12.9. Methodology for Assessment of Effects

12.9.1.              Overview

  1. The commercial fisheries assessment of effects has followed the methodology set out in volume 1, chapter 6 of the Offshore EIA Report. Specific to the commercial fisheries EIA, the following guidance documents have also been considered:
  • Sea Fish Industry Authority and UK Fisheries Economic Network (UKFEN) (2012) Best practice guidance for fishing industry financial and economic impact assessments;
  • Guidance on commercial fisheries mitigation and opportunities from offshore wind commissioned by Collaborative Offshore Wind Research into the Environment (COWRIE), (Blyth-Skyrme, 2010);
  • FLOWW Best Practice Guidance for Offshore Renewables Developments: Recommendations for Fisheries Liaison: FLOWW (Fishing Liaison with Offshore Wind and Wet Renewables Group) (2014);
  • FLOWW Best Practice Guidance for Offshore Renewables Developments: Recommendations for Fisheries Disruption Settlements and Community Funds. FLOWW (Fishing Liaison with Offshore Wind and Wet Renewables Group) (2015);
  • International Cable Protection Committee (2009) Fishing and Submarine Cables – Working Together;
  • Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas) (2012) Guidelines for data acquisition to support marine environmental assessments of offshore renewable energy projects. Contract report: ME5403, May 2012; and
  • Cefas, Marine Consents and Environment Unit (MCEU), Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) and Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) (2004) Offshore Wind Farms – Guidance note for Environmental Impact Assessment In respect of the Food and Environmental Protection Act (FEPA) and Coastal Protection Act (CPA) requirements, Version 2.
    1. Marine Scotland Science (2022). Assessing fisheries displacement by other licensed marine activities: good practice guidance, by Xodus for the Scottish Government.

12.9.2.              Criteria for Assessment of Effects

  1. The process for determining the significance of effects is a two-stage process that involves defining the magnitude of the potential impacts and the sensitivity of the receptors. This section describes the criteria applied in this chapter to assign values to the magnitude of potential impacts and the sensitivity of the receptors. The terms used to define magnitude and sensitivity are based on those which are described in further detail in volume 1, chapter 6 of the Offshore EIA Report.
  2. The criteria for defining magnitude in this chapter are outlined in Table 12.6   Open ▸ . In determining magnitude within this chapter, each assessment considered the spatial extent, duration, frequency and reversibility of impact and these are outlined within the magnitude section of each assessment of effects (e.g. a duration of hours or days would be considered for most receptors to be of short term duration, which is likely to result in a low magnitude of impact).

 

Table 12.6:
Definition of Terms Relating to the Magnitude of an Impact

Table 12.6: Definition of Terms Relating to the Magnitude of an Impact

 

  1. The criteria for defining sensitivity in this chapter are outlined in Table 12.7   Open ▸ .

 

Table 12.7:
Definition of Terms Relating to the Sensitivity of the Receptor

Table 12.7: Definition of Terms Relating to the Sensitivity of the Receptor

 

  1. The significance of the effect upon commercial fisheries is determined by correlating the magnitude of the impact and the sensitivity of the receptor. The particular method employed for this assessment is presented in Table 12.8   Open ▸ .
  2. In cases where a range is suggested for the significance of effect, there remains the possibility that this may span the significance threshold (i.e. the range is given as minor to moderate). In such cases, the final significance conclusion is based upon the author’s professional judgement as to which outcome delineates the most likely effect, with an explanation as to why this is the case. Where professional judgement is applied to quantify final significance from a range, the assessment will set out the factors that result in the final assessment of significance. These factors may include the likelihood that an effect will occur, data certainty and relevant information about the wider environmental context.
  3. For the purposes of this assessment:
  • a level of residual effect of moderate or more will be considered a ‘significant’ effect in terms of the EIA Regulations; and
  • a level of residual effect of minor or less will be considered ‘not significant’ in terms of the EIA Regulations.
    1. Effects of moderate significance or above are therefore considered important in the decision-making process, whilst effects of minor significance or less warrant little, if any, weight in the decision-making process.

