4. Onshore Field Surveys

In order to adequately assess the baseline conditions for birds, the following field surveys were conducted with respect to the onshore cable route and included for both the Northern (which was selected) and Southern landfall (which has subsequently been removed from consideration[3]) options:

       Breeding Bird Survey (see Onshore EIA - Volume 4, Appendix 8.1);

        Wintering (non-breeding) Bird Survey (see Onshore EIA - Volume 4, Appendix 8.2); and

       Inter-tidal surveys (Offshore EIA - Volume 2, Chapter 11, Offshore and Intertidal Ornithology).

Details of the specific methods used, and the results of each survey can be found in the respective Technical Appendix. Further details on the desk study and the records found can be obtained from Technical Appendix 7.1.

Surveys for wintering birds were undertaken in the 2020/2021 winter period and the breeding bird survey was completed in 2020 in relation to the onshore cable corridor and associated infrastructure.

4.1            External Data Consultation

As part of the desk study to inform the baseline conditions, an external data consultation was undertaken in which the regional biological records centre, The Wildlife Information Centre (TWIC), were consulted on any historical data of relevance they may hold. This included for bird records from the following organisations:

       British Trust for Ornithology (BTO) – including records from the BTO, Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) partnership;

       East Lothian Council Ranger Service records;

       Scottish Ornithologists' Club - Borders records (2010-2019);

       Scottish Ornithologists' Club - Lothians Tetrad Bird Atlas 2007-13 (winter records);

       Scottish Ornithologists' Club - Lothians Tetrad Bird Atlas 2008-13 (breeding records); and

       The British Association for Shooting and Conservation - UK casual records from BASC members.

Although the dataset was comprehensive, only records from the last ten years (i.e. those from 2011) have been considered relevant as part of this assessment.

The details of the consultation and the data obtained can be found in Onshore EIA – Volume 4, Appendix 7.1.

5. Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA

5.1            Designated Site Description

The Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA is located directly east of the Site and is a large estuarine and marine designation on the south-eastern coast of Scotland, consisting of the two closely adjacent Firths of Forth and Tay and was first designated on 3rd December 2020 (NatureScot, 2022).

In the mid Firth of Forth a belt of mud-rich sediments lies between areas of sandy gravels and shell material on either side along the shore. As the estuary widens towards the outer firth, there are extensive areas of sandy and gravelly muds and fine sediments. In contrast St Andrews Bay contains clean sands and gravel with only small areas of muddy sediments. Water depth is variable but large areas, in both the Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay, are shallow and less than 10 m deep.

The area supports a wide variety of both pelagic and demersal fish, including sandeels, and crustaceans, molluscs and marine worms, all of which, especially sandeels, comprise the prey of the waterfowl species

5.2            Qualifying Interests

The Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA qualifies under Article 4.1 of the Habitat Regulations by regularly supporting a non-breeding population of European importance of the following Annex 1 species: red-throated diver (Gavia stellata) during the period 2001/02 to 2004/2005; Slavonian grebe (Podiceps auritus)during the period 2006/07 to 2010/11 (an average of 30 individuals; i.e., 2.7% of the Great Britain population; little gull (Larus minutus) during the period 2001/02 to 2004/05 (126 individuals; more than 50 individuals) and feeding common tern (Sterna hirundo) and Arctic tern (Sterna paradisaea) from the adjacent breeding colonies.

The Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA further qualifies under Article 4.2 by regularly supporting populations of European importance of the following migratory waterfowl species: Common eider (Somateria mollissima) and by regularly supporting in excess of 20,000 individual waterfowl including nationally important populations of the following species during the five year period 2001/02 to 2004/05: long tailed duck (Clangula hyemalis), common scoter, and during the period 2006/07-2010/11: velvet scoter  (Melanitta fusca), common goldeneye (Bucephala clangula) and red-breasted merganser (Mergus serrator).

The Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA further qualifies under Article 4.2 by regularly supporting populations of European importance of the two following migratory species of seabird: foraging European shag (Phalacrocorax aristotelis) from the nearby colonies, and Northern gannet (Morus bassanus) during the period 1980-2006.

The Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA further qualifies under Article 4.2 by regularly supporting in excess of 20,000 individual seabirds during the breeding season including nationally important populations of the following species during the period 1980-2006: Atlantic puffin (Fratercula arctica), black-legged kittiwake (Rissa tridactyla) Manx shearwater (Puffinus puffinus), common guillemot (Uria aalge) and herring gull.

The Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA further qualifies under Article 4.2 by regularly supporting in excess of 20,000 individual seabirds during the non-breeding season including nationally important populations of the following species during the period 2003/04-2005/06: black-headed gull (Chroicocephalus ridibundus), common gull (Larus canus), and herring gull and, during the period 1980-2006: common guillemot, European shag, black-legged and razorbill (Alca torda).

5.2.1           Feature Summary

Feature Condition and Conservation Objectives

NatureScot is currently preparing conservation and management advice for all inshore marine protected areas and once finalised the advice documents will include the full Conservation Objectives for the SPA. This advice document is anticipated to incorporate site-specific supplementary advice and information to assist in the interpretation of the high-level Conservation Objectives. While site-specific advice and information is developed, the high-level Conservation Objectives will remain as draft (NatureScot & JNCC, 2021) but are unlikely to change. As such, in the absence of a final version of the advice document, the high-level Conservation Objectives remain pertinent to this appraisal.

“Draft Conservation Objectives:

•                     1. To ensure that the qualifying features of the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA are in favourable condition and make an appropriate contribution to achieving Favourable Conservation Status;

•                     2. To ensure that the integrity of the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA is restored in the context of environmental changes by meeting objectives 2a, 2b and 2c for each qualifying feature:

  • 2a. The populations of qualifying features are viable components of the site.
  • 2b. The distributions of the qualifying features throughout the site are maintained by avoiding significant disturbance of the species.
  • 2c. The supporting habitats and processes relevant to the qualifying features and their prey/food resources are maintained, or where appropriate restored, at the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA.”

The HRA screening process summarised in Table 4 concluded four species, non-breeding eider, non-breeding black-headed gull, non-breeding common gull and breeding and non-breeding herring gull were scoped in and all other species were scoped out of the assessment (See Annex A: Table 5).

5.2.1.1     Eider (non-breeding)

Eider is a species of seaduck that is currently Amber Listed on the Bird of Conservation Concern 4 (Stanbury et al., 2021) and lives along coastlines relying on shellfish, particularly mussels, for their main source of food. They are commonly found breeding along the Scottish and Northern English coasts but known to winter along most UK shores.

Given the relatively new status of the SPA designation, the condition of eider (non-breeding) as a qualifying feature has not been assessed, although for the purposes of this RIAA they are considered to be in a Favourable condition (as per NatureScot & JNCC, 2021), and no negative pressures have been identified.

5.2.1.2     Herring gull (breeding and non-breeding)

Herring gull are Red Listed on the Bird of Conservation Concern 4 (Stanbury et al., 2021) and are also a Scottish Priority List species.

Despite the newly ratified status of the SPA, herring gull are considered to be in an Unfavourable condition at the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA and therefore an overarching ‘restore’ objective is set for the site for this species.

5.2.1.3     Black-headed gull (non-breeding)

Black-headed gull are on the Scottish Priority list as well as being Amber Listed on the Birds of Conservation Concern 5 (Stanbury et al., 2021).

Given the newly ratified status of the SPA, black-headed gull is considered to be in a Favourable condition at the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA and therefore an overarching maintenance of that favourable status is expected.

5.2.1.4     Common gull (non-breeding)

Common gull are Amber-listed on the Birds of Conservation Concern 5 (Stanbury et al., 2021).

Given the newly ratified status of the SPA, common gull are considered to be in a Favourable condition at the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA and therefore an overarching maintenance of that favourable status is expected.

