterns of haul-out use by harbour seals in the Wash coincided with the construction of the Scroby Sands Offshore Wind Farm, however, such changes in harbour seal number could have been part of wider regional dynamics (Verfuss et al., 2016).
  7. As a part of marine mammal monitoring at Robin Rigg Offshore Wind Farm, boat-based surveys for cetaceans were conducted before, during, and after construction (Walls et al., 2013). Data suggested that harbour porpoise were displaced from the wind farm site during the construction period and operation period when compared to the pre-construction numbers. However, because there was only one year of pre-construction survey, natural variation cannot be ruled out as the reason for the observed change, especially since control survey locations, outside of the wind farm also appeared to experience declines in harbour porpoise density (Verfuss et al., 2016).
  8. With the expansion of offshore wind farms, post-construction monitoring programmes are being executed at various developments in Europe. A study on short-term effects of the construction of wind turbines on harbour porpoises at Horns Rev Offshore Wind Farm showed a decrease in porpoise acoustic activity within the wind farm at the onset of piling operations and subsequent recovery to higher levels a few hours after each piling operation was completed (Tougaard, et al., 2003). Another study at Horns Rev has shown that over the entire construction phase there was no significant change in the abundance of harbour porpoise in the wind farm area compared to reference areas (Teilmann et al., 2008). Teilmann et al., (2008) also reported that during the operation and maintenance phase porpoise activity was higher in both the wind farm and reference area compared to baseline levels. At Nysted Offshore Wind Farm, initially during construction and the first two years of operation there were lower acoustic detections of harbour porpoises in the wind farm area with recovery starting to occur within two years after the end of construction suggesting that animals were gradually habituating and returning to the wind farm area (Teilman et al., 2008).
  9. Simulations of the response of harbour porpoise to wind farm construction undertaken by Nabe-Nielsen et al. (2011) suggested that wind farms already existing off Danish coast do not have impact on porpoise population dynamics and that the that construction of new wind farms is not expected to cause any changes in the long-term dynamics of the population. Similarly, various studies investigated possible interactions between seals and Danish offshore wind farms (Nysted Wind Farm, Rødsand II) and found that although there was a temporary reduction in the number of seals hauled out during construction operations (i.e. piling), there was no long-term effect on haul-out behaviour trends (Edren et al., 2010; McConnell et al., 2012).
  10. These examples of monitoring studies suggest that, despite the potential effects from multiple stressors associated with offshore wind farms, marine mammals can quickly recover and return to the impacted area.

10.15. Summary of Impacts, Mitigation Measures, Likely Significant Effects and Monitoring

  1. Information on marine mammals within the regional marine mammal study area and the Proposed Development marine mammal study area was collected through desktop review, site-specific surveys, and consultation. This information is summarised in Table 10.9   Open ▸ to Table 10.11   Open ▸ . The baseline characterisation used to inform the assessment of the marine mammal IEFs present within the vicinity of the Proposed Development marine mammal study area is presented in volume 3, appendix 10.2 and summarised in Table 10.12   Open ▸ .
  2. Table 10.66   Open ▸ presents a summary of the potential impacts, secondary mitigation measures and the conclusion of likely significant effects on marine mammals in EIA terms. The impacts assessed include: injury and disturbance from elevated underwater noise during piling (fixed foundations), injury and disturbance to marine mammals from elevated underwater noise during site investigation surveys, injury and disturbance to marine mammals from elevated underwater noise during UXO clearance, injury and disturbance to marine mammals from elevated underwater noise due to vessel use and other activities, increased risk of injury of marine mammals due to collision with vessels and changes in fish and shellfish communities affecting prey availability. Overall, it is concluded that for all impacts, considered in isolation, the residual effects will not be any greater than minor (after implementation of secondary mitigation) during the construction, operation and maintenance or decommissioning phases and are not significant in EIA terms.
  3. Table 10.67   Open ▸ presents a summary of the potential cumulative effects, secondary mitigation measures and the assessment of likely significant effects on marine mammals in EIA terms. The cumulative effects assessed include: injury and disturbance from elevated underwater noise during piling (fixed foundations), injury and disturbance to marine mammals from elevated underwater noise during site investigation surveys, injury and disturbance to marine mammals from elevated underwater noise during UXO clearance, injury and disturbance to marine mammals from elevated underwater noise due to vessel use and other activities, increased risk of injury of marine mammals due to collision with vessels and changes in fish and shellfish communities affecting prey availability. Overall, it is concluded that there will be minor significant cumulative effects from the Proposed Development alongside other projects/plans.
  4. As noted in section 10.7.2, an assessment of the likely significant effects in EIA terms on the relevant features of sites that comprise part of the UK National Site Network or Natura 2000 network (i.e. European Sites) has been made in this chapter.  The assessment of the potential impacts on the site itself are deferred to the RIAA (SSER, 2022d) for the Proposed Development. The RIAA concluded that no adverse effect on integrity was predicted to occur on any European sites designated for marine mammals, specifically:
  • Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast SAC
  • Isle of May SAC
  • Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary SAC
  • Moray Firth SAC
  • Southern North Sea SAC
    1. An assessment on the individual qualifying interest features of the sites relevant to marine mammals has also been undertaken in this chapter. 
    2. No likely significant transboundary effects have been identified in regard to effects of the Proposed Development.
    3. As per the Scoping opinion for 2020 Berwick Bank ( Table 10.9   Open ▸ ), given the distance of seal haul-out sites from construction works at landfall or activities associated with cable installation, these works are unlikely to affect any individuals hauled out on land. Therefore, the effects on intertidal ecology have been screened out from marine mammal assessment. No likely significant transboundary effects have been identified in regard to effects of the Proposed Development.
Table 10.66:
Summary of Likely Significant Environmental Effects, Secondary Mitigation and Monitoring

Table 10.66: Summary of Likely Significant Environmental Effects, Secondary Mitigation and Monitoring


Table 10.67:
Summary of Likely Significant Cumulative Environment Effects, Secondary Mitigation and Monitoring

Table 10.67: Summary of Likely Significant Cumulative Environment Effects, Secondary Mitigation and Monitoring

 

10.16. References

Aarts, G., Brasseur, S. and Kirkwood, R. (2018). Behavioural response of grey seals to pile-driving. (No. C006/18). Wageningen Marine Research.

AECOM. (2022a). Scotland England Green Link 1 / Eastern Link 1 - Marine Scheme. Environmental Appraisal Report. Volume 2. Chapter 10 - Marine Mammals.

AECOM. (2022b). Eastern Green Link 2 - Marine Scheme. Environmental Appraisal Report. Volume 2. Chapter 10 - Marine Mammals.

Albouy, C., Delattre, V., Donati, G., Frolicher, T. L., Albouy-Boyer, S., Rufino, M., Pellissier, L., Mouillot, D. and Leprieur, F. (2020). Global vulnerability of marine mammals to global warming. Sci Rep 10, 548.

Andersson, M. H., Berggren, B., Wilhelmsson, D., and Öhman, M. C. (2009). Epibenthic Colonization of Concrete and Steel Pilings in a Cold-Temperate Embayment: A Field Experiment. Helgoland Marine Research, 63, pp. 249–260.

Anderson, P.A., Berzins, I.K., Fogarty, F., Hamlin, H.J. and Guillette, L.J. (2011). Sound, stress, and seahorses: the consequences of a noisy environment to animal health. Aquaculture, 311, 129–138. Anderwald, P., Brandecker, A., Coleman, M., Collins, C., Denniston, H., Haberlin, M.D., O’Donovan, M., Pinfield, R., Visser, F. and Walshe, L. (2013). Displacement responses of a mysticete, an odontocete, and a phocid seal to construction-related vessel traffic. Endang Species Res. ol. 21, 231–240.

Anderwald, P., Evans, P.G., Dyer, R., Dale, A.C., Wright, P.J., and Hoelzel, A.R. (2012). Spatial scale and environmental determinants in minke whale habitat use and foraging. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 450, 259-274.

Anderwald, P., Brandecker, A., Coleman, M., Collins, C., Denniston, H., Haberlin, M.D., O’Donovan, M., Pinfield, R., Visser, F. and Walshe, L. (2013). Displacement responses of a mysticete, an odontocete, and a phocid seal to construction-related vessel traffic. Endang Species Res. ol. 21: 231–240, 2013.

Arrigo, K.R., van Dijken, G.L., Cameron, M.A., van der Griend, J., Wedding, L. M., Hazen, L., Leape, J., Leonard, G., Merkl, A., Micheli, F., Millis, M. M., Monismith, S., Ouellette, N. T., Zivian, A., Levi, M. and Bailey, R. M. (2020). Synergistic interactions among growing stressors increase risk to an Arctic ecosystem. Nat Commun 11, 6255.

Arso Civil, M., Quick, N. J., Cheney, B., Pirotta, E., Thompson, P. M. and Hammond, P. S. (2019). Changing distribution of the east coast of Scotland bottlenose dolphin population and the challenges of area-based management. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, 29(S1), 178–196. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/aqc.3102. Accessed on: 2 March 2022.

Arso Civil, M., Quick, N., Mews, S., Hague, E. Cheney, B.J., Thompson, P.M. and Hammond, P.S. (2021). Improving understanding of bottlenose dolphin movements along the east coast of Scotland. Final report. Report number SMRUC-VAT-2020-10 provided to European Offshore Wind Deployment Centre (EOWDC), March 2021 (unpublished).

Au, W.W.L., Floyd, R.W., Penner, R.H., and Murchison, A.E. (1974). Measurement of echolocation signals of the Atlantic bottlenose dolphin, Tursiops truncatus Montagu, in open waters. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 56, 1280– 1290.

Authier, M., Peltier, H., Dore´mus, G., Dabin, W., Van Canneyt, O. and Ridoux, V. (2014). How much are stranding records affected by variation in reporting rates? A case study of small delphinids in the Bay of Biscay, Biodiversity Conservation, 23, 2591–2612.

Avila, I. C., Kaschner, K. and Dormann, C. F. (2018). Current global risks to marine mammals: Taking stock of the threats, Biological Conservation 221: 44-58.

Bailey, H. and Thompson, P. (2010). Effect of oceanographic features on fine-scale foraging movements of bottlenose dolphins. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 418, pp.223-233.

Bailey, H., Senior, B., Simmons, D., Rusin, J., Picken, G. and Thompson, P. M. (2010). Assessing underwater noise levels during pile-driving at an offshore windfarm and its potential effects on marine mammals. Marine pollution bulletin, 60(6), 888-897.

Beatrice. (2018). Piling Strategy Implementation Report.