 

Table 12.8:
Matrix Used for the Assessment of the Significance of the Effect

Table 12.8: Matrix Used for the Assessment of the Significance of the Effect

 

  1. Please not that for the potential impact “Snagging Risk – Loss or Damage to Fishing Gear and Safety Issues” the outcome of volume 2, chapter 13 has been used to inform assessment of risk (further details also provided in paragraph 164). Therefore, for this impact only, terminology for significance of effect aligns with assessment terminology as used in volume 2, chapter 13.

12.10. Measures Adopted as part of the Proposed Development

  1. As part of the project design process, a number of measures have been proposed to reduce the potential for impacts on commercial fishing (see Table 12.9   Open ▸ ). As there is a commitment to implementing these measures, they are considered inherently part of the design of the Proposed Development and have therefore been considered in the assessment presented in section 12.11 (i.e. the determination of magnitude and therefore significance assumes implementation of these measures). These measures are considered standard industry practice for this type of development.

 

Table 12.9:
Designed In Measures Adopted as Part of the Proposed Development

Table 12.9: Designed In Measures Adopted as Part of the Proposed Development

 

12.11. Assessment of Significance

  1. The potential effects arising from the construction, operation and maintenance and decommissioning phases of the Proposed Development are listed in Table 12.5   Open ▸ , along with the maximum design scenario against which each impact has been assessed. An assessment of the likely significance of the effects of the Proposed Development on commercial fisheries receptors caused by each identified impact is given below.

Loss or Restricted Access to Fishing Grounds

  1. During the construction, operation and maintenance and decommissioning phases there may be potential for the undertaking of Proposed Development activities and/or the presence of Proposed Development infrastructure to result in a loss of grounds or restricted access to traditional fishing grounds.

Construction Phase

Magnitude of Impact
  1. The maximum design scenario is represented by the installation of up to 307 wind turbines and ten OSPs/Offshore convertor station platforms, up to 1,225 km of inter-array cables, up to 94 km of interconnector cables and up to eight offshore export cables of up to 872 km in total length, with associated safety zones and/or advisory measures around relevant infrastructure/works, over a period of up to 96 months. Within this period, offshore export cables installation (including post-commissioning) may take place over up to 24 months. Site preparation activities may happen at any point during the construction phase.
  2. The need to implement safety zones and advisory measures during the construction phase may result in localised loss or restricted access to fishing grounds. As described in Table 12.5   Open ▸ , requirements for safety zones and advisory measures are anticipated to include:

Demersal Trawling – Nephrops and Squid Fishery

Nephrops Fishery

  1. As discussed in section 12.7.2, vessels engaged in the Nephrops fishery in the commercial fisheries study area concentrate their activities in inshore areas (within the 12 nm limit and predominantly within the 6 nm limit) and therefore, for the most part, impacts on these vessels would be limited to construction works associated with the inshore area of the Proposed Development export cable corridor. Considerable areas of suitable Nephrops grounds are however available within the commercial fisheries study area in areas outside of the Proposed Development export cable corridor ( Figure 12.9   Open ▸ and Figure 12.10   Open ▸ ).
  2. The extent of the overall Nephrops grounds affected at any given time will be limited to inshore areas of the Proposed Development export cable corridor that overlap with Nephrops grounds where advisory safe passing distances are in place at a given time and/or around vulnerable sections of the offshore export cables. The impact will be short term in duration (up to 24 months for offshore export cables installation, including post-commissioning and site preparation activities may happen at any point during the construction phase.) and occur intermittently. As previously noted (paragraphs 77 to 79), a range of fisheries liaison and management measures will be implemented to minimise loss of access to fishing grounds during construction. The magnitude of the impact is therefore considered to be low.