5.2.2           Assessment of Adverse Effects Alone

5.2.2.1     Eider (non-breeding)

There is no direct overlap between the onshore Project footprint and the SPA boundary (located at the Mean Low Water Springs (MLWS) line) at any point from making landfall at the transition joint bays and the remainder of the onshore cable route and associated infrastructure. The edge of the SPA lies 220 m away at its closest point from the nearest above ground infrastructure (i.e. landfall and the transition joint bays) and works in the intertidal zone will be completed using trenchless technology and underground, meaning impacts on bird species are considered to be limited.

The wintering bird survey completed in 2020/2021 confirmed a single registration consisting of a raft of 36 birds at the north-western corner of the Site boundary (see Technical Appendix 8.2 and Figure TA8.2.3).

The intertidal surveys covered a strip 1,500 m wide opposite the coastline from the MHWS and opposite the two proposed landfall locations. The maximum disturbance distance impacting on bird species is considered to be at most 500 m out to see therefore only results from Sections A1 and B1 (See Figure 2) are considered relevant to this assessment.

A maximum of 69 individuals was recorded in February 2021 during intertidal surveys. The peak counts recorded during intertidal surveys total 151 individuals between September 2020 and March 2021 (taking highest values of in Sections A1 or B1 – See Figure 2 for locations and Offshore EIA – Volume 3, Appendix 11.2: Ornithology Inter-tidal Survey Report. Table 2) which equates to an average peak count of 22 birds per month, although it should be noted not all the intertidal records were recorded within 500 m of the landfall. Including all of the peak count records creating a worse scenario of 22 individuals that may be disturbed during construction activities this accounts for 0.1 % of the SPA population.

The desk study records confirmed a total of 120 registrations (totalling 1,047 birds) for eider in the last 10 years located within 5 km of the Site boundary. Of the 120 registrations returned, nine were located within the Site boundary and totalled 62 birds.

Disturbance/ Displacement

The nearest onshore site infrastructure comes to within 50 m of typical habitat for eider (at high tide) and works are predicted to be limited to a maximum of two winter seasons (See Table 5.2: of Onshore EIA – Volume 1, Chapter 5: Proposed Development Description), although it is considered significant disturbance will be limited to drilling activities and more likely to be limited to one winter season. Merkel et al. (2009) studied eider disturbance from boats in Greenland and found that, left undisturbed, they tended to avoid feeding at high tides, concentrating on foraging at the start and end of daylight hours. Although active disturbance from boats was found, analyses of feeding activity indicated that eiders in the WBS Study Area had the capacity to adapt to human disturbances, indicated by a change in feeding time allocation when disturbed (Merkel et al., 2009).

 

The wintering bird survey confirmed a single registration for eider and the intertidal survey identified groups of eider in all winter months close to the shoreline, along with the historical records returned from the desk study for this species shows eider do use the area close to the landfall but only in small numbers. If you take an average figure from the WBS and intertidal surveys it comprises nine and 22 birds respectively. These counts comprise creating a worse scenario of 22 individuals that may be disturbed during construction activities which equates to just 0.1 % of the SPA designation population (21,546). Given the fact that a maximum of only 0.1 % of the SPA could be impacted and the fact that disturbed birds are likely to simply swim further out to sea or along the coast, any disturbance on eider is considered to be insignificant.

 

Therefore, it is considered that there is no adverse effect on integrity, having regard to the conservation objectives of the non-breeding eider feature of the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA from any pressure associated with disturbance / displacement.

5.2.2.2     Herring gull (breeding and non-breeding)

There is no direct overlap between the Proposed Development and the SPA boundary (located at the MLWS line) at any point from making landfall at the transition joint bays and the remainder of the onshore cable route and associated infrastructure. The edge of the SPA lies 220 m away at its closest point from the nearest infrastructure (i.e. landfall and the transition joint bays).

The wintering bird survey and intertidal survey confirmed multiple registrations throughout the survey in the WBS Study Area and IS Study Areas A1 and B1 (See Figure 1) including within the Site boundary (see Onshore EIA – Volume 4, Appendix 8.2 and Appendix Figure 8.2.3). Although herring gull were recorded during the breeding bird survey, no breeding territories were identified within the BBS Study Area (See Figure 1). The desk study identified a further 240 records within 5 km of the site between 2011-2021 of which 13 records, totalling 333 individuals, were recorded within the Site. The desk study records of herring gull are notably spread throughout the wider East Lothian region.

