12.12.3.         Cumulative Effects Assessment

229. A description of the significance of cumulative effects of the Proposed Development upon commercial fisheries receptors arising from each identified impact is given in the following sections.

Cumulative Loss or Restricted Access to Fishing Grounds

Tier 2 and 3

Construction phase

Magnitude of impact

230. The construction of the Proposed Development, together with the projects identified under Tier 2 and Tier 3 in Table 12.12   Open ▸ , may result in loss of grounds or restricted access to traditional fishing grounds. These projects would be expected to implement similar safety zones and advisory measures during their construction/decommissioning and operation and maintenance phase to those described in respect of the Proposed Development, which could add to the temporary loss of grounds/restricted access to fishing grounds identified for the Proposed Development alone.

Demersal trawling – Nephrops and squid fishery

Nephrops fishery

231. Of the projects identified under Tier 2, it would only be those located in areas of relevance to Nephrops grounds, predominantly Seagreen 1A Project, Seagreen 1A Export Cable Corridor, Eastern Link 1 and Eastern Link 2 and the offshore export cables of Inch Cape, NnG, and Seagreen 1 that would have potential to add to cumulative impacts ( Figure 12.37   Open ▸ ). In this context it is important to note that NnG and Seagreen 1 are currently under construction. The construction phase of NnG and Seagreen 1 is not expected to overlap with the construction of the Proposed Development.
232. The cumulative impact is predicted to be of small spatial extent, being limited to areas where safety zones and advisory measures are in place in these cable projects during their construction/operation. The effect would be short-term duration as the Nephrops fishery is only of relevance in respect to the Proposed Development in areas of the Proposed Development export cable corridor (up to 24 months for installation and post-commissioning and site preparation activities may happen at any point during the construction phase) and intermittent. The magnitude is therefore, considered to be low.
233. Of the Tier 3 projects considered in the assessment there is no potential for projects to add cumulatively to loss of fishing grounds on the Firth of Forth Nephrops grounds. As shown in Figure 12.37   Open ▸ the Cambois connection, and the proposed closures to trawling within the Firth of Forth Banks Complex MPA, avoid the Firth of Forth Nephrops grounds. The magnitude of impact considering Tier 2 and Tier 3 projects cumulatively would remain as identified above for Tier 2 projects, low.

Figure 12.37:  VMS by Value (£) Demersal Trawls/Seines (average 2015-2019) and Cumulative Projects

Squid fishery

234. In the case of the squid fishery, as the fishery extends over the east coast Scotland, including in the Moray Firth area, all the projects under Tier 2 (except Rampion) are considered to have potential to add to cumulative impacts. This would apply to visiting squid vessels that work grounds across the whole east coast ( Figure 12.38   Open ▸ ). Local demersal trawlers that concentrate their squid fishing in the local area would be only potentially affected by construction works at Seagreen 1A Project, Seagreen 1A Export Cable corridor, Eastern Link 1 and Eastern Link 2 and Inch Cape ( Figure 12.40   Open ▸ ).
235. The remaining projects under Tier 2, with the exception of Moray Offshore Wind (west) and the Forthwind Demonstration Project, are all already operational and therefore fishing can resume within their boundaries. Moray offshore Wind (west) may show some overlap during construction with the construction phase of the Proposed Development.
236. The cumulative impact will be of small spatial extent, being limited to discrete areas of squid grounds that overlap with the footprint of operational infrastructure and areas where safety zones and advisory passage distances may in place at a given time.
237. The duration of the impact will be short to medium term (up to 96 months 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. The magnitude of the impact is therefore considered to be low.
238. Of the Tier 3 projects considered in the assessment there are no projects that are likely to add cumulatively to loss of fishing grounds, particularly for vessels that operate nearshore. As shown in Figure 12.37   Open ▸ proposed closures to trawling within the Firth of Forth Banks Complex MPA support very low levels of demersal trawling activity and the potential for the Cambois connection to affect squid fisheries would be very small. The magnitude of impact considering Tier 2 and Tier 3 projects cumulatively would remain as identified above for Tier 2 projects, low.