Bejder, L., Samuels, A.M.Y., Whitehead, H.A.L., Gales, N., Mann, J., Connor, R., Heithaus, M., Watson-Capps, J.A., Flaherty, C. and Krützen, M. (2006). Decline in relative abundance of bottlenose dolphins exposed to long‐term disturbance. Conservation Biology, 20(6), pp.1791-1798.

Benhemma-Le-Gall, A., Graham, I. M., Merchant, N. D. and Thompson, P. M. (2021). Broad-Scale Responses of Harbor Porpoises to Pile-Driving and Vessel Activities During Offshore Windfarm Construction. Front. Mar. Sci.

Bennett, K.A., Robinson, K.J., Moss, S.E.W (2017). Using blubber explants to investigate adipose function in grey seals: glycolytic, lipolytic and gene expression responses to glucose and hydrocortisone. Sci Rep 7, 7731 .https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-06037-x

Birchenough, S. N. R. and Degraer, S. (2020). Science in support of ecologically sound decommissioning strategies for offshore man-made structures: taking stock of current knowledge and considering future challenges, ICES Journal of Marine Science, Volume 77, Issue 3, Pages 1075–1078, https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsaa039.

Boisseau, O., McGarry, T., Stephenson, S., Compton, R., Cucknell, A. C., Ryan, C., McLanaghan, R. and Moscrop, A. (2021). Minke whales Balaenoptera acutorostrata avoid a 15 kHz acoustic deterrent device (ADD). Marine Ecology Progress Series, 667, 191-206.

Bonner W. (1982). Seals and man: a study of interactions. Seattle, WA (USA). University of Washington Press.

Booth, C., Harwood, J., Plunkett, R., Mendes, S. and Walker, R. (2017). Using The Interim PCoD Framework To Assess The Potential Effects Of Planned Offshore Wind Developments In Eastern English Waters On Harbour Porpoises In The North Sea. Final Report. SMRUC-NEN-2017-007.

Brandt, M. J., Diederichs, A., Betke, K. and Nehls, G. (2011). Responses of harbour porpoises to pile driving at the Horns Rev II offshore wind farm in the Danish North Sea. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 421, 205-216.

Brandt, M. J., Dragon, A. C., Diederichs, A., Bellmann, M. A., Wahl, V., Piper, W., & Nehls, G. (2018). Disturbance of harbour porpoises during construction of the first seven offshore wind farms in Germany. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 596, 213–232. https://doi.org/10.3354/ meps12560

Brasseur, S., Aarts, G., Meesters, E., T. van Polanen Petel, Dijkman, E., Cremer, J. and Reijnders, P. (2012). Habitat preference of harbour seals in the Dutch coastal area: analysis and estimate of effects of offshore wind farms.

Buckstaff, K.C. (2004). Effects of watercraft noise on the acoustic behaviour of bottlenose dolphins, Tursiops truncatus, in Sarasota Bay, Florida. Mar. Mamm. Sci., 20 (2004), pp. 709-725

Calderan, S. and Leaper, R. (2019). Review of harbour porpoise bycatch in UK waters and recommendations for management.

Carrillo M.A and Ritter F.A. (2010). Increasing numbers of ship strikes in the Canary Islands: proposals for immediate action to reduce risk of vessel-whale collisions. Journal of cetacean research and management, 11(2),131-8.

Carter, M. I. D., Boehme, L., Duck, C. D., Grecian, W. J., Hastie, G. D., McConnell, B. J., Miller, D. L., Morris, C. D., Moss, S. E. W., Thompson, D., Thompson, P. M. & Russell, D. J. F. (2020). Habitat-based predictions of at-sea distribution for grey and harbour seals in the British Isles. Sea Mammal Research Unit, University of St Andrews, Report to BEIS, OESEA-16-76/OESEA-17-78

Castellote, M., Clark, C. and Lammers, M. (2010). Potential negative effects in the reproduction and survival on fin whales (Balaenoptera physalus) by shipping and airgun noise. Int. Whal. Comm. (SC/62/E3).

Castellote, M., Clark, C. W., and Lammers, M. O. (2012). Acoustic and behavioural changes by fin whales (Balaenoptera physalus) in response to shipping and airgun noise. Biological Conservation, 147(1), 115-122.

Cates, K., DeMaster, D.P., Brownell Jr, R.L., Silber, G., Gende, S., Leaper, R., Ritter, F. and Panigada, S. (2017). Strategic Plan to Mitigate the Impacts of Ship Strikes on Cetacean Populations: 2017-2020. IWC.

CEFAS (2010). Strategic review of offshore wind farm monitoring data associated with FEPA licence conditions – annex 4: underwater noise. Cefas report ME1117.

Cheney, B., Thompson, P. M., Ingram, S. N., Hammond, P. S., Stevick, P. T., Durban, J. W., Culloch, R. M., Elwen, S. H., Mandleberg, L., Janik, V. M., Quick, N. J., Islas-Villanueva, V., Robinson, K. P., Costa, M., Eisfeld, S. M., Walters, A., Phillips, C., Weir, C. R., Evans, P. G., Anderwald, P., Reid, R. J., Reid, J. B. and Wilson, B. (2013). Integrating multiple data sources to assess the distribution and abundance of bottlenose dolphins Tursiops truncatus in Scottish waters. Mammal Review 43:71-88.

Cheney, B., Graham, I. M., Barton, T., Hammond, P. S. and Thompson, P. M. (2018). Site Condition Monitoring of bottlenose dolphins within the Moray Firth Special Area 288 of Conservation: 2014-2016. Scottish National Heritage Research Report No 1021.

Christiansen, F. and Lusseau, D. (2015). Linking behavior to vital rates to measure the effects of non‐lethal disturbance on wildlife. Conservation Letters, 8(6), pp.424-431.

Christiansen, F., Víkingsson, G. A., Rasmussen, M. H. and Lusseau, D. (2013a). Minke whales maximise energy storage on their feeding grounds. Journal of Experimental Biology, 216(3), 427-436.

Christiansen, F., Rasmussen, M. and Lusseau, D. (2013b). Whale watching disrupts feeding activities of minke whales on a feeding ground. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 478, 239-251.CIEEM. (2019). Guidelines for ecological impact assessment in the UK and Ireland: Terrestrial, Freshwater, Coastal and Marine. September 2018 Version 1.1 - updated September 2019. Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management, Winchester.Cierco. (2019). Forthwind Offshore Wind Demonstration Project Environmental Scoping Request Available at: Forthwind Offshore Demonstration Array (marine.gov.scot). Accessed on: 2 March 2022.

CIEEM (2018) Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the UK and Ireland: Terrestrial, Freshwater,

Coastal and Marine. Version 1.2. Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management, Winchester.

Copping, A. (2018). The State of Knowledge for Environmental Effects Driving Consenting/Permitting for the Marine Renewable Energy Industry. Prepared for Ocean Energy Systems On behalf of the Annex IV Member Nations, January 2018.

Costa, D. P. (2012). A bioenergetics approach to developing the PCAD model. In A. N. Popper & A. Hawkins (Eds.), The Effects of Noise on Aquatic Life, New York: Springer-Verlag, 23–426.

Cranford, T. W. and Krysl, P. (2015). Fin whale sound reception mechanisms: skull vibration enables low-frequency hearing. PloS one, 10(1), e0116222.

CSA (2019). Evaluation of Potential EMF Effects on Fish Species of Commercial or Recreational Fishing Importance in Southern New England. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Headquarters, Sterling, VA. OCS Study BOEM 2019-049. 59 pp.

CSIP (2015). UK Cetacean Strandings Investigation Programme Report. Annual Report for the period 1st January – 31st December 2015 (Contract number MB0111). Available at :http://ukstrandings.org/csip-reports/. Accessed on: 2 March 2022.

Culik, B. (2010). Odontocetes. The toothed whales. UNEP/CMS Secretariat, Bonn, Germany. https://www.cms.int/reports/small_cetaceans/index.htm

Culloch, R.M., Anderwald, P., Brandecker, A. and Haberlin, D. (2016). Effect of construction-related activities and vessel traffic on marine mammals. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 549:231-242.

Culloch, R.M. and Robinson, K.P. (2008). Bottlenose dolphins using coastal regions adjacent to a Special Area of Conservation (SAC) in NE Scotland. Journal of the Marine Biological Association UK 88: 1237–1243.

Damseaux, F., Siebert, U., Pomeroy, P., Lepoint, G. and Das, K. (2021). Habitat and resource segregation of two sympatric seals in the North Sea. Science of The Total Environment, Volume 764, 142842, ISSN 0048-9697. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142842. Accessed on: 3 March 2022

de Boer, M.N. (2010). Spring distribution and density of minke whale Balaenoptera acutorostrata along an offshore bank in the central North Sea. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 408:265-274.

Deecke, V. B., Slater, P. J., and Ford, J. K. (2002). Selective habituation shapes acoustic predator recognition in harbour seals. Nature, 420(6912), 171-173.

Degraer, S., Carey, D. A., Coolen, J. W. P., Hutchison, Z. L., Kerckhof, F., Rumes, B., and Vanaverbeke, J. (2020). Offshore wind farm artificial reefs affect ecosystem structure and functioning: A Synthesis. Oceanography, 33(4), 48–57.

Dahl, P.H. and Reinhall, P.H. (2013). Beam Forming of the Underwater Sound Field from Impact Pile Driving. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 134 (1): EL1–6.

Delefosse, M., Rahbek, M., Roesen, L., and Clausen, K. (2018). Marine mammal sightings around oil and gas installations in the central North Sea. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 98(5).

De Soto, N. A., Delorme, N., Atkins, J., Howard, S., Williams, J., and Johnson, M. (2013). Anthropogenic noise causes body malformations and delays development in marine larvae. Scientific reports, 3(1), 1-5.

Diederichs, A., Hennig, V. and Niels, G. (2008). Investigation of the bird collision risk and the responses of harbour porpoises in the offshore wind farms Horns Rev, North Sea and Nysted, Baltic Sea, in Denmark Part II: Harbour porpoises. Universit¨at Hamburg and BioConsult SH, p 99.

Douglas, A. B., Calambokidis, J., Raverty, S., Jeffries, S. J., Lambourn, D. M. and Norman, S. A. (2008). Incidence of ship strikes of large Whales in Washington state. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. 88, 1121–1132. doi: 10.1017/S0025315408000295.

Dukas, R. (2002). Behavioural and ecological consequences of limited attention. Philos. T. R. Soc. B. 357, 1539–1547. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2002.10063.

Dyndo, M., Wiśniewska, D. M., Rojano-Doñate, L. and Madsen, P. T. (2015). Harbour porpoises react to low levels of high frequency vessel noise. Sci. Rep. 5:11083.EDF. (2020). Blyth Offshore Demonstration Project Phase 2 – Supporting Environmental Information, document reference: 1233849.