Disturbance/ Displacement

The onshore site infrastructure is all located within what could be classed as typical habitat for herring gull (both for breeding, along the foreshore coastal edges, and non-breeding life-cycle stages). The SNH and JNCC document providing advice to support management of the SPA (SNH & JNCC, 2016) outlines that, with respect to vessel movements and disturbance, although all species display some level of avoidance behaviour:

“All other qualifying species are considered to be either not sensitive (gulls) or have a low sensitivity to visual disturbance created by vessel movement.”

In addition, in relation to the harvesting of intertidal shellfish and bait as disturbance pressure to the SPA features, SNH & JNCC (2016) state:

“Red-throated diver, Slavonian grebe, common scoter, velvet scoter, red-breasted merganser are considered to have a medium sensitivity to visual disturbance.

All other qualifying species are considered to have low sensitivity to visual disturbance associated with shellfish harvesting.”

The visual, human presence and vehicle-associated disturbance from the limited footprint of the scheme (primarily in the form of the undergrounding construction works associated with the cable route) is considered to be limited and short-term temporal. Furthermore, herring gull are regularly witnessed utilising the ground disturbance associated with field ploughing and other farming activities to forage on worms and other invertebrates brought to the surface during the process. As such, they are assumed to have not only habitualised to some disturbance but to make opportunistic use of such disturbance.

 

Therefore, it is considered that there is no adverse effect on integrity, having regard to the conservation objectives of the non-breeding and breeding herring gull feature of the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA from any pressure associated with disturbance / displacement.

5.2.2.3     Black-headed gull (non-breeding)

There is no direct overlap between the Proposed Development and the SPA boundary (located at the MHLS line) at any point from making landfall at the transition joint bays and the remainder of the onshore cable route and associated infrastructure. The edge of the SPA lies 220 m away at its closest point from the nearest infrastructure (i.e. landfall and the transition joint bays).

The wintering bird survey confirmed multiple registrations of black-headed gull throughout the WBS Study Area (see Figure 1) on all four survey visits and IS Study Areas A1 and B1 (see Figure 1), including within the Site boundary (see Onshore EIA – Volume 4, Appendix 8.2 and Appendix Figure 8.2.3). A total of 53 registrations were recorded, which included 402 birds. A group of approximately 600 individuals was noted offshore east of Torness Power Station during the first survey visit in October. The desk study identified a further 120 records within 5 km of the site between 2011-2021, of which 12 records, totalling 279 individuals, were recorded within the Site boundary. The desk study records of black-headed gull are notably spread throughout the wider area.

Disturbance/Displacement

The onshore site infrastructure is all located within what could be classed as typical habitat for black-headed gull. The SNH and JNCC document providing advice to support management of the SPA (SNH & JNCC, 2016), as outlined above for herring gull (see Section 5.2.2.2 above) outlines that, with respect to vessel movements and other fishing activities, although all species display some level of avoidance behaviour, gulls exhibit a low level of sensitivity to such disturbance.

 

The visual, human presence and vehicle-associated disturbance from the limited footprint of the scheme (primarily in the form of the undergrounding construction works associated with the cable route) is considered to be limited and short-term temporal. Furthermore, black-headed gull is regularly witnessed utilising the ground disturbance associated with field ploughing and other farming activities to forage on worms and other invertebrates brought to the surface during the process. As such, they are assumed to have not only habitualised to some disturbance but to make opportunistic use of such disturbance.

 

Therefore, it is considered that there is no adverse effect on integrity, having regard to the conservation objectives of the non-breeding black-headed gull feature of the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA from any pressure associated with disturbance / displacement.

5.2.2.4     Common gull (non-breeding)

There is no direct overlap between the onshore Project footprint and the SPA boundary (located at the MLWS line) at any point from making landfall at the transition joint bays and the remainder of the onshore cable route and associated infrastructure. The edge of the SPA lies 220 m away at its closest point from the nearest infrastructure (i.e., landfall and the transition joint bays).