Figure 12.38: Squid Landings (£) Average 2015 -2019 and Cumulative Projects

Figure 12.39: Squid Grounds from Consultation with Fisheries Stakeholders and Cumulative Projects

Creeling – Lobster and Crab Fishery

239. Local creelers that limit their activity to nearshore areas would only be potentially affected by Tier 2 projects of relevance to the inshore area, namely Seagreen 1A Export Cable Corridor, and the offshore export cables of Inch Cape and NnG.
240. In the case of vessels that have extended operational ranges, there may be potential for cumulative impacts to additionally arise from the Inch Cape and NnG array areas, Eastern Link 1 as well as Seagreen 1 ( Figure 12.40   Open ▸ ).
241. As previously mentioned, NnG is currently under construction and it is expected to be operational by the time that construction starts the Proposed Development. For the remaining projects, however, there could be potential overlap between their construction phases and construction at the Proposed Development.
242. The impact will be of small spatial extent (being limited to discrete areas of creeling grounds that overlap with the footprint of the infrastructure of these projects and with areas where safety zones and advisory passage distances may in place at a given time. The duration of the impact will be short to medium term (up to 96 months construction phase within which 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) and occur intermittently. The magnitude of the impact is therefore considered to be low.
243. As previously noted for the Proposed Development alone, a range of fisheries liaison and management measures will be implemented to minimise loss of access to fishing grounds during construction. With specific reference to creelers, this includes a commitment to the implementation of appropriate mitigation via the establishment of cooperation agreements for affected vessels, in instances where the relocation of static fishing gear cannot be avoided. Similar measures are expected to be implemented by the rest of projects included in the CEA assessment.
244. Of the Tier 3 projects considered in the assessment there is no potential for projects to add cumulatively to loss of fishing grounds, particularly for vessels that operate nearshore. As shown in Figure 12.37   Open ▸ the Cambois connection has little potential to affect local creelers significantly. The magnitude of impact considering Tier 2 and Tier 3 projects cumulatively would remain as identified above for Tier 2 projects, low.

Figure 12.40: Creeling Grounds from Consultation with Fisheries Stakeholders and Cumulative Projects

Dredging – Scallop Fishery

245. As described in section 12.7.4, scallop dredging activity in areas of relevance to the Proposed Development is predominantly focused around 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. Vessels active in offshore areas are typically nomadic and target productive scallop grounds around Scotland and the rest of the UK.
246. Given the operational extent of scallop dredging activities, particularly in the case of nomadic vessels, there may be potential for all the projects included under Tier 2 to add cumulatively to the magnitude of the impact identified for the Proposed Development alone ( Figure 12.41   Open ▸ ). All the projects, with the exception of Seagreen 1A Project, Seagreen 1A Export Cable Corridor, the Forthwind Demonstration Project, Inch Cape, Eastern Link 1, Eastern Link 2 and Moray Offshore Wind (West) are already operational or currently under construction. During the construction phase of the Proposed Development, fishing vessels will have access to Tier 2 projects for fishing with the exception of discrete areas associated with the project’s infrastructure footprint and where safety zones and advisory passage distances may in place at a given time. Considering the distribution of fishing activity in relation to the location of the Proposed Development and the extent of grounds available to the fishery, the impact is considered to be moderate in extent. The duration of the impact will be short to medium term (up to 96 months construction phases 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. The magnitude of the impact is therefore considered to be medium.
247. Of the Tier 3 projects considered in the assessment there may be potential for Rampion 2, to add cumulatively to loss of fishing grounds. As shown in Figure 12.41   Open ▸ , the Cambois connection have little potential to affect scallop dredgers and areas potentially closed to dredging within the Firth of Forth Banks Complex MPA show limited overlap with scallop dredging activity.
248. The magnitude of impact considering Tier 2 and Tier 3 projects cumulatively would remain as identified above for Tier 2 projects, medium.

