8. EIA –Dunbar Castle Wardening Role

8.1. Introduction

98. This section considers the potential impacts arising from the Dunbar castle wardening role compensatory measure. A characterisation of the physical, biological and human environmental baseline is presented ( Table 9   Open ▸ ) followed by the results of an assessment of potential likely significant effects arising from the proposed compensatory measure (Section 8.3).
99. The third compensatory measure proposed by The Applicant is wardening of kittiwake colonies on the mainland site of Dunbar Castle. The wardening position is provided as an umbrella role to implement a series of sub-measures to reduce human disturbance (through education and liasion, access restrictions and fencing of areas) and improve nesting habitat for Kittiwakes (through reducing fishing litter / debris from nests and adding artificial ledges) in Dunbar Castle.
100. Section 3 of the IMP provides a detailed description of the proposed compensatory measure.

8.2. Baseline

101. Table 9   Open ▸ provides a description of the baseline environment for each receptor which was identified during the scoping stage as potentially being affected by the proposed compensation measure ( Table 5   Open ▸ ).

Table 9: The baseline environment for the receptor groups relevant to the Dunbar Castle wardening role compensatory measure

8.3. Assessment

8.3.1.    Identification of Impacts and Scope of Assessment

102. Based on the information presented in this document and the IMP, and CCM Evidence Report, all activities associated with the wardening at Dunbar Castle were defined and potential impact pathways identified. The potential impact pathways identified are presented here with respect to the relevant receptor groups:

• Historic Environment:

–      Adverse effect on historic fabric of listed castle building from improvement of kittiwake nesting habitat

• Noise and Vibration

–      Adverse effect on local residents from increasing noise levels due to kittiwake population growth

• Offshore and Intertidal Ornithology:

–      Temporary disturbance during improvement of kittiwake nesting habitat

–      Beneficial effect on seabird populations from improved nesting habitat

–      Temporary disturbance through access for debris removal activities

–      Beneficial effect on seabird populations from removal of debris activities

–      Temporary disturbance during camera/monitoring equipment installation and removal

• Onshore Ecology:

–      Temporary disturbance during improvement of kittiwake nesting habitat

–      Temporary disturbance through access for debris removal activities

–      Temporary disturbance during camera/monitoring equipment installation and removal

• Socio-economics:

–      Beneficial effect on local economy through the creation of an employed position

8.3.2.    Impact Assessment alone

103. The assessment for the effects of the compensation alone (that is not combined with any other plans or projects) is presented below:

Historic Environment

Adverse effect on historic listed castle building from improvement of kittiwake nesting habitat

104. The proposed measure involves adding artificial ledges and overhangs in certain areas during the winter period. There is a potential for an adverse effect on the castle building from the addition of these ledges which may result in adverse visual effects, or change the historic fabric of the site. Dunbar Castle is a Scheduled Monument.  Therefore, scheduled monument consent may be required for the undertaking works which would be obtained from HES. The purpose of scheduled monument consent is to ensure that any changes to monuments are appropriate and sympathetic to their character.  Therefore, permission of the works would only be granted by HES if they deem that the works are appropriate within the context of Dunbar Castle and its significance.  The assessment presented here is based on the MDS presented within Table 2   Open ▸ .
105. The spatial extent of the impacts would be small, as the ledges themselves will only take up a small proportion of the castle, not the whole structure. The temporal extent is anticipated to be long-term, with the ledges not currently being proposed to be removed once installed. Based on this, any visual impacts associated with the improvement of kittiwake nesting habitat works have a magnitude of medium (adverse). With respect to structural change, the historic value of the site means that further liaison will be undertaken with the local Conservation Officer and HES to agree an acceptable plan for the work to minimise adverse effects, including use of non-invasive techniques for installation. Therefore, it is considered that the magnitude associated with structural change is negligible (adverse).
106. Given the proposed natural colour of the artificial ledges and the swift covering of nesting materials and excrement from the presence of kittiwakes, it is anticipated that the sensitivity of the receptor to visual impacts associated with this measure is negligible (adverse). As Dunbar Castle is a scheduled monument, the sensitivity of this receptor to structural change is considered to be high (adverse).
107. Following the significance matrix utilised in this assessment, a magnitude of medium and sensitivity of negligible results in a negligible to minor adverse significance of effect for visual impacts, which is not significant in EIA terms. A magnitude of negligible and a sensitivity of high results in a minor adverse significance of effect for structural change which is not significant in EIA terms. It should be noted that the works will only go ahead if scheduled monument consent is obtained (if required) and this provides a protective mechanism for the historic value of the site and they would only go ahead if the effects on the historic environment are deemed acceptable by HES.