The wintering bird survey recorded common gull on two of the four survey visits (visit 2, December, and 3, January), totalling 43 birds with 13 registrations widespread across the WBS Study Area (see Onshore EIA – Volume 4, Appendix 8.2 and Appendix Figure 8.2.3). The desk study identified a further 83 records within 5km of the site between 2011-2021 of which 5 records, totalling 267 individuals, were recorded within the Site. The desk study records of common gull are notably spread throughout the wider East Lothian region.

Disturbance/Displacement

The onshore site infrastructure is all located within what could be classed as typical habitat for common gull. The SNH and JNCC document providing advice to support management of the SPA (SNH & JNCC, 2016), as referred to above for herring gull (see Section 5.2.2.2 above) outlines that, with respect to vessel movements and other fishing activities, although all species display some level of avoidance behaviour, gulls exhibit a low level of sensitivity to such disturbance.

 

The visual, human presence and vehicle-associated disturbance from the limited footprint of the scheme (primarily in the form of the undergrounding construction works associated with the cable route) is considered to be limited and short-term temporal. Furthermore, common gull is regularly witnessed utilising the ground disturbance associated with field ploughing and other farming activities to forage on worms and other invertebrates brought to the surface during the process. As such, gulls are assumed to have not only habitualised to some disturbance but to make opportunistic use of it.

 

Therefore, it is considered that there is no adverse effect on integrity, having regard to the conservation objectives of the non-breeding common gull feature of the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA from any pressure associated with disturbance / displacement.

5.2.3           Assessment of Adverse Effects In-combination

As part of the onshore EIA for the Proposed Development a Cumulative Effects Assessment (CEA) takes into account the effects associated with the Proposed Development together with other relevant plans, projects and activities. Cumulative effects are therefore the combined effect of the Proposed Development in combination with the effects from a number of different projects, on the same receptor or resource. Please see Volume 1, Chapter 2 of the Onshore EIA Report for detail on CEA methodology.

A total of three projects and plans have been selected as relevant to the CEA presented within the ornithology chapter (Onshore EIA – Volume 1, Chapter 8: Ornithology) are based upon the results of a screening exercise (see Onshore EIA – Volume 4, Appendix 2.4). this was further reduced to two following a further project being scoped out due to the distance involved.

A planning application for a cable route and sub-station which overlaps the site (SPEN Eastern Link Project, 22/00852/PPM & 22/00002/SGC) is in ongoing dialogue and breeding bird and wintering bird surveys were completed in 2021. The cable route and proposed sub-station location overlapped with the site which was covered by surveys for the Proposed Development. A similar range of species were recorded during the bird surveys and the EIA Report scoped out all designated sites and species bar wintering curlew, breeding peregrine falcon and breeding herring gull. The predicted impacts on all three receptors were concluded to be minor and not significant during construction, operation and cumulatively.

Another similar scheme is a (currently withdrawn) application for the construction of a 400 kilovolt (kV) gas insulated switchgear (GIS) substation and associated works (SPEN Branxton Grid Substation, 21/01569/PM). This works area which would overlap the current site but the planning application has not been submitted to date. The withdrawn EIA predicts no significant effects on bird species with basic mitigation outlined to fully offset both the breeding bird and wintering bird assemblages including herring gull, peregrine and curlew (SP Energy Networks, 2021).

In addition to the two projects outlined above the impacts of the Berwick Bank Wind Farm Offshore Proposed Development is also considered as part of the CEA. Eider, common gull, black-headed gull and herring gull were recorded during offshore surveys including the surveys completed as part of intertidal study. No significant impacts were predicted on these four species as part of the EIA Report for the offshore study and therefore there will be no significant impacts on these species with respect to disturbance or displacement from construction activities, as part of the CEA for the onshore works.

It is considered that there would be no contribution in terms of adverse effects on wintering eider, black-headed gull, common gull and breeding and wintering herring gull with any other development on the integrity of the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA and its conservation objectives.