Figure 12.41:  VMS (£) Scallop Dredgers (average 2015 -2019) and Cumulative Projects

Sensitivity of receptor

249. The sensitivity of the receptors to loss or restricted access to fishing grounds during the construction phase in a cumulative context is as previously described for the construction phase for the Proposed Development alone. This is as follows:

• demersal trawling – Nephrops and squid fisheries: medium for Nephrops trawlers and low for squid trawlers;
• creeling – lobster and crab fishery: high for vessels restricted to nearshore areas and medium for vessels with extended operational ranges; and
• dredging – scallop fishery: low.

Significance of effect

Demersal Trawling – Nephrops and Squid Fishery

Nephrops Fishery

250. 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

251. 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

252. 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.
253. For vessels operating in nearshore areas a minor to moderate significance would apply based on the significance matrix, whilst for vessels with extended operational ranges impact significance would be minor. Based on expert judgement, the final significance for both vessels are however considered to be minor which not significant in EIA terms. This takes account of the designed in mitigation that has been proposed (e.g. the commitment to implement appropriate mitigation for affected vessels, via cooperation agreements, in instances where the relocation of static fishing gear cannot be avoided) and considers that similar measures would be implemented by the rest of projects included in the CEA assessment.

Dredging – Scallop Fishery

254. Overall, the magnitude of the impact is deemed to be medium 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.

Further Mitigation and Residual Effect

255. 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.

Operation and maintenance phase

Magnitude of impact

256. The Proposed Development, together with the projects identified under Tier 2 and Tier 3 in Table 12.12   Open ▸ , may result in loss of grounds or restricted access to fishing grounds during the operation and maintenance phase of the Proposed Development. These projects would be expected to implement similar safety zones and advisory measures around vulnerable cables during the construction/decommissioning and operation and maintenance phase to those described in respect of the Proposed Development and could therefore add to the loss of grounds/restricted access to fishing grounds identified for the Proposed Development alone.
257. It has been assumed that the impacts from the presence of these projects will be similar in nature to those described for the Proposed Development alone (e.g. presence of project infrastructure and safety zones and advisory measures where appropriate (i.e. around vulnerable cables).
258. As described for assessment of the impact of the Proposed Development alone, existing legislation does not prevent fishing from occurring within operational wind farm sites. As such, fishing activity would be expected to resume to some levels in the projects included for cumulative assessment.

Demersal Trawling – Nephrops and Squid Fishery

Nephrops Fishery

259. As described for the construction phase, of the projects identified under Tier 2, it would only be those located in areas of relevance to Nephrops grounds, predominantly Seagreen 1A Export Cable Corridor, and the offshore export cables of Inch Cape, NnG, Seagreen 1, and Eastern Link 1 that would have potential to add to cumulative impacts on the Nephrops fishery ( Figure 12.37   Open ▸ ). The operation and maintenance phase of these projects will overlap with the operation and maintenance phase of the Proposed Development. During this phase, however, fishing would be able to resume across the offshore export cables of these projects.
260. The cumulative impact is predicted to be of small spatial extent, being limited to areas of cable protection and potential discrete vulnerable sections of cables (i.e. in the event that cable exposures are identified in these projects). The presence of cable protection will be long term, however, any additional localised loss of grounds associated with safety zones or advisory measures would be short term, temporary and intermittent. Furthermore, as previously noted, a range of fisheries liaison and management measures will be implemented to minimise loss of access to fishing grounds during the operation and maintenance phase of the Proposed Development, 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). Similar approaches are expected to be implemented by other projects. The magnitude of the impact is therefore considered to be low.
261. Of the Tier 3 projects considered in the assessment there is no potential to add cumulatively to loss of fishing grounds on the Firth of Forth Nephrops grounds. Similar measures to those proposed for the Proposed Development are expected to be implemented by these projects. As shown in Figure 12.37   Open ▸ the Cambois connection, and the proposed closures to trawling within the Firth of Forth Banks Complex MPA, avoid the Firth of Forth Nephrops grounds.
262. The magnitude of impact considering Tier 2 and Tier 3 projects cumulatively would remain as identified above for Tier 2 projects, low.