Squid Fishery

  1. Vessels engaged in the seasonal squid fishery in the commercial fisheries study area predominantly target nearshore areas, including discrete sections of inshore area of the Proposed Development export cable corridor. In addition, there may be potential for some activity to take place in offshore areas at times, including within the Proposed Development array area ( Figure 12.13   Open ▸ , Figure 12.14   Open ▸ and Figure 12.15   Open ▸ ).
  2. The extent of squid grounds affected at a given time will therefore be limited to the discrete sections of grounds that may overlap with safety zones, areas where advisory safe passing distances are in place and/or around vulnerable sections of cables. The impact will be short to medium term in duration (over a 96 month construction phase within which, offshore export cables installation (including post- commissioning) may take place over 24 months and site preparation activities may happen at any point during the construction phase) and will occur intermittently. As previously noted (paragraphs 77 to 79), a range of fisheries liaison and management measures will be implemented to minimise loss of access to fishing grounds during construction. The magnitude of the impact on is therefore considered to be low.

Creeling – Lobster and Crab Fishery

  1. As described in section 12.7.3, creelers active in the commercial fisheries study area predominantly target inshore areas, including nearshore areas where the Proposed Development export cable corridor is located. However, some vessels extend their activity further offshore, including within the Proposed Development array area ( Figure 12.17   Open ▸ , Figure 12.18   Open ▸ , Figure 12.19   Open ▸ , Figure 12.20   Open ▸ and Figure 12.21   Open ▸ ).
  2. The extent of grounds affected at any given time will be limited to discrete sections of the creeling grounds that may overlap with safety zones, areas where advisory safe passing distances are in place and/or around vulnerable sections of cables. The impact will be short to medium term in duration (over a 96 month construction phase within which offshore export cables installation (including post-commissioning) may take place over up to 24 months and site preparation activities may happen at any point during the construction phase) and occur intermittently. As previously noted (paragraphs 77 to 79), a range of fisheries liaison and management measures will be implemented to minimise loss of access to fishing grounds during construction.
  3. With specific reference to creelers, this includes a commitment to the implementation of appropriate mitigation via co-operation agreements with affected vessels in instances where the relocation of static fishing gear cannot be avoided. The magnitude of the impact is therefore considered to be low.

Dredging – Scallop Fishery

  1. Scallop dredging activity in the study area is predominantly focused on the western section of the Proposed Development array area, with limited activity anticipated in inshore areas of the Proposed Development export cable corridor ( Figure 12.24   Open ▸ , Figure 12.27   Open ▸ ). As described in section 12.7.4, vessels active in offshore areas are typically nomadic and target productive scallop grounds around Scotland and the rest of the UK ( Figure 12.28   Open ▸ ). The location of the base port would have little relevance to the magnitude of effect predicted, as all local and visiting vessels would be able to fish and transit across the whole of the Firth of Forth grounds, except around cable installation vessels. Vessels may be additionally excluded (fishing only) from areas where cables are vulnerable. However, vessels would be able transit these areas and can fish east and west of the cables.
  2. The extent of scallop grounds affected at any given time would be limited to discrete sections of the grounds that may overlap with safety zones, areas where advisory safe passing distances are in place and/or around vulnerable sections of cables. The impact will be short to medium term in duration (over a 96month construction phase within which, offshore export cable installation (including post-commissioning) may take place over up to 24 months) and occur intermittently. As previously noted (paragraphs 77 to 79), a range of fisheries liaison and management measures will be implemented to minimise loss of access to fishing grounds during construction. The magnitude of the impact is therefore considered to be low.
Sensitivity of the Receptor

Demersal Trawling – Nephrops and Squid Fishery

Nephrops Fishery

  1. Vessels active in the Nephrops fishery in areas of relevance to the Proposed Development are typically between 10 m and 20 m in length. Operational ranges vary from vessel to vessel and have been reported to be from 2 nm to 60 nm during consultation (volume 3, appendix 12.1). The grounds that these vessels can target are restricted to areas of suitable Nephrops habitat. As illustrated in section 12.7.2, grounds actively targeted by Nephrops trawlers within the commercial fisheries study area, extend across the inshore section of the Firth of Forth ( Figure 12.9   Open ▸ , Figure 12.10   Open ▸ and Figure 12.11   Open ▸ ) including the area where the inshore section of the Proposed Development export cable corridor is located. The sensitivity of Nephrops trawlers is therefore considered to be medium.