5.2.4           Summary

The potential pressure pathway identified in relation to non-breeding eider, herring gull, black-headed gull, common gull and breeding herring gull includes disturbance/displacement. The baseline assessment included wintering bird surveys in 2020/2021, as well as breeding bird surveys in 2020, and intertidal surveys in 2020/2021, to establish use of the onshore cable route and wider area by priority birds of conservation value. The baseline surveys were further complimented through consultation and purchasing of historical data from TWIC (which included records from the BTO and RSPB as well as other data sources).

Due to the lack of proximity and the proposed route taken by the onshore cable it is determined there will be no adverse effect on integrity, having regard to the conservation objectives of the screened in features of the Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA from the identified pressure associated with any effect resulting from the Project (alone or in combination).

6. Firth of Forth SPA

6.1            Designated Site Description

The Site is located south of the Firth of Forth SPA, 5.9 km north-west at its closest point. The Firth of Forth SPA is located on the east coast of Scotland and is a complex estuarine site extending 55 km and covering 6,313.72 ha from Alloa in the west to the East Lothian and Fife coasts, including intertidal flats, rocky shore, saltmarsh, lagoons and sand dune habitats, in the east (JNCC, 2001).

6.2            Qualifying Interests:

The Firth of Forth SPA qualifies under Article 4.1 of the Birds Directive for regularly supporting wintering populations of the Annex 1 species: red-throated diver, Slavonian grebe, golden plover and bar-tailed godwit (Limosa lapponica). The SPA also qualifies under Article 4.1 for regularly supporting populations of European importance of the Annex 1 species sandwich tern (Sterna sandvicensis) during the passage period.

The SPA further qualifies under Article 4.2 of the Birds Directive by regularly supporting populations of European importance of the wintering migratory species: pink-footed goose (Anser brachyrhynchus), shelduck (Tadorna tadorna), knot (Calidris canutus), redshank (Tringa totanus) and turnstone (Arenaria interpres). The SPA also qualifies under Article 4.2 for regularly supporting a wintering assemblage, in excess of 20,000 individual waterfowl, of European importance: a winter peak mean of 95,000 waterfowl, comprising 45,000 wildfowl and 50,000 waders including nationally important populations of the following species: scaup (Aythya marila);Slavonian grebe; golden plover; bar-tailed godwit; pink-footed; shelduck; knot; redshank); turnstone; great crested grebe (Podiceps cristatus); cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo); red-throated diver (90 individuals); curlew (Numenius arquata); eider; long-tailed duck; common scoter (Melanitta nigra); velvet scoter; goldeneye (Bucephala clangula); red-breasted merganser (Mergus serrator); oystercatcher (Haematopus ostralegus); ringed plover (Charadrius hiaticula) ; grey plover (Pluvialis squatarola) and dunlin (Calidris alpina).

In the five-year winter period 1991/92 to 1995/96 the assemblage additionally included nationally important populations greater than 2,000 individuals of: mallard (Anas platyrhynchos); lapwing (Vanellus vanellus); and wigeon (Anas penelope).

6.2.1           Feature Summary

Feature Condition and Conservation Objectives

The Conservation Objectives of the Firth of Forth SPA are as follows:

       “To avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species (listed below) or significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained; and

       To ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term:

  • Population of the species as a viable component of the site
  • Distribution of the species within site
  • Distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species
  • Structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species
  • No significant disturbance of the species.”

The HRA screening process summarised in Table 4 concluded two species, non-breeding pink-footed goose and non-breeding golden plover, were scoped in and all other species were scoped out of the assessment (See Annex A: Table 5).

6.2.1.1     Pink-footed goose (non-breeding)

Pink-footed goose is currently an Amber-listed species on the Bird of Conservation Concern 5 (Stanbury et al., 2021). This species does not breed in the UK, but large numbers congregate here for the winter season from their breeding grounds in the northern tundra (in Iceland, northern Norway and Greenland). They feed primarily in agricultural habitats, preferring stubble fields, managed grasslands and typical agricultural cereal and root crops (Mitchel & Hearn, 2004). Pink-footed goose will travel large distances (up to 20 km) from roosting sites to feed in fields (Mitchel, 2012).