Squid Fishery

263. As previously mentioned for construction, in the case of the squid fishery, as the fishery extends over the east coast of Scotland, including in the Moray Firth area, all the projects under Tier 2 are considered to have potential to add to cumulative impacts ( Figure 12.38   Open ▸ and Figure 12.39   Open ▸ ). The operation and maintenance phase of these projects would overlap with that of the Proposed Development.
264. During operation and maintenance, squid trawlers would however be able to fish to resume fishing within the boundaries of Tier 2 projects.
265. The cumulative impact will be of small spatial extent, being limited to discrete areas of squid grounds that overlap with the footprint of the infrastructure of these projects or with areas where safety zones and vulnerable sections of cables may be in place at a given time.
266. The presence of project infrastructure will be long term, however, any additional localised loss of grounds associated with the implementation of safety zones or other measures would be short term, temporary and intermittent. Furthermore, as previously mentioned, a range of fisheries liaison and management measures will be implemented for the Proposed Development to minimise loss of access to fishing grounds during the operation and maintenance phase, 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 other projects included in the assessment would be expected to implement similar approaches to co-existence. The magnitude of the impact is therefore considered to be low.
267. Of the Tier 3 projects considered in the assessment there is no potential to add cumulatively for loss of fishing grounds, particularly for vessels that operate nearshore. As shown in Figure 12.37   Open ▸ , proposed closures to trawling within the Firth of Forth Banks Complex MPA support very low levels of demersal trawling activity and the potential for the Cambois connection to affect squid fisheries would be very small.
268. The magnitude of impact considering Tier 2 and Tier 3 projects cumulatively would remain as identified above for Tier 2 projects, low.

Creeling – Lobster and Crab Fishery

269. Local creelers that limit their activity to inshore areas would only be potentially affected by Tier 2 project of relevance to this area, namely Seagreen 1A Export Cable Corridor, Eastern Link 1 and the offshore export cables of Inch Cape and NnG.
270. In the case of vessels that have extended operational ranges, there may be potential for cumulative impacts to additionally arise from the Inch Cape and NnG array areas as well as Seagreen 1 ( Figure 12.40   Open ▸ ).
271. It is anticipated that the operation and maintenance phase of all the projects in Tier 2 identified above will overlap with that of the Proposed Development. Creeling activity will be able to resume within these projects during the operation and maintenance phase.
272. The impact will be of small spatial extent (being limited to discrete areas of creeling grounds that overlap with the footprint of the infrastructure of these projects and with areas where safety zones and vulnerable sections of cables may be in place at a given time. The presence of project infrastructure will be long-term; however, any additional localised loss of grounds associated with safety zones or advisory measures which may be required would be short term, temporary and intermittent. Furthermore, a range of fisheries liaison and management measures will be implemented to minimise loss of access to fishing grounds during the operation and maintenance phase for the Proposed Development. Both, for creelers that limit their activity to inshore areas and those with extended operational ranges, the magnitude of the impact is therefore considered to be low.
273. Of the Tier 3 projects considered in the assessment there is no potential for projects to add cumulatively to loss of fishing grounds, particularly for vessels that operate nearshore. As shown in Figure 12.37   Open ▸ the Cambois connection has little potential to affect local creelers significantly.
274. The magnitude of impact considering Tier 2 and Tier 3 projects cumulatively would remain as identified above for Tier 2 projects, low.