Squid Fishery

  1. As mentioned in section 12.7.2, some of the local vessels engaged in the Nephrops fishery as well as some visiting vessels target squid on a seasonal basis. Operational ranges reported during consultation with local vessels ranged from 2 nm to 60 nm. Visiting vessels, would generally be expected to have wider operational ranges. Available information on the distribution of activity suggests that there is limited overlap between squid grounds reported in the commercial fisheries study area and the Proposed Development ( Figure 12.11   Open ▸ , Figure 12.13   Open ▸ , Figure 12.14   Open ▸ and Figure 12.15   Open ▸ ). The sensitivity of squid trawlers is therefore considered to be low.

Creeling – Lobster and Crab Fishery

  1. Vessels active in the lobster and crab fishery are typically small in size (under 10 m in length) and have reduced operational ranges with activity generally concentrating within the 6 nm limit, including areas that overlap with the Proposed Development export cable corridor. Some vessels, are known to target areas further offshore, including areas within the Proposed Development array area ( Figure 12.19   Open ▸ , Figure 12.20   Open ▸ , Figure 12.21   Open ▸ and Figure 12.22   Open ▸ ). Reported operational ranges during consultation with fisheries stakeholders typically ranged between 2 nm and 28 nm with some vessels noting greater operational ranges Given their typically smaller operational ranges and reliance on local grounds the fishing opportunities of vessels engaged in creeling tend to be more restricted than for other methods. The sensitivity of creelers is considered to be high for vessels that are restricted to nearshore areas and medium for vessels with extended operational ranges.

Dredging – Scallop Fishery

  1. Vessels active in the scallop dredging fishery within the commercial fisheries study area are typically nomadic vessels (generally over 15 m in length) with wide operational ranges, which target productive scallop grounds around Scotland and in many cases across the rest of the UK. Although some nearshore activity may be undertaken at times by smaller local vessels, this would be expected at very low levels ( Figure 12.29   Open ▸ ). As discussed in section 12.7.4, the Proposed Development array area, particularly the north-western section, supports some scallop dredging activity ( Figure 12.27   Open ▸ ). However, activity levels within this area, are considerably lower than in more productive grounds located immediately to the north of the Proposed Development, as well as in other areas around Scotland and the UK. The sensitivity of scallop dredgers is therefore considered to be low.
Significance of the Effect

Demersal Trawling – Nephrops and Squid Fishery

Nephrops Fishery

  1. Overall, the magnitude of the impact is deemed to be low and the sensitivity of the receptor is considered to be medium. The effect will, therefore, be of minor adverse significance, which is not significant in EIA terms.

Squid Fishery

  1. Overall, the magnitude of the impact is deemed to be low and the sensitivity of the receptor is considered to be low. The effect will, therefore, be of minor adverse significance, which is not significant in EIA terms.

Creeling – Lobster and Crab Fishery

  1. Overall, the magnitude of the impact is deemed to be low and the sensitivity of the receptor is considered to be high for vessels active in nearshore area and medium for vessels with extended operational ranges. The effect will, therefore, be of minor adverse significance, which is not significant in EIA terms.
  2. This takes account of the embedded mitigation that has been proposed, and includes a commitment to the implementation of appropriate mitigation, via co-operation agreements with affected vessels, in instances where the relocation of static fishing gear cannot be avoided.

Dredging – Scallop Fishery

  1. Overall, the magnitude of the impact is deemed to be low and the sensitivity of the receptor is considered to be low. The effect will, therefore, be of minor adverse significance, which is not significant in EIA terms.
Secondary Mitigation and Residual Effect
  1. No commercial fisheries mitigation is considered necessary because the likely effect in the absence of mitigation (beyond the designed in measures outlined in section 12.10) is not significant in EIA terms.