Noise and Vibration

Adverse effect on local residents from increasing noise levels due to kittiwake population growth

108. The proposed measure will result in increased bird populations, and therefore there is a potential for an adverse effect on local residents due to an increase to the level of noise generated at the site from the increase in the number of birds, especially with an increase in juveniles resulting in increased noise in the breeding season (summer). The assessment presented here is based on the MDS presented within Table 2   Open ▸ .
109. The proposed measure is anticipated to result in a significant increase in the population of kittiwakes at Dunbar, to approximately 400 pairs (800 birds) which could result in additional noise being generated when reaching this population size. However, the population growth will be gradual over a 5-year period. Therefore, given the gradual nature of the change and the timescales associated with it, it is considered that the magnitude of noise generated is low (adverse). As the site is already an established kittiwake colony, noise is already created by the presence of kittiwakes, and it is considered that local residents will be used to noise generated by the colony. Given the existing level of noise that local residents will be adjusted to and the anticipated gradual increase in volume, the sensitivity of this receptor is low (adverse).
110. Following the significance matrix utilised in this assessment ( Table 4   Open ▸ ), a magnitude of low and sensitivity of low results in a negligible to minor adverse significance of effect, which is not significant in EIA terms.

Offshore and intertidal ornithology

Temporary disturbance during improvement of kittiwake nesting habitat

111. The proposed measure involves adding artificial ledges and overhangs in certain areas during the winter period. There is a potential for disturbance to offshore and intertidal ornithological receptors from the required trips for planning / designing the work, and the physical construction of the ledges / platforms, as those undertaking the proposed work may cause disturbance and stress to birds on site. The assessment presented here is based on the MDS presented within Table 2   Open ▸ .
112. The spatial extent of disturbance would be moderate, with any disturbance from human presence being temporary and short-term. The temporal extent is also anticipated to be small, with any disturbance caused being temporary (typically in terms of days). Based on the small spatial and temporal extent, it is considered that the proposed activities have a magnitude of medium (adverse). As the kittiwake nesting habitat improvement will be undertaken within the winter period (November to March), it therefore avoids the breeding season for offshore and intertidal ornithological receptors. Based on the lack of interaction with receptors during the breeding season, it is considered that the receptors have a sensitivity of negligible (adverse).
113. Following the significance matrix utilised in this assessment ( Table 4   Open ▸ ), a magnitude of low and sensitivity of negligible results in a negligible to minor adverse significance of effect, which is not significant in EIA terms.

Beneficial effect on seabird populations from improved nesting habitat

114. The proposed measure involves adding artificial ledges and overhangs in certain areas during the winter period. There is a potential for an increase to kittiwake breeding success and therefore population growth due to the implementation of the improved habitat. The assessment presented here is based on the MDS presented within Table 2   Open ▸ .
115. The proposed measure is anticipated to result in a significant increase in the population of kittiwakes at Dunbar, to approximately 400 pairs (800 birds) as per the conservation targets, and therefore it is considered that the magnitude of activities is high (beneficial). Given the declining population of kittiwakes at the site, it is considered that the measures being taken will be great importance and effectiveness, meaning that it is considered that their sensitivity is high (beneficial).
116. Following the significance matrix utilised in this assessment ( Table 4   Open ▸ ), a magnitude of high and sensitivity of high results in a major beneficial significance of effect, which is significant in EIA terms.