Dredging – Scallop Fishery

275. As previously mentioned, given the operational extent of scallop dredging activities, particularly in the case of nomadic vessels, there may be potential for all the projects included under Tier 2 to add cumulatively to the magnitude of the impact identified for the Proposed Development alone ( Figure 12.41   Open ▸ ). There is potential for the operation and maintenance phase of all these projects to overlap with the operation and maintenance phase at the Proposed Development. Fishing would be able to resume to some extent within these projects during this phase.
276. During the construction phase of the Proposed Development, fishing vessels will have access to these projects for fishing with the exception of discrete areas associated with the footprint of the infrastructure of these projects and areas where safety zones or advisory restrictions around vulnerable sections of cable are in place at a given time. Considering the distribution of fishing activity in relation to the location of the Proposed Development and other projects in Tier 2 and the extent of grounds available to the fishery, the impact is considered to be moderate in extent.
277. The presence of project infrastructure will be long-term, however, any additional localised loss of grounds associated with the implementation of safety zones or with the presence of vulnerable sections of cables would be of small spatial extent and for the most part, short term, temporary and intermittent. Furthermore, a range of fisheries liaison and management measures will be implemented to minimise loss of access to fishing grounds during the operation and maintenance phase for the Proposed Development. The magnitude of the impact is therefore considered to be medium.
278. Of the Tier 3 projects considered in the assessment there may be potential for Rampion 2 to add cumulatively to loss of fishing grounds. As shown in Figure 12.41   Open ▸ the Cambois connection has little potential to affect scallop dredgers and areas potentially closed to dredging within the Firth of Forth Banks Complex MPA show limited overlap with the main scallop grounds.
279. The magnitude of impact considering Tier 2 and Tier 3 projects cumulatively would remain as identified above for Tier 2 projects, medium.

Sensitivity of the receptor

280. The sensitivity of the receptors to loss or restricted access to fishing grounds during the operation and maintenance phase in a cumulative context is as previously described for the construction phase (paragraph 249). This is as follows:

• demersal trawling – Nephrops and squid fisheries: medium for Nephrops trawlers and low for squid trawlers;
• creeling – lobster and crab fishery: high for vessels restricted to nearshore areas and medium for vessels with extended operational ranges; and
• dredging – scallop fishery: low.

Significance of the effect

Demersal Trawling – Nephrops and Squid Fishery

Nephrops Fishery

281. 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

282. 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

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

Dredging – Scallop Fishery

284. Overall, the magnitude of the impact is deemed to be medium 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.

Further mitigation and residual effect

285. 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

286. The cumulative effects of decommissioning activities associated with the removal of infrastructure with regard to potential loss or restricted access to fishing grounds are 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 significant in EIA terms.
  287. The cumulative 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 adverse significance which is not significant in EIA terms; and
• dredging – scallop fishery: minor adverse significance which is not significant in EIA terms.
  288. 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. Similar approach would be expected from other projects included in the CEA.

Cumulative Displacement of fishing activity into other areas

Tiers 2 and 3

289. As previously described for the Proposed Development alone, 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. 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. This would apply for the Proposed Development alone, but also in a cumulative context.
290. As such it is considered that the findings of the cumulative assessment with regards to loss or restricted access to fishing grounds also apply in relation to cumulative displacement of fishing activity and are therefore as summarised in Table 12.14   Open ▸ .

Table 12.14: Assessment of the Cumulative Effect of Displacement of Fishing Activities into Other Areas