Operation and Maintenance Phase

Magnitude of Impact
  1. The maximum design scenario with regard to loss or restricted access to fishing grounds during the operation and maintenance phase is represented by an operational life of up to 35 years, the presence of up to 307 wind turbines and up to ten OSPs/Offshore convertor station platforms, with a minimum spacing between wind turbines of 1,000 m, presence of up to 1,225 km of inter-array cables, 94 km of interconnector cables and up to eight offshore export cables (872 km in total) buried to a minimum depth of 0.5 m and protected where cable burial target depths are not met (cable protection over up to 15% of inter-array, interconnector and offshore export cables and at up to 94 cable crossings (78 for inter‑array cables and 16 for offshore export cables)), and presence of safety zones and/or advisory measures during operation and maintenance.
  2. As described in Table 12.5   Open ▸ , requirements for safety zones and advisory measures are anticipated to include:
  • 500 m operational safety zones around major maintenance activities; and
  • up to 500 m advisory exclusion of fishing along vulnerable sections of cables (i.e. in the event that sections of cables become exposed).
    1. The potential loss of fishing grounds during the operation and maintenance phase within the Proposed Development array area will be localised around the footprint of the Proposed Development’s infrastructure on the seabed and any safety zones or advisory measures which may be in place around infrastructure/works at a given time.
    2. Existing legislation does not prevent fishing from occurring within operational wind farm array areas and it is expected that fishing activities will be able to resume to a certain degree in the Proposed Development array area. The level of activity which may resume in the Proposed Development array area, however, would depend on the perception of individual skippers with regard to risks associated with operating fishing gear within the Proposed Development array area at a given time. This is influenced by conditions such as minimum spacing, weather and visibility as well as operating patterns and gears specifications all of which may affect vessel manoeuvrability.
    3. Whilst guidance with regard to standard parameters required to facilitate the viability of fishing within wind farms is currently not available, there is evidence of the ability of fishing to continue within operational wind farm array areas from various operational projects across the UK. This includes both static and towed gear fishing activities.
    4. It is well established that creelers are able to resume activity within operational wind farms and are less constrained than other fishing methods given the size of the vessels involved and static nature of the gear used (i.e. see example of co-existence at Westermost Rough reported in Ørsted (2022) and AIS tracks of a 22 m creeler fishing within the Hornsea One array area illustrated in Figure 12.32   Open ▸ for reference).
    5. Given the relatively small and inshore location of the majority of operational offshore wind farms in the UK to date, records of activity by vessels operating towed gear are scarcer, however, in some of the projects which supported towed gear fisheries prior to construction, there is emerging evidence of mobile fishing methods resuming activity. Examples of this are based on AIS tracks of a 30 m beam trawler fishing within Walney Extension, a 20 m trawler operating within the Beatrice array area and a 33 m scallop dredger fishing within the Moray East array area are given in Figure 12.33   Open ▸ , Figure 12.34   Open ▸ and Figure 12.35   Open ▸ respectively. In this context it is important to note that the minimum spacing between wind turbines at these projects is comparable to that of 1,000 m currently considered for the Proposed Development (926 m at Hornsea One, 946 m at Beatrice, 913 m at Walney Extension and 1,119 m at Moray East).

Figure 12.32:
AIS Tracks of a 22 m Creeler Fishing within Hornsea One

Figure 12.32: AIS Tracks of a 22 m Creeler Fishing within Hornsea One

Figure 12.33:
AIS Tracks of a 30 m Beam Trawler Fishing within Walney Extension

Figure 12.33: AIS Tracks of a 30 m Beam Trawler Fishing within Walney Extension

Figure 12.34:
AIS Tracks of a 20 m Trawler Undertaking an Overtrawlability Survey within Beatrice

Figure 12.34: AIS Tracks of a 20 m Trawler Undertaking an Overtrawlability Survey within Beatrice