The Pink-footed goose (non-breeding) feature condition of the SPA was last assessed in March 2015 and was identified as being of Favourable Maintained condition with no negative pressures having been identified.

6.2.1.2     Golden plover (non-breeding)

Golden plover is a species of wader that is currently Green Listed on the Bird of Conservation Concern 5 (Stanbury et al., 2021), and so has experienced a relatively stable population over the previous 50 years although it is listed on the Scottish Priority List. This species breeds in the upland moorland of the UK, but ventures to lower-level fields, farmland and shorelines to forage and over-winter in large flocks.

The golden plover (non-breeding) feature condition of the SPA was last assessed in March 2015 and was identified as being of Unfavourable Declining condition with no negative pressures having been identified.

6.2.2           Assessment of Adverse Effects Alone

The Firth of Forth SPA boundary is located 6.8 km northwest of the cable landfall point and transition joint bays (being the nearest onshore infrastructure).

6.2.2.1     Pink-footed goose (non-breeding)

The wintering bird survey recorded pink-footed goose on all four survey visits, totalling 51 registrations consisting of 4,139 individuals (see Onshore EIA – Volume 4, Appendix 8.2 and Appendix Figure 8.2.3). Two large groups of 1,250 and 640 individuals were recorded in the south-east of the Site during the first survey visit in October. Numbers of records and individuals were significantly higher on the first survey visit (31 registrations consisting of 3,146 birds) in comparison to visit 2 (5 registrations, 185 birds), 3 (5 registrations, 216 birds) and 4 (10 registrations, 592 birds), indicating that the higher numbers noted at this early stage of winter were of passage migrants on route to their roosting grounds.

Pink-footed goose were not recorded within the intertidal surveys. The desk study records confirmed 30 records (totalling 6,199 birds) for pink-footed goose in the last 10 years located within 5 km of the Site boundary. Of the 30 records returned, two were located within the Site boundary and totalled 530 birds.

Disturbance/ Displacement

The onshore site infrastructure is located within what is considered to be typical habitat for wintering pink-footed goose. Mitchel and Hearn (2004) found that pink-footed goose was some of the most sensitive goose species to disturbance with freedom from people (particularly shooting parties) being of higher importance than proximity to primary habitats, such as shoreline (Bell et al., 1998). The geese associated with the Firth of Forth SPA are primarily recognised as utilising the Aberlady Bay roost site (Mitchel, 2014), as well as the Skinflats roost site in the upper Forth, with foraging areas ranging over most of central and western parts of East Lothian. Some foraging locations are noted in and around the estuary of the River Tyne (west of Dunbar), however this is towards the outer reaches of the full typical 20 km extent of pink-footed goose foraging from roost sites (Mitchel (2014), SNH (2016)) and is a further 10 km west of the nearest part of the Site boundary.

 

Although the wintering bird survey confirmed pink-footed goose registrations on all survey visits, the numbers recorded were significantly weighted to the first visit in October implying they were birds from the initial winter influx on passage to winter roosts elsewhere. Wilson et al. (2015) outlined that there is a high seasonal turnover of birds in Scotland, with many birds that spend the winter in England only passing through Scotland while in transit. Scotland therefore holds more pink-footed geese in the autumn than it does for most of the winter (Wilson et al., 2015).

 

Although pink-footed goose is found to make use of the habitats within the Site and wider area, the predominant landscape use within the region consists of the same preferable habitats and so foraging resource is considered to be plentiful. Furthermore, given the distance from the nearest part of the Site boundary to the nearest roost location for the Firth of Forth SPA pink-footed goose population (i.e. about 25.7 km to the Aberlady Bay roost site) it is considered unlikely that the birds recorded here are of SPA provenance.

 

The total construction programme is anticipated to take 36 months, although this is associated with works progressing along the onshore cable length as the installation progresses (i.e. this does not equate to 36 months of construction occurring throughout the entire Site boundary) and so would be very localised. If, as a precautionary measure, it was assumed pink-footed goose found in and around the Site were of SPA provenance then the associated disturbance that may result from the construction works would be considered to be short term temporal. Also, with so much foraging habitat/resource located elsewhere within the Site and the wider landscape, any disturbance or displacement pressure would not be considered to be of significance to any geese found here.