Elliott, M. and Birchenough, S. N. R. (2022). Man-made marine structures – Agents of marine environmental change or just other bits of the hard stuff? Marine Pollution Bulletin, Volume 176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022.113468.

Ellison, W. T., Southall, B. L., Clark, C. W. and Frankel, A. S. (2012). A new context‐based approach to assess marine mammal behavioral responses to anthropogenic sounds. Conservation Biology, 26(1), 21-28.

Embling, C.B., Gillibrand, P.A., Gordon, J., Shrimpton, J., Stevick, P.T. and Hammond, P.S. (2010). Using habitat models to identify suitable sites for marine protected areas for harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena). Biological Conservation 143: 267 – 279

Erbe, C., Dunlop, R. and Dolman, S. (2018). Effects of Noise on Marine Mammals. Chapter 10 in: Effects of Anthropogenic Noise on Animals, Slabberkoorn, H., Dooling, R.J., Popper, Ar.N., and Fay, R.R (Eds). Springer Handbook of Auditory Research. Volume 66. Series Editors Richard R. Fay and Arthur N. Popper. Springer and ASA Press.

Erbe, C. and McPherson, C. (2017). Underwater noise from geotechnical drilling and standard penetration testing. J Acoust Soc Am. 142(3):281. doi: 10.1121/1.5003328.

Edren, S.M.C., Andersen, S.M., Teilmann, J., Carstensen, J., Harders, P.B., Dietz, R. and Miller, L.A. (2010) The effect of a large Danish offshore wind farm on harbor and gray seal haul-out behavior. Marine Mammal Science, 26, 614-634.

Fernandez-Betelu, O., Graham, I. M., Brookes, K. L., Cheney, B. J., Barton, T. R. and Thompson, P. M. (2021). Far-field effects of impulsive noise on coastal bottlenose dolphins. Frontiers in Marine Science, 837

Finneran, J. J. (2015). Noise-induced hearing loss in marine mammals: A review of temporary threshold shift studies from 1996 to 2015. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 138(3), 1702-1726.

Finneran, J. J., and Schlundt, C. E. (2013). Effects of fatiguing tone frequency on temporary threshold shift in bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus). The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 133(3), 1819-1826.

Finneran, J.J., Schlundt, C.E., Carder, D.A., Clark, J.A., Young, J.A., Gaspin, J.B. and Ridgway, S.H. (2000). Auditory and behavioral responses of bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) and a beluga whale (Delphinapterus leucas) to impulsive sounds resembling distant signatures of underwater explosions. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 108, 417–431.

Fisher, H.D. and Harrison, R.J. (1970). Reproduction in the Common porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) of the North Atlantic. Journal of Zoology London 1970. 161: 471–486.

Forewind. (2013). Environmental Statement Chapter 14 - Marine Mammals. Dogger Bank Creyke Beck, Application Reference 6.14.

Forney, K.A., Southall, B.L., Slooten, E., Dawson, S., Read, A.J., Baird, R.W. and Brownell, R.L. Jr. (2017). Nowhere to go: noise impact assessments for marine mammal populations with high site fidelity. Endang Species Res 32:391-413. https://doi.org/10.3354/esr00820

Fowler, A.M., Jørgensen, A.M., Svendsen, J.C., Macreadie, P.I., Jones, D.O., Boon, A.R., Booth, D.J., Brabant, R., Callahan, E., Claisse, J.T. and Dahlgren, T.G. (2018). Environmental benefits of leaving offshore infrastructure in the ocean. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 16(10), pp.571-578.

Gall, B. L., Graham, I. M., Merchant, N. D. and Thompson, P. M. (2021). Broad-Scale Responses of Harbor Porpoises to Pile-Driving and Vessel Activities During Offshore Windfarm Construction. Frontiers in Marine Science, 8, 735

Gerstein, E. R., Blue, J. E. and Forysthe, S. E. (2005). The acoustics of vessel collisions with marine mammals. In Proceedings of OCEANS 2005 MTS/IEEE (pp. 1190-1197). IEEE.

Gill, A., Reid, R.J. and Fairburns, B.R. (2000). Photographic and strandings data highlighting the problem of marine debris and creel rope entanglement to minke whales (Balaenoptera acutorostrata). Eur Res Cetaceans 14:173–178.

Gill, A. B., Gloyne-Phillips, I., Neal, K. J. and Kimber, J. A. (2005). The Potential Effects of Electromagnetic Fields Generated by Sub-Sea Power Cables Associated with Offshore Wind Farm Developments on Electrically and Magnetically Sensitive Marine Organisms – A Review. COWRIE 1.5 Electromagnetic Fields Review.

GoBe. (2018a). Hornsea Project Three Offshore Wind Farm Environmental Statement: Volume 2, Chapter 4 – Marine Mammals. PINS Document Reference: A6.2.4 APFP Regulation 5(2)(a).

GoBe. (2018b). Appendix 15 to Deadline I submission – In-Principle Southern North Sea SCI Site Integrity Plan.

Goldstein, T., Johnson, S. P., Phillips, A. V., Hanni, K. D., Fauguier, D. A., and Gulland, F. M. D. (1999). Human-related injuries observed in live stranded pinnipeds along the central California coast 1986-1998. Aquat. Mamm. 25, 43–51.

Goold, J. C. (1996). Acoustic assessment of populations of common dolphin Delphinus delphis in conjunction with seismic surveying. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 76(3), 811-820.

Gordon, J., Gillespie, D., Potter, J., Frantzis, A., Simmonds, M. P., Swift, R., & Thompson, D. (2003). A review of the effects of seismic surveys on marine mammals. Marine Technology Society Journal, 37(4), 16-34.

Graham, I. M., Pirotta, E., Merchant, N. D., Farcas, A., Barton, T. R., Cheney, B. and Thompson, P. M. (2017). Responses of bottlenose dolphins and harbor porpoises to impact and vibration piling noise during harbor construction. Ecosphere, 8(5), e01793.

Graham, I. M., Merchant, N. D., Farcas, A., Barton, T. R., Cheney, B., Bono, S. and Thompson, P. M. (2019). Harbour porpoise responses to pile-driving diminish over time. Royal Society open science, 6(6), 190335

Grellier, K. and Lacey, C. (2011). Analysis of The Crown Estate aerial survey data for marine mammals for the FTOWDG. SMRU Report dated 12/12/2011.

Hague, E. L., Sinclair, R.R. and Sparling, E. (2020). Regional baselines for marine mammal knowledge across the North Sea and Atlantic areas of Scottish waters. Scottish Marine and Freshwater Science Vol 11 No 12. Published by Marine Scotland Science. Available from: MSS Reports Template (marine.gov.scot) Accessed August 2021.

Hall, A.J., McConnell, B.J. and Barker, R.J. (2001). Factors affecting first-year survival in grey seals and their implications for life history strategy. J Anim Ecol 70:138–149.

Hammond, P., K. McLeod, and M. Scheidat. (2006). Small Cetaceans in the European Atlantic and North Sea (SCANS-II). Final Report. Saint Andrews.

Hammond, P.S., MacLeod, K., Gillespie, D., Swift, R., and Winship, A. (2009). CODA Final Report Feb 2009.

Hammond, P. S., K. MacLeod, P. Berggren, D. L. Borchers, L. Burt, A. Cañadas, G. Desportes, G. P. Donovan, A. Gilles, D. Gillespie, J. Gordon, L. Hiby, I. Kuklik, R. Leaper, K. Lehnert, M. Leopold, P. Lovell, N. Øien, C. G. M. Paxton, V. Ridoux, E. Rogan, F. Samarra, M. Scheidat, M. Sequeira, U. Siebert, H. Skov, R. Swift, M. L. Tasker, J. Teilmann, O. Van Canneyt, and J. A. Vázquez. (2013). Cetacean abundance and distribution in European Atlantic shelf waters to inform conservation and management. Biological Conservation 164:107-122

Hammond, P. S., C. Lacey, A. Gilles, S. Viquerat, P. Börjesson, H. Herr, K. Macleod, V. Ridoux, M. Santos, M. Scheidat, J. Teilmann, J. Vingada, and N. Øien. (2017). Estimates of cetacean abundance in European Atlantic waters in summer 2016 from the SCANS-III aerial and shipboard surveys. Wageningen University. 40p.

Hammond, P. S., Lacey, C., Gilles, A., Viquerat, S., Börjesson P., H. Herr, K., Macleod, V. Ridoux, M.B. Santos, M. Scheidat, J. Teilmann, Vingada, J. and Øien, N. (2021) Estimates of cetacean abundance in European Atlantic waters in summer 2016 from the SCANS-III aerial and shipboard surveys.

Hanson, N., Thompson., D., Duck, C., Baxter, J. and Lonergan, M. (2017). Harbour seal (Phoca vitulina) abundance within the Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary, Scotland : recent trends and extrapolation to extinction ' , Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 27: 268-281.

Harris, C.M., Thomas, L., Falcone, E.A., Hildebrand, J., Houser, D., Kvadsheim, P.H., Lam, F.P.A., Miller, P.J., Moretti, D.J., Read, A.J. and Slabbekoorn, H. (2018). Marine mammals and sonar: Dose‐response studies, the risk‐disturbance hypothesis and the role of exposure context. Journal of applied ecology, 55(1), pp.396-404.

Harwood, J., King, S., Schick, R., Donovan, C. and Booth, C. (2014). A Protocol for Implementing the Interim Population Consequences of Disturbance (PCOD) Approach: Quantifying and assessing the Effects of UK Offshore Renewable Energy Developments on Marine Mammal Populations: Report SMRUL-TCE-2013-014. Scottish Marine and Freshwater Science, 5(2), 1-90.

Hastie, G.D., Donovan, C., Götz, T. and Janik, V.M. (2014). Behavioral responses by grey seals (Halichoerus grypus) to high frequency sonar. Marine pollution bulletin, 79(1-2), 205-210.

Hastie, G.D., Russell, D.J.F., McConnell, B., Moss, S., Thompson, D. and Janik. V.M. (2015). Sound exposure in harbour seals during the installation of an offshore wind farm: predictions of auditory damage. Journal of Applied Ecology 52:631-640.

Hastie, G. D., Russell, D. J., Benjamins, S., Moss, S., Wilson, B. and Thompson, D. (2016). Dynamic habitat corridors for marine predators; intensive use of a coastal channel by harbour seals is modulated by tidal currents. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology:1-14.