Figure 12.35:
AIS Tracks of a 33 m Scallop Dredger Fishing within Moray East

Figure 12.35: AIS Tracks of a 33 m Scallop Dredger Fishing within Moray East

  1. With regard to the Proposed Development export cable corridor, loss of grounds during operation and maintenance would be limited to the discrete locations where cable protection may be introduced and any temporary advisory measures which may be in place at a given time.
  2. To minimise disturbance to fishing operations during the operation and maintenance phase the Proposed Development’s FLO will engage with the fishing industry as appropriate and information on relevant maintenance works will be circulated to the fishing industry in a timely and efficient manner to allow fishermen sufficient time to plan their activities.
  3. The location, extent and nature of the cable protection used will be shared with fisheries stakeholders. In areas where rock placement is required, consideration will be given to designs that reduce potential snagging risk with fishing gear to facilitate co-existence with mobile fisheries, particularly demersal trawling (i.e. use of graded rocks and berms designed with 1:3 gradients). Furthermore, post-lay and burial inspections surveys will be undertaken. In addition, assessments will be carried out to determine cable burial status (including cable protection) and to identify potential changes to seabed conditions. These would be aimed at facilitating co-existence with fishing and minimising snagging risk and associated loss or damage of fishing gear and safety issues.
  4. Provisions for the measures above will be included in the FMMS which will be produced for the Proposed Development (see volume 3, appendix 24).

Demersal Trawling – Nephrops and Squid Fishery

Nephrops Fishery

  1. As discussed in section 12.7.2, vessels engaged in the Nephrops fishery in the commercial fisheries study area concentrate their activities in inshore areas (within the 12 nm limit and predominantly within the 6 nm limit). Loss of grounds to these vessels during operation and maintenance, would be very small, being limited to discrete sections of Nephrops grounds which may overlap with areas of the offshore export cables where cable protection may be required and/or areas where cables may be vulnerable at a given time (i.e. in the event that cables exposures are identified during operation and maintenance).
  2. The presence of cable protection will be long term, however, additional localised loss of grounds associated with the presence of vulnerable sections of cables would be short term, temporary and intermittent. Furthermore, as previously noted (paragraphs 108 to 110), a range of fisheries liaison and management measures will be implemented to minimise loss of access to fishing grounds during operation, including various measures to facilitate co-existence with mobile fisheries (e.g. consideration of rock placement designs that minimise gear snagging risk and undertaking of post-lay and burial inspections as well as assessments to determine cable burial status and to identify potential changes to seabed conditions). The magnitude of the impact is therefore considered to be low.

Squid Fishery

  1. Vessels engaged in the seasonal squid fishery in the commercial fisheries study area predominantly target nearshore areas, including discrete sections of inshore area of the Proposed Development export cable corridor. In addition, there may be potential for some activity to take place in offshore areas at times, including within the Proposed Development array area. Loss of grounds to these vessels during operation and maintenance, would be very small being limited to discrete areas of squid grounds which may overlap with areas where the Proposed Development’s infrastructure is located, safety zones around major operation and maintenance works, and discrete areas around vulnerable sections of cables (i.e. in the event that cable exposures are identified during operation and maintenance).
  2. The presence of Proposed Development infrastructure will be long-term. However, any additional localised loss of grounds associated with the implementation of safety zones around major operation and maintenance activities and/or the presence of vulnerable sections of cables would be short term, temporary and intermittent.
  3. Furthermore, as previously noted (paragraphs 108 to 110), a range of fisheries liaison and management measures will be implemented to minimise loss of access to fishing grounds during operation, including various measures to facilitate co-existence with mobile fisheries (e.g. consideration of rock placement designs that minimise gear snagging risk and undertaking of post-lay and burial inspections as well as assessments to determine cable burial status and to identify potential changes to seabed conditions). The magnitude of the impact is therefore considered to be low.

Creeling – Lobster and Crab Fishery

  1. As described in section 12.7.3, creelers active in the commercial fisheries study area predominantly target inshore areas, including nearshore areas where the Proposed Development export cable corridor is located. However, some vessels extend their activity further offshore, including within the Proposed Development array area. Loss of grounds to these vessels during operation and maintenance, would be limited to small discrete areas where project infrastructure is located and areas where it is necessary to implement safety zones or other advisory measures.
  2. The presence of Proposed Development infrastructure will be long-term, however, any additional localised loss of grounds associated with the safety zones around major operation and maintenance activities and/or the presence of vulnerable sections of cables would be short term, temporary and intermittent. Furthermore, as previously noted (paragraphs 108 to 110), a range of fisheries liaison and management measures will be implemented to minimise loss of access to fishing grounds during operation and maintenance. The magnitude of the impact is therefore considered to be low.