 

Therefore, it is considered that there is no adverse effect on integrity, having regard to the conservation objectives of the non-breeding pink-footed goose feature of the Firth of Forth SPA from any pressure associated with disturbance / displacement.

6.2.2.2     Golden plover (non-breeding)

Golden plover was recorded during all four wintering bird visits with a total of 15 registrations totalling 893 birds being recorded, of which five groups of over 100 were noted. The larger groups were associated with roosting individuals located in fields inland from the coast (see Onshore EIA – Volume 4 Appendix Figure 8.2.4). The closest registration to any proposed infrastructure was within 60 m, with the remaining registrations spread throughout suitable habitats of the wider Site.

Golden plover were not recorded within the intertidal surveys. The external desk study data returned a total of 21 records (consisting of 2,014 birds) within the last 10 years located within 5 km of the Site boundary, of which 8 registrations (1,216 birds) were noted within the Site boundary.

Although NatureScot publish long-established guidance on assessing connectivity with SPAs (SNH, 2016), for golden plover this guidance relates only to breeding birds rather than wintering. As a precaution, if the ranges presented for breeding golden plover are considered for wintering birds, then the core range would be 3 km, extending out to a maximum of 11 km (SNH, 2016), meaning that the Site would be within the outer 4.2 km of the maximum range.

Although golden plover is found to make use of the habitats within the Site and wider area, the predominant landscape use within the region consists of the same preferable habitats and so foraging resource is considered to be plentiful.

 

The total construction programme is anticipated to take 36 months, although this is associated with works progressing along the onshore cable length as the installation progresses (i.e., this does not equate to 36 months of construction occurring throughout the entire Site boundary) and so would be highly localised. If, as a precautionary measure, it was assumed that any golden plover found in and around the Site were of SPA provenance then the associated disturbance that may result from the construction works would be considered to be short term temporal. Also, with so much foraging habitat/resource located elsewhere within the Site and the wider landscape, any disturbance or displacement pressure would not be considered to be of significance to any birds found here.

 

Therefore, it is considered that there is no adverse effect on integrity, having regard to the conservation objectives of the non-breeding golden plover feature of the Firth of Forth SPA from any pressure associated with disturbance / displacement.

6.2.3           Assessment of Adverse Effects In-combination

As discussed and described in Section 5.2.3, a total of two projects and the Berwick Bank Wind Farm Offshore Proposed Development are considered to the in-combination assessment.

The SPEN Eastern Link Project, SPEN Branxton Grid Substation did not predict any impacts on non-breeding populations of golden plover of pink-footed goose. The Berwick Bank Wind Farm Offshore Proposed Development did not record either species during surveys that were impacted by the proposed works and therefore no impacts were predicted on either species. No in-combination impacts are therefore predicted on either species from all three projects in addition to the Proposed Development.

It is considered that there would be no contribution in terms of adverse effects on wintering pink-footed geese or golden plover either in-combination with any other development on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA and its conservation objectives.

6.2.4           Summary

The potential pressure pathway identified in relation to non-breeding pink-footed goose and golden plover included disturbance/displacement. The baseline assessment included wintering bird surveys in 2020/2021 and intertidal surveys in 2020/2021 to establish use of the onshore cable route and wider area by priority birds of conservation value. Pink-footed goose and golden plover were both recorded during the wintering bird survey with multiple registrations. The baseline surveys were further complimented through consultation and purchasing of historical data from TWIC (which included records from the BTO and RSPB as well as other data sources). 

Although it cannot be determined whether the golden plover and pink-footed goose recorded within the Site boundary (and nearby) may be of SPA provenance, following the precautionary principle it was assumed they were. Despite this, due to the route taken by the proposed onshore cable, the nature of the proposed works and the availability of suitable roosting and foraging habitat in the wider area, it is determined there will be no adverse effect on integrity, having regard to the conservation objectives of the non-breeding pink-footed goose and golden plover as features of the Firth of Forth SPA from the identified pressure associated with any effect resulting from the Project (alone or in combination).