Hastie, G., Merchant, N. D., Götz, T., Russell, D. J., Thompson, P. and Janik, V. M. (2019). Effects of impulsive noise on marine mammals: investigating range‐dependent risk. Ecological Applications, 29(5), e01906.

Hayes, M. P. and Gough, P. T. (1992). Broad-band synthetic aperture sonar. IEEE Journal of Oceanic engineering, 17(1), 80-94.

Hastie, G. D., Lepper, P., McKnight, J. C., Milne, R., Russell, D. J. and Thompson, D. (2021). Acoustic risk balancing by marine mammals: anthropogenic noise can influence the foraging decisions by seals. Journal of Applied Ecology, 58(9), 1854-1863.

Haug, T., Lindstrøm, U. and Nilssen, K. T. (2002). Variations in Minke Whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) Diet and Body Condition in Response to Ecosystem Changes in the Barents Sea. Sarsia, 87:6, 409-422.

Heinänen, S., and H. Skov. (2015). The identification of discrete and persistent areas of relatively high harbour porpoise density in the wider UK marine area. JNCC Report No. 544, JNCC, Peterborough.

Helker, V. T., M. M. Muto, K. Savage, S. Teerlink, L. A. Jemison, K.Wilkinson, and J. Jannot (2017). Human-caused mortality and injury of NMFS-managed Alaska marine mammal stocks, 2011-2015. U.S. Dep. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-AFSC-354,112 pp.

Henderson, D. and Hamernik, R. P. (1986). Impulse noise: Critical review. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 80, 569-584

Hermannsen, L. and Beedholm, K. (2014). High frequency components of ship noise in shallow water with a discussion of implications for harbor porpoises (Phocoena phocoena). The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 136, 1640.

Hoelzel, A. R., Potter, C. W. and Best, P.B. (1998). Genetic differentiation between parapatric ‘nearshore’ and ‘offshore’ populations of the bottlenose dolphin. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences 265: 1177–1183.

IAMMWG. 2013. Management Units for marine mammals in UK waters (June 2013).

IAMMWG. (2015). Management Units for cetaceans in UK waters. JNCC Report 547, ISSN 0963-8091.

IAMMWG. (2021). Updated abundance estimates for cetacean Management Units in UK waters. JNCC Report No. 680, JNCC Peterborough, ISSN 0963-8091.

IAMMWG, Camphuysen, C.J. and Siemensma, M.L. (2015). A Conservation Literature Review for the Harbour Porpoise (Phocoena phocoena). JNCC Report No. 566, Peterborough. 96pp.

IJsseldijk, L., Brownlow, A., Davison, N., Deaville, R., Haelters, J., Keijl, G., Siebert, U. and Ten Doeschate, M. (2018). Spatiotemporal trends in white-beaked dolphin strandings along the North Sea coast from 1991–2017. 61: 153-163.

Inch Cape Offshore Limited. (2014). Offshore Environmental Statement.

Inch Cape Offshore Limited Scoping Report. (2017). Inch Cape Offshore Windfarm (Revised Design) - Scoping Report.

Inch Cape Offshore Limited. (2018). Offshore Environmental Statement Revised.

Inger, R., Attrill, M.J., Bearhop, S., Broderick, A.C., James Grecian, W., Hodgson, D.J., Mills, C., Sheehan, E., Votier, S.C., Witt, M.J. and Godley, B.J. (2009). Marine renewable energy: potential benefits to biodiversity? An urgent call for research. Journal of Applied Ecology, 46: 1145-1153.

Innogy. (2020). Sofia Offshore Wind Farm Environmental Appraisal of Increased Hammer Energy: Main Report. Document Ref: 003230484-02. Available at: EN010051-002445-Innogy Renewables UK Limited Hammer Energy Increase 4000kJ Environmental Appraisal Main Report 2020.pdf (planninginspectorate.gov.uk). Accessed on: 25 March 2022.

IWC (2006). 58th Annual Meeting of the International Whaling Commission. Ship strikes working group. First progress report to the conservation committee. Report No. IWC/58CC3.

Jensen, A. S., and Silber, G. K. (2003). Large Whale Ship Strike Database. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-OPR. Silver Spring, MD: US Department of Commerce.

Jensen, A. S., and Silber, G. K. (2004). Large Whale Ship Strike Database. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-OPR. Silver Spring, MD: US Department of Commerce

Jensen, S.K., Lacaze, J.P., Hermann, G., Kershaw, J., Brownlow, A., Turner, A. and Hall, A. (2015) Detection and effects of harmful algal toxins in Scottish harbour seals and potential links to population decline. Toxicon. (97): 1 -14.

JNCC. (2019a). Article 17 Habitats Directive Report 2019: Species Conservation Status Assessments 2019. Conservation status assessment for the species: S1351 ‐ Harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena).

JNCC. (2019b). Article 17 Habitats Directive Report 2019: Species Conservation Status Assessments 2019. Conservation status assessment for the species: S1349 ‐ Bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus).

JNCC. (2019c). Article 17 Habitats Directive Report 2019: Species Conservation Status Assessments 2019. Conservation status assessment for the species: S2032 ‐ White-beaked dolphin (Lagenorhynchus albirostris).

JNCC. (2019d). Article 17 Habitats Directive Report 2019: Species Conservation Status Assessments 2019. Conservation status assessment for the species: S2618 ‐ Minke whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata).

JNCC. (2019e). Article 17 Habitats Directive Report 2019: Species Conservation Status Assessments 2019. Conservation status assessment for the species: S1365 ‐ Common seal (Phoca vitulina).

JNCC. (2019f). Article 17 Habitats Directive Report 2019: Species Conservation Status Assessments 2019. Conservation status assessment for the species: S1365 S1364 ‐ Grey seal (Halichoerus grypus).

JNCC (2010a). Statutory nature conservation agency protocol for minimising the risk of injury to marine mammals from piling noise. August 2010. Available at: Statutory nature conservation agency protocol for minimising the ris of injury to marine mammals from piling noise (jncc.gov.uk). Accessed on 02 March 2022.

JNCC (2010b). JNCC guidelines for minimising the risk of injury to marine mammals from using explosives. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Aberdeen, UK.

JNCC (2017). JNCC guidelines for minimising the risk of injury to marine mammals from geophysical surveys.

Johnson, A., and Acevedo-Gutiérrez, A. (2007). Regulation compliance by vessels and disturbance of harbor seals. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 85, 290-294.

Kastelein, R. A., Hardeman, J., and Boer, H. (1997). Food consumption and body weight of harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena). The biology of the harbour porpoise, 217-233.

Kastelein, R. A., van Heerden, D., Gransier, R., and Hoek, L. (2013). Behavioral responses of a harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) to playbacks of broadband pile driving sounds. Marine environmental research, 92, 206-214.

Kastelein, R. A., Hoek, L., Gransier, R., Rambags, M., and Claeys, N. (2014). Effect of level, duration, and inter-pulse interval of 1-2 kHz sonar signal exposures on harbor porpoise hearing. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 136(1), 412–422.

Kastelein, R. A., Helder-Hoek, L., Covi, J., and Gransier, R. (2016). Pile driving playback sounds and temporary threshold shift in harbor porpoises (Phocoena phocoena): Effect of exposure duration. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 139(5), 2842-2851.

Kastelein, R.A., Helder-Hoek, L. and Van de Voorde, S. (2017). Hearing thresholds of a male and a female harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena). The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 142(2), 1006-1010.

Kastelein, R. A., Helder-Hoek, L., Kommeren, A., Covi, J., and Gransier, R. (2018a). Effect of pile-driving sounds on harbor seal (Phoca vitulina) hearing. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 143(6), 3583-3594.

Kastelein, R. A., Helder-Hoek, L., and Terhune, J. M. (2018b). Hearing thresholds, for underwater sounds, of harbor seals (Phoca vitulina) at the water surface. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 143(4), 2554-2563.

Kastelein, R.A., Helder-Hoek, L., Cornelisse, S., Huijser, L.A. and Terhune, J.M. (2019a). Temporary hearing threshold shift in harbor seals (Phoca vitulina) due to a one-sixth-octave noise band centered at 16 kHz. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 146(5), 3113-3122.

Kastelein, R. A., Helder-Hoek, L., Booth, C., Jennings, N. and Leopold, M. (2019b). High levels of food intake in harbor porpoises (Phocoena phocoena): Insight into recovery from disturbance. Aquatic Mammals, 45(4), 380-388.

Kastelein, R.A., Helder-Hoek, L., Cornelisse, S.A., von Benda-Beckmann, A. M., Lam, F.A., de Jong, C.A.F and Ketten, D.R. (2020). Lack of reproducibility of temporary hearing threshold shifts in a harbor porpoise after exposure to repeated airgun sounds. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 148, 556-565.

Kastelein, R.A., Helder-Hoek, L., Cornelisse, S.A., Defillet, L.N., Huijser, L.A. and Gransier, R. (2021). Temporary Hearing Threshold Shift in a Harbor Porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) Due to Exposure to a Continuous One-Sixth-Octave Noise Band Centered at 0.5 kHz. Aquatic Mammals, 47(2), 135-145.

Ketten, D. R. (1993). Blast injury in humpback whale ears: Evidence and implications. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 94, 1849-1850 (1993)

Ketten, D. R. and Mountain, D. C. (2009). Modelling minke whale hearing. Presentation to the Joint Industry Programme, United Kingdom.

King, S. and Sparling, C. (2012). FTOWDG Cetacean Density Modelling –Non Technical summary. Report number SMRUL-SGW-029.

Lacy, R.C., Williams, R., Ashe, E., Balcomb III, K.C., Brent, L.J., Clark, C.W., Croft, D.P., Giles, D.A., MacDuffee, M. and Paquet, P.C. (2017). Evaluating anthropogenic threats to endangered killer whales to inform effective recovery plans. Scientific reports, 7(1), pp.1-12.

Laist, D.W., Knowlton, A.R., Mead, J.G., Collet, A.S. and Podesta, M. (2001). Collisions between ships and whales. Marine Mammal Science. 17, 35 - 75.

Langton, R., Boulcott, P. and Wright, P.J. (2021). A verified distribution model for the lesser sandeel Ammodytes marinus. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 667:145-159. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3354/meps13693. Accessed on: 3 March 2022.

Leaper, R., Calderan, S. and Cooke, J. (2015). A Simulation Framework to Evaluate the Efficiency of Using Visual Observers to Reduce the Risk of Injury from Loud Sound Sources. Aquatic Mammals, 41(4).

Leatherwood, S., Reeves, R. R., Perrin, W. F., & Evans, W. E. (1988). Whales, dolphins, and porpoises of the eastern North Pacific and adjacent Arctic waters: A guide to their identification. New York: Dover Publications.