Dredging – Scallop Fishery

  1. Scallop dredging activity in areas of relevance to the Proposed Development is predominantly focused on the western section of the Proposed Development array area with limited activity anticipated in inshore areas of relevance to the Proposed Development export cable corridor. As described in section 12.7.4, vessels active in offshore areas are typically nomadic and target productive scallop grounds around Scotland and the rest of the UK.
  2. Loss of grounds to these vessels during operation and maintenance would be very small, being limited to discrete areas of scallop grounds which may overlap with areas where the Proposed Development’s infrastructure is located, and discrete areas around vulnerable sections of cables (i.e. in safety zones around major maintenance works, the event that cable exposures are identified during operation and maintenance). In the case of nomadic vessels, this takes account of the availability of productive grounds in areas beyond the Proposed Development. For local vessels active in nearshore areas, this considers the limited overlap expected between their activity and the inshore section of the Proposed Development export cable corridor.
  3. The presence of the Proposed Development’s infrastructure will be long-term, however, any additional localised loss of grounds associated with the implementation of safety zones and the presence of vulnerable sections of cables would be short term, temporary and intermittent. Furthermore, as previously noted (paragraphs 108 to 110), a range of fisheries liaison and management measures will be implemented to minimise loss of access to fishing grounds. The magnitude of the impact is therefore considered to be low.
Sensitivity of the Receptor
  1. The sensitivity of the receptors to the loss of or restricted access to fishing grounds during the operation and maintenance phase is as previously described for the construction phase This is as follows:
  • demersal trawling – Nephrops and squid fisheries: medium for Nephrops trawlers and low for squid trawlers (paragraphs 90 and 91);
  • creeling – lobster and crab fishery: high for vessels restricted to nearshore areas and medium for vessels with extended operational ranges (see paragraph 92); and
  • dredging – scallop fishery: low (see paragraph 93).
Significance of the Effect

Demersal Trawling – Nephrops and Squid Fishery

Nephrops Fishery

  1. Overall, the magnitude of the impact is deemed to be low and the sensitivity of the receptor is considered to be medium. The effect will, therefore, be of minor adverse significance, which is not significant in EIA terms.

Squid Fishery

  1. Overall, the magnitude of the impact is deemed to be low and the sensitivity of the receptor is considered to be low. The effect will, therefore, be of minor adverse significance, which is not significant in EIA terms.

Creeling – Lobster and Crab Fishery

  1. Overall, the magnitude of the impact is deemed to be low and the sensitivity of the receptor is considered to be high for vessels restricted to nearshore areas and medium for vessel with extended operational ranges. The effect will, therefore, be of minor adverse significance, which is not significant in EIA terms.

Dredging – Scallop Fishery

  1. Overall, the magnitude of the impact is deemed to be low (and the sensitivity of the receptor is considered to be low. The effect will, therefore, be of minor adverse significance, which is not significant in EIA terms.
Secondary Mitigation and Residual Effect
  1. No commercial fisheries mitigation is considered necessary because the likely effect in the absence of further mitigation (beyond the designed in measures outlined in section 12.10) is not significant in EIA terms.

Decommissioning Phase

  1. The decommissioning sequence will generally be the reverse of the construction sequence and involve similar types and numbers of vessels and equipment. The decommissioning plan and programme will be updated during the Project lifespan to take account of changing best practice and new technologies. It may be decided, closer to the time of decommissioning, that removal will result in greater environmental impacts than leaving offshore components in situ.
  2. The effects of decommissioning activities associated with the removal of infrastructure with regard to potential loss or restricted access to fishing grounds are therefore expected to be the same or similar in nature to the effects of construction and therefore considered as follows:
  • demersal trawlers – Nephrops and squid fisheries:

-             Nephrops fishery: minor adverse significance which is not significant in EIA terms; and

-             squid fishery: minor adverse significance which is not significant in EIA terms.