Cumulative Increased Steaming times

Tiers 2 and 3

Construction phase

Magnitude of impact

All Fisheries

291. The construction of the Proposed Development, together with projects identified under Tier 2 in Table 12.12   Open ▸ , may result in increased steaming times to fishing vessels. These projects would be expected to implement similar safety zones and advisory measures during their construction/decommissioning and operation and maintenance phase to those described in respect of the Proposed Development and could add to the magnitude of the impact in respect of increased steaming times identified for the Proposed Development alone.
292. Appropriate liaison would be undertaken with fisheries stakeholders via the Proposed Development’s FLO and other appropriate channels (e.g. Kingfisher Information Service, NtM, etc) to ensure that they are informed of the nature, timing and location of construction activities associated with the Proposed Development, including the location and extent of safety zones and advisory measures, in a timely and efficient manner. Other projects included in the assessment would be expected to implement similar measures. The majority of projects included in Tier 2 are either already operational or currently under construction (with the exception of the Forthwind Demonstration Project, Seagreen 1A Project, Seagreen 1A Export Cable Corridor, Inch Cape, Eastern Link 1, Eastern Link 2 and Moray Offshore Wind (West)). Therefore, during the construction phase of the Proposed Development these will be for the most part already operational.
293. The impact is considered to be very small in spatial extent, short to medium term and intermittent. In addition, appropriate fisheries liaison and management measures will be implemented to minimise impacts. The magnitude is therefore considered to be low.
294. Of the Tier 3 projects considered in the assessment there may be only potential for the Cambois connection to add to cumulative impacts. Similar measures to those proposed for the Proposed Development are expected to be implemented by these projects. The closures to fishing within the Firth of Forth Banks Complex MPA currently under consultation, if finally implemented, would not affect the ability of fishing vessels to steam through the area.
295. The magnitude of impact considering Tier 2 and Tier 3 projects cumulatively would remain as identified above for Tier 2 projects, low.

Sensitivity of the receptor

296. The sensitivity of the receptors to increased steaming times during the construction phase in a cumulative context is as previously described for the construction phase for the Proposed Development alone. This is as follows:

• demersal trawling – Nephrops and squid fisheries: low;
• creeling – lobster and crab fishery: medium for small vessels which operate in nearshore areas and low for vessels with extended operational ranges and
• dredging – scallop fishery: low for nomadic vessels and medium for smaller local vessels that operate nearshore.

Significance of the effect

Demersal Trawling – Nephrops and Squid Fishery

297. 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

298. Overall, the magnitude of the impact is deemed to be low and the sensitivity of the receptor is considered to be medium for small vessels active in nearshore areas and low for vessels that have extended operational ranges. The effect will, therefore, be of minor adverse significance, for both types of vessels which is not significant in EIA terms.

Dredging – Scallop Fishery

299. Overall, the magnitude of the impact is deemed to be low and the sensitivity of the receptor is considered to be low for nomadic vessels and medium for local vessels that target nearshore areas. The effect will, therefore, be of minor adverse significance for both types of vessels, which is not significant in EIA terms.

Further mitigation and residual effect

300. 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 decommissioning phase

Magnitude of impact

All Fisheries

301. The presence of infrastructure and safety zones in place during the operation and maintenance phase at the projects in Tier 2 could result in additional short term increases in steaming distances and times for fishing vessels.
302. The majority of projects included in Tier 2 are either already operational or currently under construction (with the exception of the Forthwind Demonstration Project, Seagreen 1A Project, Seagreen 1A Export Cable Corridor, Inch Cape, Eastern Link 1, Eastern Link 2, and Moray Offshore Wind (West)). Therefore, during the operation and maintenance phase of the Proposed Development these will be operational.
303. Whilst the impact could occur across the operational lifetime of the Proposed Development (up to 35 years), fishing vessels would not be restricted from transiting through the Proposed Development array area and offshore export cables, with the exception of areas subject to temporary 500 m safety zones or advisory measures.
304. Furthermore, appropriate liaison would be undertaken with fisheries stakeholders to ensure that they are informed of the nature, timing and location of major maintenance activities associated with the Proposed Development, including the location and extent of safety zones, in a timely and efficient manner. Similarly, measures are also expected to be implemented at the other projects included in the assessment.
305. The impact is predicted to be of small spatial extent, localised and intermittent in nature and a range of fisheries liaison and management measures will be implemented to minimise impacts on fishing. The magnitude is therefore considered to be low.
306. Of the Tier 3 projects considered in the assessment there may be only potential for the Cambois connection to add to cumulative impacts. Closures to fishing within the Firth of Forth Banks Complex MPA currently under consultation, if finally implemented, would not affect the ability of fishing vessels to steam through the area.
307. The magnitude of effect considering Tier 2 and Tier 3 projects cumulatively would remain as identified above for Tier 2 projects, low.