Lee, P. H. and Weis, J. S. (1980). Effects of magnetic fields on regeneration in fiddler crabs. Biol. Bull. 159, 681–691.

Lindeboom, H. J., H. J. Kouwenhoven, M. J. N. Bergman, S. Bouma, S. Brasseur, R. Daan, R. C. Fijn, D. de Haan, S. Dirksen, R. van Hal, R. Hille Ris Lambers, R. ter Hofstede, K. L. Krijgsveld, M. Leopold, and M. Scheidat. (2011). Short-term ecological effects of an offshore wind farm in the Dutch coastal zone; a compilation. Environmental Research Letters 6:1-13.

Lippert, S., Huisman, M., Ruhnau, M., Estorff, O.V. and van Zandwijk, K. (2017). Prognosis of Underwater Pile Driving Noise for Submerged Skirt Piles of Jacket Structures. In 4th Underwater Acoustics Conference and Exhibition (UACE 2017), Skiathos, Greece.

Lucke, K., Siebert, U., Lepper, P. A. and Blanchet, M-A. (2009). Temporary shift in masked hearing thresholds in a harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) after exposure to seismic airgun stimuli. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 125(6), 4060-4070.

Luksenburg. (2014). Prevalence of External Injuries in Small Cetaceans in Aruban Waters, Southern Caribbean. PLoS One, 9 (1) doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0088988.

Lusseau, D., Williams, R., Wilson, B., Grellier, K., Barton, T.R., Hammond, P.S. and Thompson, P.M. (2004). Parallel influence of climate on the behaviour of Pacific killer whales and Atlantic bottlenose dolphins. Ecology Letters, 7: 1068-1076.

Lusseau, D., New, L., Donovan, C., Cheney, B., Thompson, P.M., Hastie, G. and Harwood, J (2011). The development of a framework to understand and predict the population consequences of disturbances for the Moray Firth bottlenose dolphin population. Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 468.

MacLeod, C.D., S.M. Bannon, G.J. Pierce, C. Schweder, J.A. Learmonth, J.S. Herman and R.J. Reid (2005). Climate change and the cetacean community of north-west Scotland. Biological Conservation 124 (4): 477-483.

MacLeod, C.D., Weir, C.R., Santos, M.B. and Dunn, T.E. (2008). Temperature-based summer habitat partitioning between white-beaked and common dolphins around the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 88(6): 1193-1198.

Madsen, P. T., Wahlberg, M., Tougaard, J., Lucke, K. and Tyack, P. (2006). Wind turbine underwater noise and marine mammals: implications of current knowledge and data needs. Marine Ecology Progress Series 309:279-295.

Mainstream Renewable Power (2019). Neart Na Gaoithe Offshore Wind Farm Environmental Statement.

Marine Scotland. (2022). Berwick Bank Wind Farm Scoping Opinion. Available at: Scoping Opinion – Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm | Marine Scotland Information. Accessed on 9 June 2022.

McGarry, T., Boisseau, O., Stephenson, S. and Compton, R. (2017). Understanding the Effectiveness of Acoustic Deterrent Devices (ADDs) on Minke Whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata), a Low Frequency Cetacean. ORJIP Project 4, Phase 2. RPS Report EOR0692. Prepared on behalf of The Carbon Trust. November 2017.

McGarry, T., De Silva, R., Canning, S., Mendes, S., Prior, A., Stephenson, S. & Wilson, J. (2020). Evidence base for application of acoustic deterrent devices (ADDs) as marine mammal mitigation (Version 2.0). JNCC Report No. 615, JNCC, Peterborough. ISSN 0963-8091.

Marubini, F., Gimona, A., Evans, P. G., Wright, P. J. and Pierce, G. J. (2009). Habitat preferences and interannual variability in occurrence of the harbour porpoise Phocoena phocoena off northwest Scotland. Marine Ecology Progress Series 381:297-310.

McConnell, B., Lonergan, M. and Dietz, R. (2012). Interactions between seals and offshore wind farms.’ The Crown Estate, 41 pages. ISBN: 978-1-906410-34-6.

Mclean, D., Cerqueira, F., Luciana, B., Jessica, M., Karen, S., Marie-Lise, S., Matthew, B., Oliver, B., Silvana, B., Todd, B., Fabio, B., Ann, C., Jeremy, C., Scott, C., Pierpaolo, C., Joop, J., Michael, F., Irene, F., Ashley, G., Bronwyn, T. M. (2022). Influence of offshore oil and gas structures on seascape ecological connectivity. Global Change Biology. 32. 10.1111/gcb.16134.

McWhinnie, L. H., Halliday, W. D., Insley, S. J., Hilliard, C. and Canessa, R. R. (2018). Vessel traffic in the Canadian Arctic: management solutions for minimizing impacts on whales in a changing northern region. Ocean Coast Manage 160: 1-17.

Mellish, J.E., Iverson, S.J. and Bowen, D.W. (1999). Individual variation in maternal energy allocation and milk production in grey seals and consequences for pup growth and weaning characteristics. Physiol Biochem Zool 72:677–690

Mikkelsen, L., Johnson, M., Wisniewska, D.M., van Neer, A., Siebert, U., Madsen, P.T. and Teilmann, J. (2019). Long‐term sound and movement recording tags to study natural behavior and reaction to ship noise of seals. Ecology and evolution, 9(5), pp.2588-2601.

Miller, L. J., Solangi, M., and Kuczaj, S. A. (2008). Immediate response of Atlantic bottlenose dolphins to high-speed personal watercraft in the Mississippi Sound. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 88(6), 1139-1143.

MMO (2014). Review of Post-Consent Offshore Wind Farm Monitoring Data Associated with Marine Licence Conditions. A report produced for the Marine Management Organisation, pp 194. MMO Project No: 1031. ISBN: 978-1-909452-24-4.

Moray Offshore Renewables Ltd. (2012). Moray Offshore Renewables Limited Environmental Statement Technical Appendix 7.3 A - Marine Mammals Environmental Impact Assessment. Produced by Natural Power on behalf of Moray Offshore Renewables Ltd.

Moray West. (2018). Offshore EIA Report, Moray Offshore Windfarm (West) Limited.

Morell, M., IJsseldijk, L.L., Berends, A.J., Gröne, A., Siebert, U., Raverty, S.A., Shadwick, R.E. and Kik, M.J. (2021). Evidence of Hearing Loss and Unrelated Toxoplasmosis in a Free-Ranging Harbour Porpoise (Phocoena phocoena). Animals, 11(11), 3058.

Murray, C., Mach, C. Megan, E. and Martone, R. G. (2014). Cumulative effects in marine ecosystems: scientific perspectives on its challenges and solutions. WWF-Canada and Center For Ocean Solutions. 60 pp.

Muto, M. M., V. T. Helker, R. P. Angliss, B. A. Allen, P. L. Boveng, J. M. Breiwick, M. F. Cameron, P. J. Clapham, S. P. Dahle, M. E. Dahlheim, B. S. Fadely, M. C. Ferguson, L. W. Fritz, R. C. Hobbs, Y. V. Ivashchenko, A. S. Kennedy, J. M. London, S. A. Mizroch, R. R. Ream, E. L. Richmond, K. E. W. Shelden, R. G. Towell, P. R. Wade, J. M. Waite, and Zerbini, A. N. (2018). Alaska marine mammal stock assessments, 2017. U.S. Dep. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-AFSC-378, 382 p.

Nabe-Nielsen, J., Tougaard, J., Teilmann, J. and Sveegaard, S. (2011). Effects of wind farms on harbour porpoise behavior and population dynamics. Report commissioned by the Environmental Group under the Danish Environmental Monitoring Programme. Danish Centre for Environment and Energy, Aarhus University.

NAREC (2012). Blyth Offshore Demonstration Project Environmental Statement.

NAREC (2013). Blyth Offshore Demonstration Project Supplementary Environmental Information.

National Grid (2021a). Scotland to England Green Link (SEGL) ~ Eastern Link 1 Marine Scheme Scoping Report. March 2021.

National Grid (2021b). Scotland to England Green Link (SEGL) ~ Eastern Link 2 Marine Scheme Scoping Report. July 2021.

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (2005). Scoping Report for NMFS EIS for the National Acoustic Guidelines on Marine Mammals. National Marine Fisheries Service.

NatureScot. (2020). Southern Trench Marine Protected Area. Available at: Accessed on 12 May 2022.

Nielsen, N. H, Hansen, R. G., Teilmann, J. and Heide-Jorgensen, M. P. (2013). Extensive offshore movements of harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena). NAMMCO SC/20/HP/08. Harbour porpoise working group.

NMFS (2012). National Marine Fisheries Service Policy Directive 02-238. Process for Distinguishing Serious from Non-Serious Injury of Marine Mammals. Available at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/op/pds/documents/02/02-238.pdf. Accessed on: 3 March 2022.

NMFS. (2018). 2018 Revisions to: Technical Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0): Underwater Thresholds for Onset of Permanent and Temporary Threshold Shifts. U.S. Dept. of Commer., NOAA. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-OPR-59, 167 p

NMPi (2021). Webmap Service. National Marine Plan Interactive. Available at: Marine Scotland - National Marine Plan Interactive (atkinsgeospatial.com). Accessed August 2021.

Normandeau, E., Tricas, T. and Gill, E. (2011). Effects of EMFs from Undersea Power Cables on Elasmobranchs and Other Marine Species. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement, Pacific OCS Region, Camarillo, CA. OCS Study BOEMRE 2011-09.

Northridge, S., Cargill, A., and Coram, A. (2010). Entanglement of Minke Whales in Scottish Waters; An Investigation into Occurrence, Causes and Mitigation. Final Report to Scottish Government, CR/2007/49. St Andrews: University of St Andrews, 57

Northridge, S., Kingston, A. and Thomas, L. (2018). Annual report on the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 812/2004 during 2018.

Northridge, S., Kingston, A. and Thomas, L. (2019). Annual report on the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 812/2004 during 2018.

Nowacek, D. P., Thorne, L. H., Johnston, D. W. and Tyack, P. L. (2007). Responses of cetaceans to anthropogenic noise. Mammal Rev. 2007, Volume 37, No. 2, 81–115.

Nowacek, S. M., Wells, R.S. and Solow, A. R. (2001). Short-term effects of boat traffic on bottlenose dolphins, Tursiops truncatuJ, in Sarasota Bay, Florida. Marine Mammal Science 17:673-688

Onoufriou, J., Jones, E., Hastie, G., and Thompson, D. (2016). Investigations into the interactions between harbour seals (Phoca vitulina) and vessels in the inner Moray Firth. Marine Scotland Science.