Temporary disturbance through access for debris removal activities

117. The proposed measure involves the removal of debris from nesting sites during the winter period, including clipping any trailing net / rope or small pieces of plastic from nests, noting that complete removal is not possible as nests are reused annually. There is a potential for disturbance to offshore and intertidal ornithological receptors from the required trips for planning the work, and the physical removal of debris, as those undertaking the proposed work may cause disturbance and stress to birds on site. The assessment presented here is based on the MDS presented within Table 2   Open ▸ .
118. The spatial extent of disturbance would be small, with any disturbance from human presence being temporary and short-term. The temporal extent is also anticipated to be small, with any disturbance caused being temporary (typically in terms of hours). Based on the small spatial and temporal extent, it is considered that the proposed activities have a magnitude of low (adverse). As the debris removal activities will be undertaken within the winter period (November to March), it therefore avoids the breeding season for offshore and intertidal ornithological receptors. Based on the lack of interaction with receptors during the breeding season, it is considered that the receptors have a sensitivity of negligible (adverse).
119. Following the significance matrix utilised in this assessment ( Table 4   Open ▸ ), a magnitude of low and sensitivity of negligible results in a negligible to minor adverse significance of effect, which is not significant in EIA terms.

Beneficial effect on seabird populations from removal of debris activities

120. The proposed measure involves the removal of debris from nesting sites during the winter period, including clipping any trailing net / rope or small pieces of plastic from nests, noting that complete removal is not possible as nests are reused annually. There is a potential for an increase to kittiwake breeding success from the removal of this debris as it may lead to more structurally sound nests. The assessment presented here is based on the MDS presented within Table 2   Open ▸ .
121. The proposed measure is anticipated to result in a significant increase in the population of kittiwakes at Dunbar, to approximately 400 pairs (800 birds), and therefore it is considered that the magnitude of activities is high (beneficial). Given the declining population of kittiwakes at the site, it is considered that the measures being taken will be great importance and effectiveness, meaning that it is considered that their sensitivity is high (beneficial).
122. Following the significance matrix utilised in this assessment ( Table 4   Open ▸ ), a magnitude of high and sensitivity of high results in a major beneficial significance of effect, which is significant in EIA terms.

Temporary disturbance during camera/monitoring equipment installation and removal

123. The proposed measure involves setting up cameras/monitoring equipment during the winter season for monitoring purposes. There is a potential for disturbance to offshore and intertidal ornithological receptors from the required trips for planning / designing the work, and the physical installation and removal  of the cameras/monitoring equipment, as those undertaking the proposed work may cause disturbance and stress to birds on site. The assessment presented here is based on the MDS presented within Table 2   Open ▸ .
124. The spatial extent of disturbance would be small, with any disturbance from human presence being temporary and short-term. The temporal extent is anticipated to be small, with any disturbance caused being temporary (typically in terms of hours). Based on the small spatial and temporal extent, it is considered that the proposed activities have a magnitude of low (adverse). As the camera/monitoring equipment installation and removal will be undertaken within the winter period (November to March), it therefore avoids the breeding season for offshore and intertidal ornithological receptors. Based on the lack of interaction with receptors during the breeding season, it is considered that the receptors have a sensitivity of negligible (adverse).
125. Following the significance matrix utilised in this assessment ( Table 4   Open ▸ ), a magnitude of low and sensitivity of negligible results in a negligible to minor adverse significance of effect, which is not significant in EIA terms.