Sensitivity of the receptor

308. The sensitivity of the receptors to increased steaming times during the operation and maintenance in a cumulative context is as previously described for the construction phase for the Proposed Development (paragraph 296). This is as follows:

• demersal trawling – Nephrops and squid fisheries: low;
• creeling – lobster and crab fishery: medium for small vessels which operate in nearshore areas and low for vessels with extended operational ranges; and
• dredging – scallop fishery: low for nomadic vessels and medium for smaller local vessels that operate nearshore.

Significance of the effect

Demersal Trawling – Nephrops and Squid Fishery

309. 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

310. Overall, the magnitude of the impact is deemed to be low and the sensitivity of the receptor is considered to be medium for small vessels active in nearshore areas and low for vessels that have extended operational ranges. The effect will, therefore, be of minor adverse significance, which is not significant in EIA terms.

Dredging – Scallop Fishery

311. Overall, the magnitude of the impact is deemed to be low and the sensitivity of the receptor is considered to be low for nomadic vessels and medium for local vessels that target nearshore areas. The effect will, therefore, be of minor adverse significance for both types of vessels, which is not significant in EIA terms.

Further mitigation and residual effect

312. 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

313. The decommissioning sequence will generally be the reverse of the construction sequence and involve similar types and numbers of vessels and equipment.
314. The effects of decommissioning activities associated with the Proposed Development in a cumulative context with regard to increased steaming times are therefore expected to be the same or similar in nature to the cumulative effects of construction and therefore considered as follows:

• demersal trawlers – Nephrops and squid fisheries: 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 significant in EIA terms.

Cumulative Snagging risk – lOSS or Damage to Fishing gear and SAFETY ISSUES

Tiers 2 and 3

Construction phase

Magnitude of impact

All Fisheries

315. The construction of the Proposed Development, together with projects identified under Tier 2 and Tier 3 in Table 12.12   Open ▸ , may result in increased snagging risk and associated loss or damage to fishing gears.
316. As construction progresses wind turbine and OSP/Offshore convertor station platform foundations would have potential to represent a snagging risk for fishing gear. Similarly, the potential presence of sections of offshore export cables, inter-array and interconnector cables temporarily awaiting burial or protection as well as seabed obstacles (e.g. dropped objects) which may arise as a result of construction works may also pose a snagging risk. In addition, in projects which may be operational at the time that the Proposed Development is under construction, the potential presence of discrete sections of offshore export cables and/or inter-array cables which may become exposed as well as seabed obstacles which may arise as a result of maintenance works (i.e. dropped objects, sediment berms, etc) may also pose a snagging risk.
317. As previously described under the assessment for the Proposed Development alone, a number of liaison and management measures will be implemented to ensure that snagging risk and associated loss or damage to fishing gear and safety issues are minimised and mitigated appropriately. This will include the circulation of appropriate information, including on the location of safety zones and advisory measures which may need to be implemented during the construction and operation and maintenance phase and the use of guard vessels and OFLOs as appropriate. 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 and assessments carried out to determine cable burial status (including cable protection) and to identify potential changes to seabed conditions and a procedure for the claim of loss or damage to fishing gear will be developed.
318. All contractors undertaking works will be contractually obliged to ensure compliance with standard offshore policies, including those that prohibit the discarding of objects or material overboard and that require the rapid recovery of accidentally dropped objects.
319. It is anticipated that the other projects included under Tier 2 and Tier 3 would also apply similar procedures to those proposed for the Proposed Development to minimise snagging risk.
320. The impact is predicted to affect small areas (being localised around the immediate footprint of project infrastructure and potential seabed obstacles), to be of short to medium term duration and a range of fisheries liaison and management measures will be implemented. The magnitude is therefore considered to be low and the frequency of occurrence of safety issues remote.