Ordtek. 2017. Unexploded Ordnance (UXO) Hazard and Risk Assessment with Risk Mitigation Strategy: Seagreen Alpha and Bravo Offshore Wind Farms, October 2017., Report reference JM5383_RA-RMS_V2.0, Ordtek Limited.

Ordtek. 2019. Unexploded Ordnance (UXO) Risk Assessment with Risk Mitigation Strategy: Seagreen Alpha and Bravo Offshore Wind Farms, June 2019, Report reference JM5602_RARMS_V2.1, Ordtek Limited.

OSPAR IA (2017). Abundance and distribution of cetaceans. Available from: https://oap.ospar.org/en/ospar-assessments/intermediate-assessment-2017/. Accessed on 04 August 2022.

Otani, S., Naito, Y., Kato, A. and Kawamura, A. (2000). Diving behaviour and swimming speed of a freeranging harbour porpoise Phocoena phocoena. Marine Mammal Science 16, 811-814

Parsons, E.C.M., Dolman, S.J., Wright, A.J., Rose, N.A., Burns, W.C.G. (2008). Navy sonar and cetaceans: Just how much does the gun need to smoke before we act? Marine Pollution Bulletin 56, 1248–1257.

Parsons, E.C.M., Dolman, S.J., Jasny, M., Rose, N.A., Simmonds, M.P., Wright, A.J. (2009). A critique of the UK’s JNCC seismic survey guidelines for minimising acoustic disturbance to marine mammals: Best Practice? Marine Pollution Bulletin 58: 643 – 651.

Paxton, C., Scott-Hayward, L. and Rexstad, E. (2014). Statistical approaches to aid the identification of Marine Protected Areas for minke whale, Risso’s dolphin, white-beaked dolphin and basking shark. Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 594., Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 594.

Paxton, C.G.M., Scott-Hayward, L., Mackenzie, M., Rexstad, E. and Thomas L. (2016). Revised Phase III Data Analysis of Joint Cetacean Protocol Data Resource. JNCC Report No.517

Pelagica Environmental Consultancy Ltd. (2018). Chapter 8 Marine Mammals, Neart na Gaoithe Offshore Wind Farm Environmental Impact Assessment Report. Available at: https://marine.gov.scot/sites/default/files/combined_document_-_revised.pdf . Accessed on 02 March 2022.

Peltier, H., Beaufils, A., Cesarini, C., Dabin W., Dars, C., Demaret, F., Dhermain, F., Doremus, G., Labach H., Van Canneyt, O. and Spitz, J. (2019). Monitoring of Marine Mammal Strandings Along French Coasts Reveals the Importance of Ship Strikes on Large Cetaceans: A Challenge for the European Marine Strategy Framework Directive. Frontiers in Marine Science, 6, pp. 486.

Petersen, J. K and Malm, T. (2006). Offshore Windmill Farms: Threats to or Possibilities for the Marine Environment. Ambio, 35(2), 75–80.

Pierpoint, C. (2008). Harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) foraging strategy at a high energy, near-shore site in south-west Wales, UK. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the UK 88:1167-1173.

Pirotta, E., Merchant, D., Thompson M., Barton R., and Lusseau, D. (2015). Quantifying the effect of boat disturbance on bottlenose dolphin foraging activity. Biological Conservation, 181, 82-89.

Prideaux, G. (2016). CMS Family Guidelines on Environmental Impact Assessment for Marine Noise-generating Activites, Convention on Migratory Species of Wild Animals, Bonn.

Quick, N. J., M. Arso Civil, B. Cheney, V. Islas, V. Janik, P. M. Thompson, and Hammond, P. S. (2014). The east coast of Scotland bottlenose dolphin population: Improving understanding of ecology outside the Moray Firth SAC. This document was produced as part of the UK Department of Energy and Climate Change's offshore energy Strategic Environmental Assessment programme.

Quick, N. and Cheney, B. (2011). Cetacean Baseline Characterisation for the Firth of Tay based on existing data: Bottlenose dolphins. SMRU Limited.

Raoux, A., Tecchio, S., Pezy, J.P., Lassalle, G., Degraer, S., Wilhelmsson, D., Cachera, M., Ernande, B., Le Guen, C., Haraldsson, M. and Grangeré, K. (2017). Benthic and fish aggregation inside an offshore wind farm: which effects on the trophic web functioning?. Ecological Indicators, 72, pp.33-46.

Reichmuth, C., Sills, J. M., Mulsow, J., and Ghoul, A. (2019). Long-term evidence of noise-induced permanent threshold shift in a harbor seal (Phoca vitulina). The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 146(4), 2552-2561.

Reid, J., Evans, P.G.H. and Northridge, S.P. (2003). Cetacean Distribution Atlas. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough. 68pp.

Reiser, C., Funk, D., Rodrigues, R. and Hannay, D. (2011). Marine Mammal Monitoring and Mitigation During Marine Geophysical Surveys by Shell Offshore, Inc. in the Alaskan Chukchi and Beaufort Seas, July-October 2010: 90-Day Report. LGL Alaska Research Associates.

Richardson, W.J., Greene, C.R. Jr., Malme, C.I., and Thomson, D.H. (1995). Marine Mammals and Noise. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, USA. 576p

Richardson, H. (2012) The effect of boat disturbance on the bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) of Cardigan Bay in Wales. Thesis submitted for the degree of MSc Conservation, Dept of Geography, UCL (University College London). August 2012.

Risch, D., Wilson, S.C. and Hoogerwerf, M. (2019). Seasonal and diel acoustic presence of North Atlantic minke whales in the North Sea. Sci Rep 9, 3571

Robards, M. D., Silber, G. K., Adams, J. D., Arroyo, J., Lorenzini, D., Schwehr, K., and Amos, J. (2016). Conservation science and policy applications of the marine vessel Automatic Identification System (AIS)—A review. Bulletin of Marine Science, 92(1), 75-113.Robinson, K.J., Hall, A.J., Scholl, G., Debier, C., Thome, J., Eppe, G., Adam, C. and Bennet, K.A. (2019) Investigating decadal changes in persistent organic pollutants in Scottish grey seal pups. Aquatic Conserv: Mar Freshw Ecosyst. 29( S1): 86– 100.

Robinson, K.P. and Tetley, M.J., (2005). Environmental factors affecting the fine-scale distribution of minke whales (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) in a dynamic coastal ecosystem. ICES Annual Science Conference, Aberdeen, Scotland, 20–24 September 2005, CM 2005 R:20.

Robinson, K.P., Stevick, P.T. and MacLeod, C.D. (2007). An Integrated Approach to Non-lethal Research on Minke Whales in European Waters. European Cetacean Society Spec. Public. Series 47: 8-13.

Robinson, K. P., Tetley, M. and Mitchelson-Jacob, E. (2009). The distribution and habitat preference of coastally occurring Minke whales (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) in the outer southern Moray firth, Northeast Scotland. Journal of Coastal Conservation. 13. 39-48. 10.1007/s11852-009-0050-2.

Robinson, S. P., Wang, L., Cheong, S., Lepper, P.A., Marubini, F. and Hartley, J. P. (2020). Underwater acoustic characterisation of unexploded ordnance disposal using deflagration. Marine Pollution Bulletin, Volume 160, 111646, ISSN 0025-326X.

Rojano-Doñate, L., Mcdonald, B., Wisniewska, D., Johnson, M., Teilmann, J.,Wahlberg, M., Kristensen, J. and Madsen, P. (2018). High field metabolic rates of wild harbour porpoises. The Journal of Experimental Biology. 221.

Rolland, R.M., Parks, S.E., Hunt, K.E. and Castellote, M. (2012). Evidence that ship noise increases stress in right whales. Proc Biol Sci 279: 2363−2368.

Rouse, S., Porter, J.S., Wilding, T.A. (2020). Artificial reef design affects benthic secondary productivity and provision of functional habitat. Ecol Evol. 10: 2122– 2130. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.6047

Royal Haskoning DHV. (2020). NMC Application: Environmental Report RE-PM763-RHDHV-00002.

Royal Haskoning DHV. (2021). Green Volt Offshore windfarm - Offshore Environmental Impact Assessment Offshore Scoping Report. Reference: PC2483-RHD-ZZ-XX-RP-Z-0001.

Russell, D. J. F., McConnell, B., Thompson, D., Duck, C., Morris, C., Harwood, J., and Matthiopoulos, J. (2013). Uncovering the links between foraging and breeding regions in a highly mobile mammal. Journal of Applied Ecology, 50(2), 499–509. doi:10.1111/1365-2664.12048.

Russell, D. J., Brasseur, S. M., Thompson, D., Hastie, G. D., Janik, V. M., Aarts, G., McClintock, B. T., Matthiopoulos, J., Moss, S. E. and McConnell, B. (2014). Marine mammals trace anthropogenic structures at sea. Current Biology 24:R638-R639

Russell, D.J., Hastie, G.D., Thompson, D., Janik, V.M., Hammond, P.S., Scott‐Hayward, L.A., Matthiopoulos, J., Jones, E.L. and McConnell, B.J., (2016). Avoidance of wind farms by harbour seals is limited to pile driving activities. Journal of Applied Ecology, 53(6), pp.1642-1652.

Russell, D. J. R., Jones, E. L. and Morris, C. D. (2017). Updated Seal Usage Maps: The Estimated at-sea Distribution of Grey and Harbour Seals. Scottish Marine and Freshwater Science Report Vol 8 No 25. Published by Marine Scotland Science ISSN: 2043-7722 DOI: 10.7489/2027-1

Salomons, E. M., Binnerts, B., Betke, K. and von Benda-Beckmann, A. M. (2021). Noise of underwater explosions in the North Sea. A comparison of experimental data and model predictions. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 149, 1878-1888 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0003754

Santos, M.B., and Pierce, G.J. (2003). The diet of harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) in the Northeast Atlantic. Oceanography and Marine Biology: an Annual Review 2003, 41, 355–390.

Santos, M.B., Pierce, G.J., Learmonth, J.A., Reid, R.J., Ross, H.M., Patterson, I.A.P., Reid, D.G. and Beare, D. (2004). Variability in the diet of harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) in Scottish waters 1992-2003. Marine Mammal Science, 20(1), 1-27.

Santos, M. E., Couchinho, M. N. and Luis, A. R. (2010). Monitoring underwater explosions in the habitat of resident bottlenose dolphins. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 128, 3805

Sarnocińska, J., Teilmann, J., Balle, J. D., van Beest, F. M., Delefosse, M., and Tougaard, J. (2020). Harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) reaction to a 3D seismic airgun survey in the North Sea. Frontiers in Marine Science, 6, 824.