  • creeling – lobster and crab fishery: minor adverse significance which is not significant in EIA terms; and
  • dredging – scallop fishery: minor adverse significance which is not significance in EIA terms.
    1. The effects of infrastructure which may be left in situ are anticipated to be the same or similar in nature to the effects of the operation and maintenance phase with regard to potential loss or restricted access to fishing grounds. These are as follows:
  • demersal trawlers – Nephrops and squid fisheries:

-             Nephrops fishery: minor adverse significance which is not significant in EIA terms; and

-             squid fishery: minor adverse significance which is not significant in EIA terms.

  • creeling – lobster and crab fishery: minor significance which is not significant in EIA terms; and
  • dredging – scallop fishery: minor adverse significance which is not significance in EIA terms.
    1. As noted in the Enhancement, Mitigation and Monitoring Commitments (volume 3, appendix 6.3) as part of the decommissioning plan a detailed assessment of the status of cables (and cable protection where appropriate) left in situ will be undertaken post-decommissioning, based on best practice at the time. In the event that cable exposures are identified, these will be marked and notified and appropriate rectification works undertaken where practicable and feasible.
Secondary Mitigation and Residual Effect
  1. No commercial fisheries mitigation is considered necessary because the likely effect in the absence of further mitigation (beyond the designed in measures outlined in section 12.10) is not significant in EIA terms.

Displacement of Fishing Activity into Other Areas

  1. During the construction, operation and maintenance and decommissioning phases there may be potential for the undertaking of Proposed Development activities and/or the presence of the Proposed Development’s infrastructure to result in a displacement of fishing activity into other areas.
  2. With regard to scallop dredging, which does take place within the Proposed Development array area, the area is not a key fishing ground, with more productive grounds throughout the UK.
  3. For vessels that deploy static gear, there could be potential for conflicts associated with displacement effects to arise whereby gear that have to be temporarily removed, is relocated into grounds where other static gear vessels or mobile gear vessels operate. Similarly, vessels which operate mobile gears may be displaced to grounds where other mobile gear vessels operate, also increasing conflict and competition for fishing grounds.
  4. Whilst it is difficult to predict where fishing activity may be displaced to and how this may affect individual vessels, in all cases, the level of displacement would be a function of the extent of loss or restricted access to fishing grounds. In the absence of an established assessment framework, or any precedent or guidance any such assessment would be complex and unreliable. Given the social, economic and environmental variations that could influence the outcomes, any attempt to attempt an integrated assessment of supply chains is expected to be complex and unreliable. The information required for the analysis (e.g. the number and diversity of relevant fisheries, their supply chains and how resilience to unknown influences) would, if it existed, be widely dispersed and uneven. It is the Applicant’s position that any such assessment would require the development of a complex assessment framework to process the data, and account for unpredictable factors such as human responses to change, environmental variations and external supply chain disruptions. In the absence of such a framework, any assessment would be at best unreliable. It is therefore considered that the magnitude of impact, sensitivity of the receptor and resulting significance of effect in respect of displacement would, at worst, be as identified in relation to loss of grounds or restricted access to fishing grounds (see paragraphs 74 to 130).
  5. As such it is considered that the findings of the assessment with regards to loss or restricted access to fishing grounds also apply in relation to displacement of fishing activity and are as summarised in Table 12.10   Open ▸ .

 

Table 12.10:
Assessment of the Impact of Displacement of Fishing Activities into other Areas

Table 12.10: Assessment of the Impact of Displacement of Fishing Activities into other Areas

Increased Steaming Times

  1. The implementation of safety zones, and advisory measures during the construction, operation and maintenance and decommissioning phases could result in some short term increases in steaming distances and times to fishing vessels active in the commercial fisheries study area.