Sensitivity of the receptor and severity of consequence

All Fisheries

321. The sensitivity of the receptors to snagging risk and associated loss or damage to fishing gear and the severity of consequence of safety issues during the construction phase in a cumulative context is as previously described for the construction phase for the Proposed Development alone. This is as follows:

• all fisheries: medium sensitivity and moderate severity.

Significance of the Effect

All Fisheries

322. 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 and tolerable, which is not significant in EIA terms.

Further mitigation and residual effect

323. 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.

Operation and maintenance phase

Magnitude of impact

All Fisheries

324. The operation and maintenance phase of the Proposed Development, together with that of projects identified under Tier 2 and Tier 3 in Table 12.12   Open ▸ , may result in increased snagging risk and associated damage to fishing gears.
325. This would be a result of the increased presence of wind turbine and OSP/Offshore convertor station platform foundations as well as the potential discrete sections of offshore export cables, interconnector and/or inter-array cables which may become exposed as well as seabed obstacles which may be present during the operation and maintenance phase (i.e. dropped objects) may also pose a snagging risk.
326. As previously described under the assessment for the Proposed Development alone, a number of liaison and management measures will be implemented to ensure that snagging risk and associated loss or damage to fishing gear is minimised and mitigated appropriately. This will include the circulation of appropriate information, including on the location of safety zones and advisory measures which may need to be implemented during operation and maintenance phase and the use of guard vessels and FLOs as appropriate. 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 and assessments carried out to determine cable burial status (including cable protection) and to identify potential changes to seabed conditions and a procedure for claim of loss or damage to fishing gear developed.
327. All contractors undertaking works will be contractually obliged to ensure compliance with standard offshore policies, including those that prohibit the discarding of objects or material overboard and that require the rapid recovery of accidentally dropped objects.
328. It is anticipated that the other projects included under Tier 2 and Tier 3 would also apply similar procedures to those proposed for the Proposed Development to minimise snagging risk.
329. The impact is predicted to affect very small areas (being localised around the immediate footprint of project infrastructure and potential associated seabed obstacles). Potential impacts could occur over the long term (up to 35 year); however, a range of fisheries liaison and management measures will be implemented to minimise snagging risk. The magnitude is therefore considered to be low and the probability of occurrence of safety issues remote.

Sensitivity of the receptor and severity of consequence

All Fisheries

330. The sensitivity of the receptors to snagging risk and associated loss or damage to fishing gear and the severity of consequence of safety issues during the operation and maintenance phase in a cumulative context is as previously described for the construction phase. This is as follows:

• all fisheries: medium sensitivity and moderate severity.

Significance of the Effect

All Fisheries

331. 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 and tolerable, which is not significant in EIA terms.

Further mitigation and residual effect

332. 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

333. The decommissioning sequence will generally be the reverse of the construction sequence and involve similar types and numbers of vessels and equipment.
334. The effects of decommissioning activities associated with the removal of infrastructure with regard to snagging risk and associated loss or damage to fishing gear are therefore expected to be the same or similar in nature to the effects of construction (paragraphs 315 to 323) and are therefore considered to be as follows:

• all fisheries: minor adverse significance and tolerable which is not significant in EIA terms.
  335. The effects of infrastructure which may be left in situ is anticipated to be the same or similar in nature to the effects of the operation and maintenance phase with regard to gear snagging risks. These are as follows:
• all fisheries: minor adverse significance and tolerable which is not significant in EIA terms.
  336. 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. Similar measures would be expected to be implemented by the rest of projects included in the CEA.

Cumulative Interference with fishing activities