Scheidat, M., Tougaard, J., Brasseur, S., Carstensen, J., T. van Polanen Petel, Teilmann, J. and Reijnders, P. (2011). Harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) and wind farms: a case study in the Dutch North Sea. Environmental Research Letters 6:1-10.

Schoeman, R.P., Patterson-Abrolat, C. and Plön, S. (2020). A Global Review of Vessel Collisions With Marine Animals. Front. Mar. Sci. 7:292.

Schulte-Pelkum, N., Wieskotten, S., Hanke, W., Dehnhardt, G., and Mauck, B. (2007). Tracking of biogenic hydrodynamic trails in harbour seals (Phoca vitulina). Journal of Experimental Biology, 210(5), 781-787.SCOS (2020). Scientific Advice on Matters Related to the Management of Seal Populations: 2020. Sea Mammal Research Unit. Available at: SCOS Reports | SMRU (st-andrews.ac.uk). Accessed on: 25 November 2021.

Seagreen Technical Report. (2018). Appendix F1 Baseline Technical Report Round 3 Zone 2 Firth of Forth Offshore Wind Farm Development.

Seagreen Wind Energy Ltd. (2020). Offshore Wind Farm Piling Strategy. LF000009-CST-OF-PLN-0022. Available at: https://marine.gov.scot/sites/default/files/owf_piling_strategy.pdf. Accessed on 08 July 2022.

Seagreen Wind Energy Ltd (2021) Seagreen Alpha and Bravo Site UXO clearance – European Protected Species Risk Assessment and Marine Mammal Mitigation Plan. Available at https://marine.gov.scot/sites/default/files/eps_risk_assessment_3.pdf. Accessed on 08 July 2022

Seagreen Wind Energy Ltd. (2022a). Seagreen S36C Application Environmental Appraisal Report. LF-000009-CST-OF-LIC-REP-0011. Available at: https://marine.gov.scot/sites/default/files/seagreen_s36c_environmental_appraisal_report.pdf. Accessed on 08 July 2022.

Seagreen Wind Energy Ltd. (2022b). Seagreen S36C Application Screening Report. LF000012-CST-EV-REP-0001. Available at: https://marine.gov.scot/sites/default/files/appendix_a_-_seagreen_s36c_application_screening_report.pdf. Accessed on 08 July 2022

Seagreen Wind Energy Ltd. (2021). Seagreen Alpha and Bravo Site UXO clearance – European Protected Species Risk Assessment and Marine Mammal Mitigation Plan.

Seagreen Wind Farm Energy Ltd. (2021). Project Overview - December 2021. Available at: https://www.seagreenwindenergy.com/. Accessed on 01 April 2022.

Seagreen Wind Energy Ltd (2012). Environmental Statement - Volume 1 - Main Text - Seagreen Alpha and Bravo Offshore Wind Farms.

Seagreen Wind Energy Ltd (2018). Marine Mammals. Volume 1 Chapter 10 in Seagreen Phase I Environmental Impact Assessment Report. LF009-ENV-MA-RPT-0002. September 2018.

SEAMARCO (2011). Temporary hearing threshold shifts and recovery in a harbor porpoise and two harbor seals after exposure to continuous noise and playbacks of pile driving sounds. Part of the Shortlist Masterplan Wind ‘Monitoring the Ecological Impact of Offshore Wind Farms on the Dutch Continental Shelf’. SEAMARCO Ref: 2011/01.

Senior, B., Bailey, H., Lusseau, D., Foote A., and Thompson, P.M. (2008). Anthropogenic noise in the Moray Firth SAC; potential sources and impacts on bottlenose dolphins. Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No.265 (ROAME No. F05LE02).

Sills, J. M., Ruscher, B., Nichols, R., Southall, B. L., & Reichmuth, C. (2020). Evaluating temporary threshold shift onset levels for impulsive noise in seals. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 148(5), 2973-2986.

Siebert, U., Stürznickel, J., Schaffeld, T., Oheim, R., Rolvien, T., Prenger-Berninghoff, E., Wohlsein, P., Lakemeyer, J., Rohner, S., Schick, L. A., Gross, S., Nachtsheim, D., Ewers, C., Becher, P., Amling, M. and Morell, M. (2022). Blast injury on harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) from the Baltic Sea after explosions of deposits of World War II ammunition. Environment International, Volume 159.

Sinclair, R. R., Sparling, C. E. and Harwood, J. (2020). Review Of Demographic Parameters And Sensitivity Analysis To Inform Inputs And Outputs Of Population Consequences Of Disturbance Assessments For Marine Mammals. Scottish Marine and Freshwater Science Vol 11 No 14, 74pp. DOI: 10.7489/12331-1

Sinclair, R. R. (2022). Seal haul-out and telemetry data in relation to the Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm. SMRU consulting report number SMRUC - RPS-2021-005, provided to RPS, January 2022.

Skeate, E.R. and Perrow, M.R. (2008). Scroby Sands offshore wind farm: Seal monitoring. Analysis of the 2006 post-construction aerial surveys and summary of the monitoring programme results from 2002–2006. Final report to E.ON UK Renewables Offshore Wind Limited prepared by ECON Ecological Consultancy, Norwich, UK.

Skeate, E.R., Perrow, M.R. and Gilroy, J.J. (2012). Likely effects of construction of Scroby sands offshore wind farm on a mixed population of harbour Phoca vitulina and grey Halichoerus grypus seals. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 64:872–881.

SMRU Consulting. (2021). Hornsea Project Four: Environmental Statement (ES) PINS Document Reference: A2.4 APFP Regulation: 5(2)(a) Volume A2, Chapter 4: Marine Mammals. Available at: Test (planninginspectorate.gov.uk). Accessed on 8 July 2022.

Soloway, A. G., and Dahl, P. H. (2014). Peak Sound Pressure and Sound Exposure Level from Underwater Explosions in Shallow Water. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 136 (3): EL218–23.

Southall, B.L., Bowles, A.E., Ellison, W.T., Finneran, J.J., Gentry, R.L., Greene Jr, C.R., Kastak, D Miller, J.H., Nachtigall, P.E. and Richardson, W.J. (2007). Marine Mammal Noise-Exposure Criteria: Initial Scientific Recommendations. Aquatic Mammals 33 (4): 411–521.

Southall, B. L., Finneran, J. J., Reichmuth, C., Nachtigall, P. E., Ketten, D. R., Bowles, A. E., Ellison, W.T., Nowacek, D.P and Tyack, P. L. (2019). Marine mammal noise exposure criteria: updated scientific recommendations for residual hearing effects. Aquatic Mammals, 45(2).

Southall, B.L., Nowacek, D.P., Bowles, A.E., Senigaglia, V., Bejder, L. and Tyack, P.L., (2021). Marine Mammal Noise Exposure Criteria: Assessing the Severity of Marine Mammal Behavioral Responses to Human Noise. Aquatic Mammals, 47(5), pp.421-464.

Sparling, C.E. (2012). Seagreen Firth of Forth Round 3 Zone Marine Mammal Surveys. Report number SMRUL-ROY-2012-006 to Royal Haskoning and Seagreen Wind Energy Ltd.

Sparling, C.E., Speakman, J.R. and Fedak, M.A. (2006). Seasonal variation in the metabolic rate and body composition of female grey seals: fat conservation prior to high-cost reproduction in a capital breeder?. J Comp Physiol B 176, 505–512.

Special Committee on Seals (SCOS) (2017). Scientific Advice on Matters Related to the Management of Seal Populations: 2016. Sea Mammal Research Unit. Available from: httpp://www.smru.st-andrews.ac.uk/documents. Accessed on: 16 December 2021.

SSER (2021a). Berwick Bank Wind Farm Offshore Scoping Report.

SSER (2022a). Berwick Bank Wind Farm Onshore EIA Report.

SSER (2022b). Berwick Bank Wind Farm Marine Protected Area Assessment Report.

SSER (2022d). Berwick Bank Wind Farm Report to Inform the Appropriate Assessment.

SSER (2022e) The Cambois connection Scoping Report

Stone, C. J., and Tasker, M. L. (2006). The effects of seismic airguns on cetaceans in UK waters. Journal of Cetacean Research and Management, 8(3), 255.

Sveegaard, S., J. Teilmann, P. Berggren, K. N. Mouritsen, D. Gillespie, and J. Tougaard. (2011). Acoustic surveys confirm the high-density areas of harbour porpoises found by satellite tracking. ICES Journal of Marine Science 68:929-936.

Swails, K. (2005). Patterns of seal strandings and human interactions in Cape Cod, MA. Master of Environmental Management Thesis, Nicholas School of the Environment and Earth Sciences of Duke University.

Teilmann, J., Tougaard, J. and Carstensen, J. (2006a). Summary on harbour porpoise monitoring 1999-2006 around Nysted and Horns Rev Offshore Wind Farms.

Teilmann, J., Tougaard, J., Cartensen, J., Dietz, R. and Tougaard, S. (2006b). Summary on seal monitoring 1999-2005 around Nysted and Horns Rev Offshore Wind Farms.

Teilmann J.O, Larsen F.I and Desportes G.E. (2007). Time allocation and diving behaviour of harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) in Danish and adjacent waters. J Cetacean Res Manag. 9, 201-10.

Teilmann, J., Tougaard, J. and Carsensen, J. (2008). Effects from offshore wind farms on harbour porpoises in Denmark. In: Evans, P. G. (Ed). Offshore wind farms and marine mammals: impacts & methodologies for assessing impacts. In Proceedings of the ASCOBANS/ECS Workshop. ECS Special Publication Series (Vol. 49).

Terhune, J. M. and Almon, M. (1983). Variability of harbour seal numbers on haul-out sites. Aquatic Mammals 10(3), 71-78.

Tetley, M. J., Mitchelson-Jacob, E. G. and Robinson, K. P. (2008). The summer distribution of coastal minke whales (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) in the southern outer Moray Firth, NE Scotland, in relation to co-occurring mesoscale oceanographic features. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112(8), 3449–3454. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RSE.2007.10.015

Thompson, D. (2015). Parameters for collision risk models. Report by Sea Mammal Research Unit, University of St Andrews, for Scottish Natural Heritage.

Thompson, P.M., Lusseau, D., Barton, T., Simmons, D., Rusin, J., and H. Bailey. (2010). Assessing the Responses of Coastal Cetaceans to the Construction of Offshore Wind Turbines. Marine Pollution Bulletin 60 (8): 1200–1208.

Thompson, P. M., Brookes, K. L., Graham, I. M., Barton, T. R., Needham, K., Bradbury, G., and Merchant, N. D. (2013). Short-term disturbance by a commercial two-dimensional seismic survey does not lead to long-term displacement of harbour porpoises. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 280(1771), 20132001.