Onshore ecology

Temporary disturbance during improvement of kittiwake nesting habitat

126. The proposed measure involves adding artificial ledges and overhangs in certain areas during the winter period. There is a potential for disturbance to onshore ecology receptors from the required trips for planning / designing the work, and the physical construction of the ledges / platforms, as those undertaking the proposed work may cause disturbance and stress to birds on site. The assessment presented here is based on the MDS presented within Table 2   Open ▸ .
127. The spatial extent of disturbance would be moderate, with any disturbance from human presence being temporary and short-term. The temporal extent is also anticipated to be small, with any disturbance caused being temporary (typically in terms of days). Based on the small spatial and temporal extent, it is considered that the proposed activities have a magnitude of medium (adverse). As the castle grounds themselves are closed to the public, it is anticipated that onshore ecology receptors will not be used to much human activity at the site meaning the receptors may be sensitive to the activities. However, some disturbance does occur at the site (e.g. children throwing stones at the site or people heading into the site when they are not supposed to) and the wardening role is designed to reduce disturbance to the site as a whole. Therefore, factoring in the current level of disturbance, the reduced disturbance from the presence of the warden, it is considered that  the sensitivity of the receptors is low (adverse).
128. Following the significance matrix utilised in this assessment ( Table 4   Open ▸ ), a magnitude of low and sensitivity of negligible results in a negligible to minor adverse significance of effect, which is not significant in EIA terms.

Temporary disturbance through access for debris removal activities

129. The proposed measure involves the removal of debris from nesting sites during the winter period, including clipping any trailing net / rope or small pieces of plastic from nests, noting that complete removal is not possible as nests are reused annually. There is a potential for disturbance to offshore and intertidal ornithological receptors from the required trips for planning the work, and the physical removal of debris, as those undertaking the proposed work may cause disturbance and stress to birds on site. The assessment presented here is based on the MDS presented within Table 2   Open ▸ .
130. The spatial extent of disturbance would be small, with any disturbance from human presence being temporary and short-term. The temporal extent is also anticipated to be small, with any disturbance caused being temporary (typically in terms of hours). Based on the small spatial and temporal extent, it is considered that the proposed activities have a magnitude of low (adverse). As the castle grounds themselves are closed to the public, it is anticipated that onshore ecology receptors will not be used to much activity at the site meaning the receptors may be sensitive to the activities. However, given the nature of effects being small in nature (temporally and spatially) it is considered that onshore ecology receptors will be able to move away from the source of the impact, lowering the sensitivity of the receptors to negligible (adverse).
131. Following the significance matrix utilised in this assessment ( Table 4   Open ▸ ), a magnitude of low and sensitivity of negligible results in a negligible to minor adverse significance of effect, which is not significant in EIA terms.

Temporary disturbance during camera/monitoring equipment installation and removal

132. The proposed measure involves setting up cameras/monitoring equipment during the winter season for monitoring purposes. There is a potential for disturbance to onshore receptors from the required trips for planning / designing the work, and the physical installation and removal of the cameras/monitoring equipment, as those undertaking the proposed work may cause disturbance and stress to receptors on site. The assessment presented here is based on the MDS presented within Table 2   Open ▸ .
133. The spatial extent of disturbance would be small, with any disturbance from human presence being temporary and short-term. The temporal extent is anticipated to be small, with any disturbance caused being temporary (typically in terms of hours). Based on the small spatial and temporal extent, it is considered that the proposed activities have a magnitude of low (adverse). As the castle grounds themselves are closed to the public, it is anticipated that onshore ecology receptors will not be used to much activity at the site meaning the receptors may be sensitive to the activities. However, given the nature of effects being small in nature (temporally and spatially) it is considered that onshore ecology receptors will be able to move away from the source of the impact, lowering the sensitivity of the receptors to negligible (adverse).
134. Following the significance matrix utilised in this assessment ( Table 4   Open ▸ ), a magnitude of low and sensitivity of negligible results in a negligible to minor adverse significance of effect, which is not significant in EIA terms.