Thompson, P.M., Graham, I.M., Cheney, B., Barton, T.R., Farcas, A. and Merchant, N.D. (2020). Balancing risks of injury and disturbance to marine mammals when pile driving at offshore windfarms. Ecol Solut Evidence. 1:e12034. https://doi.org/10.1002/2688-8319.12034

Todd, V.L.G., Warley, J.C. and Todd, I.B. (2016). Meals on wheels? A decade of megafaunal visual and acoustic observations from offshore oil & gas rigs and platforms in the North and Irish seas. PLoS ONE 11, e0153320.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Tougaard, J., Carstensen, J., Damsgaard Henriksen, O., and Teilmann, J. (2003). Short-term effects of the construction of wind turbines on harbour porpoises at Horns Reef. Denmark: N. p., 2003. Web.

Tougaard, J., Wright, A. J. and Madsen, P. T. (2015). Cetacean noise criteria revisited in the light of proposed exposure limits for harbour porpoises. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 90, 196–208.

Van Beest, F.M., Teilmann, J., Hermannsen, L., Galatius, .A, Mikkelsen, L., Sveegaard, S., Balle, J.D., Dietz, R. and Nabe-Nielsen, J. (2018). Fine-scale movement responses of free-ranging harbour porpoises to capture, tagging and short-term noise pulses from a single airgun. R. Soc. open sci.5: 170110.

Vanderlaan, A. S. M. and Taggart. C. T. (2007). Vessel collisions with whales: the probability of lethal injury based on vessel speed. Marine Mammal Science, 23(1), 144-156.

Van Waerebeek K., Baker A., Felix F., Gedamke J., Iniguez M., Sanino G., Secchi E., Sutaria E., Sutaria D., Helden A and Wang Y. (2007). Vessel collisions with small cetaceans worldwide and with large whales in the Southern Hemisphere, an initial assessment. Latin American Journal of Aquatic Mammals, 6.

Verfuss, U.K., Sparling, C.E., Arnot, C., Judd, A. and Coyle, M. (2016). Review of Offshore Wind Farm Impact Monitoring and Mitigation with Regard to Marine Mammals. In: Popper, A., Hawkins, A. (eds) The Effects of Noise on Aquatic Life II. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology, vol 875. Springer, New York, NY.

Víkingsson, G.A., Elvarsson, B., Ólafsdóttir, D., Sigurjónsson, J., Chosson, V. and Galan, A. (2014). Recent changes in the diet composition of common minke whales (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) in Icelandic waters. A consequence of climate change?, Marine Biology Research, 10:2, 138-152, DOI: 10.1080/17451000.2013.793812

Víkingsson, G, A., Pike, D. G., Valdimarsson, H., Schleimer, A., Thorvaldur, G., Teresa, S., Elvarsson, B., Mikkelsen, B., Øien, N., Desportes, G., Valur, B. and Hammond, P. S. (2015). Distribution, abundance, and feeding ecology of baleen whales in Icelandic waters: have recent environmental changes had an effect? Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution. (3) : 1-6.

Von Benda-Beckmann, A.M., Aarts, G., Sertlek, H.Ö., Lucke, K., Verboom, W.C., Kastelein, R.A., Ketten, D.R., van Bemmelen, R., Lam, F.P.A., Kirkwood, R.J. and Ainslie, M.A. (2015). Assessing the impact of underwater clearance of unexploded ordnance on harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) in the Southern North Sea. Aquatic Mammals, 41(4), p.503.

Waggitt, J. J., P. G. H. Evans, J. Andrade, A. N. Banks, O. Boisseau, M. Bolton, G. Bradbury, T. Brereton, C. J. Camphuysen, J. Durinck, T. Felce, R. C. Fijn, I. Garcia-Baron, S. Garthe, S. C. V. Geelhoed, A. Gilles, M. Goodall, J. Haelters, S. Hamilton, L. Hartny-Mills, N. Hodgins, K. James, M. Jessopp, A. S. Kavanagh, M. Leopold, K. Lohrengel, M. Louzao, N. Markones, J. Martinez-Cediera, O. O’Cadhla, S. L. Perry, G. J. Pierce, V. Ridoux, K. P. Robinson, M. B. Santos, C. Saavedra, H. Skov, E. W. M. Stienen, S. Sveegaard, P. Thompson, N. Vanermen, D. Wall, A. Webb, J. Wilson, S. Wanless, and J. G. Hiddink. (2020). Distribution maps of cetacean and seabird populations in the North-East Atlantic. Journal of Applied Ecology 57:253-269.

Walls, R., Canning, S., Lye, G., Givens, L., Garrett, C. and Lancaster, J. (2013). Analysis of marine environmental monitoring plan data from the Robin Rigg offshore wind farm, Scotland (Operational Year 1). Technical report to E.ON Climate & Renewables UK prepared by Natural Power Consultants Ltd., Dumfries and Galloway

Watkins, W. A. (1986). Whale reactions to human activities in Cape Cod waters. Marine mammal science, 2(4), 251-262.

Weilgart, L. (2011). Underwater Noise: Death Knell of our Oceans? Available at: http://www.raincoast.org/library/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/weilgart_underwater-noise-death-knell.pdf. Accessed on 08 April 2022.

Weir, C. (2001). Sightings of marine mammals and other animals recorded offshore installations in the North Sea.

Weir, C. R. (2008). Overt responses of humpback whales, sperm whales and Atlantic spotted dolphins to seismic exploration off Angola. Aquatic Mammals, 34.

Weir, C., Stockin, K. and Pierce, G. (2007). Spatial and temporal trends in the distribution of harbour porpoises, white-beaked dolphins and minke whales off Aberdeenshire (UK), north-western North Sea. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. 87. 327 - 338. 10.1017/S0025315407052721.

Weller, D., Ivashchenko, Y. and Tsidulko, G. (2002). Influence of seismic surveys on western gray whales off Sakhalin Island, Russia in 2001. Publ. Agencies Staff U.S. Dep. Commer. Paper 73.

Wells, R. S., Allen, J. B., Hofmann, S., Fauquier, D, A., Barros, N. B., DeLynn, R. E., Sutton, G., Socha, V. and Scott, M. D. (2008). Consequences of injuries on survival and reproduction of common bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) along the west coast of Florida, Marine Mammal Science, 24 (4).

Weston, D. E. 1976. “Propagation in Water with Uniform Sound Velocity but Variable-Depth Lossy Bottom.” Journal of Sound and Vibration 47 (4): 473–83.

Weston. 1980a. “Acoustic Flux Formulas for Range-Dependent Ocean Ducts.” The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 68 (1): 269–81.

Weston. 1980b. “Acoustic Flux Methods for Oceanic Guided Waves.” The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 68 (1): 287–96.

Wilson, B., Batty, R. S., Daunt, F. and Carter, C. (2007). Collision risks between marine renewable energy devices and mammals, fish and diving birds. Report to the Scottish Executive. Scottish Association for Marine Science, Oban.

Wisniewska, D. M., Johnson, M., Teilmann, J., Rojano-Doñate, L., Shearer, J., Sveegaard, S. and Madsen, P. T. (2016). Ultra-high foraging rates of harbor porpoises make them vulnerable to anthropogenic disturbance. Current Biology, 26(11), 1441-1446.

Wisniewska, D. M., Johnson, M., Teilmann, J., Siebert, U., Galatius, A., Dietz, R., and Madsen, P. T. (2018). High rates of vessel noise disrupt foraging in wild harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena). Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 285(1872), 20172314.

Wright, A.J., and Cosentino, A.M. (2015). JNCC guidelines for minimising the risk of injury and disturbance to marine mammals from seismic surveys: We can do better. Marine Pollution Bulletin

 

[1] The Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations (1994 implement the Habitats Directives in territorial waters out to 12 nautical miles (nm). The Offshore Marine Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 2007 (as amended) (the Offshore Marine Regulations) transpose the provisions of the Habitats Directive in offshore waters, beyond 12 nm

[2] Impacts with a potential to occur during: C = Construction, O = Operation and maintenance, D = Decommissioning

[3] As presented in maximum design scenario table for the assessment of potential impacts on fish and shellfish ecology (see Table 9.15, volume 2, chapter 9).

[4] Ticks indicate impacts with a potential to occur during: C = Construction, O = Operation and maintenance, D = Decommissioning

[5] Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora) and Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds.

[6] Demographic stochasticity refers to variability in population growth rates arising from random differences among individuals in survival and reproduction.

[7] As per the National Infrastructure Planning website, Dogger Bank Teesside A/Sofia Offshore Wind Farm (formerly Dogger Bank Teesside B) has been consented as one development. However, Dogger Bank Teesside A and Sofia Offshore Wind Farm provided separate Environmental Reports/Appraisals for increased hammer energy to support non-material change DCO applications and therefore the assessment of impacts on marine mammals will be considered independently. See more details in paragraph 10.12.2.483.

[8] C = Construction, O = Operation and maintenance, D = Decommissioning

[9] The Hornsea Project Four EIA (SMRU Consulting, 2021) concluded that since site-specific surveys did not extend far enough to cover the entire potential behavioural impact zones for the noise assessment of effects, the broader scale density estimates from SCANS III were more appropriate to be incorporated into the assessment.

[10] The assessment is based on impacts of piling at Seagreen Bravo presented in the original EIA (Seagreen Wind Energy Ltd, 2012), as it represents the maximum design scenario when compared with 2020 PS (Seagreen Wind Energy Ltd, 2020).

[11] The assessment is based on impacts of piling at Seagreen Alpha presented in the original EIA (Seagreen Wind Energy Ltd, 2012), as it represents the maximum design scenario when compared with 2020 PS (Seagreen Wind Energy Ltd, 2020).

[12] The assessment is based on impacts of piling at Seagreen Bravo presented in the original EIA (Seagreen Wind Energy Ltd, 2012), as it represents the maximum design scenario when compared with 2020 PS (Seagreen Wind Energy Ltd, 2020).

[13] It is assumed that the estimate for the operation and maintenance has been informed by the assessment presented for the cable installation phase (AECOM, 2022a; 2022b)

[14] The assessment of potential injury (PTS) on marine mammals as a result of underwater noise during UXO clearance for Hornsea Project Three was based on noise modelling for Hornsea One (the most common total weight of explosive found within Hornsea Project One was 260 kg). In order to determine impact area from UXO clearance with respect to disturbance, a 26 km buffer around source location was applied (based on guidance for harbour porpoise, however in the absence of agreed metrics for the use of other marine mammals it has been applied all species).

[15] C = Construction, O = Operation and maintenance, D = Decommissioning