Socio-economics:

Beneficial effect on local economy through the creation of an employed position

135. The proposed measure will result in a paid position for a minimum of five-years. This would be a beneficial effect to socio-economic receptors, specifically the individual (or individuals in the event that the role changes hands over the initial five-year time period) that is hired. The assessment presented here is based on the MDS presented within Table 2   Open ▸ .
136. The proposed measure is anticipated to result in a single full-time position at any given time, which may change between individuals over the 5-year programme. On all scales (national and local) this constitutes a very minor impact on the economy (both national and local). Therefore, it is considered that the magnitude of this measure on socio-economic receptors is negligible (beneficial). The sensitivity of receptors will vary greatly depending on the individual chosen for the role and their previous background and financial standing at the time of starting the position. However, when considering the economy as a whole (national and local), it is considered that the sensitivity of socio-economic receptors to be negligible (beneficial).
137. Following the significance matrix utilised in this assessment ( Table 4   Open ▸ ), a magnitude of negligible and sensitivity of negligible results in a negligible beneficial significance of effect, which is not significant in EIA terms.

8.3.3.    Cumulative Effect Assessment

138. As the potential adverse effects are exceedingly small in nature, no adverse effects are anticipated further afield than Dunbar Castle itself, and therefore the scoping undertaken for projects to be considered cumulatively is limited to those with direct spatial overlap with the proposed compensatory measures.
139. Following on from the above methodology, no projects have been identified for the consideration of cumulative effects. Therefore it can be concluded that there is no potential for any significant cumulative effects between the proposed measure and any other projects.

8.3.4.    Transboundary Impacts

140. No transboundary impacts are predicted due to the localised and small-scale nature of this compensatory measure.

9. EIA – Rat Eradication: Inchcolm

9.1. Introduction

141. This section considers the potential impacts arising from the rat eradication at Inchcolm island.
142. This measure is included as a secondary measure that may be implemented for adaptive management purposes. A complete account of this measure is provided although it should be noted that further stakeholder consultation would be required before this specific measure could be secured and the intention is not to take this measure forward as compensation at this stage. 
143. A characterisation of the physical, biological, and human environmental baseline is presented followed by the results of an assessment of potential likely significant effects arising from the proposed compensatory measure (Section 9.2).
144. This compensatory measure proposes to eradicate black rat from Inchcolm, an island in the Firth of Forth, as shown in Figure 1 Following eradication the Applicant will implement biosecurity measures, implement appropriate seabird habitat management, undertake monitoring and address any re-incursions. The objective of this measure is to increase black-legged kittiwake, common guillemot, Atlantic puffin, and razorbill populations on the island through the removal of predation pressure from black rats.
145. Section 5 of the IMP provides a detailed description of the proposed compensatory measure.

9.2. Baseline

146. Table 10 provides a description of the baseline environment for each receptor which was identified during the scoping stage as potentially being affected by the proposed compensation measure ( Table 5   Open ▸ ).

Table 10: The baseline environment for the receptor groups relevant to rat eradication at Inchcolm Island

9.3. Assessment

9.3.1.    Identification of Impacts and Scope of Assessment

147. Based on the information presented in this document, the IMP, CCM and FCM Evidence Reports, all activities associated with the proposed rat eradication at Inchcolm were defined and potential impact pathways identified. The following potential impacts were identified and scoped in:

• Historic Environment:

–      Impact to cultural heritage from loss of black rats

• Infrastructure and other users:

–      Impacts to tourism due to biosecurity measures

• Offshore and intertidal ornithology:

–      Potential for disturbance from increased human activity due to implementation of eradication programme e.g. regular setting of baits or traps and monitoring work; and

–      Beneficial effect on seabird populations from reduced predation on eggs/juveniles.

• Onshore ecology:

–      Impacts to onshore plants and animals other than the targeted rat species;

–      Potential for disturbance due to increased human activity due to implementation of eradication programme e.g. regular setting of baits or traps and monitoring work; and

–      Beneficial effect on onshore ecology from reduced predation from rats.

• Shipping and navigation:

–      Potential disturbance to usual operating procedures to factor in biosecurity measures

• Socio-economics:

–      Beneficial effect on local industry resulting from increased birds on site

–      Impacts to tourism operators due to biosecurity measures

9.3.2.    Impact Assessment Alone

148. The assessment for the effects of the compensation alone (that is not combined with any other plans or projects) is presented below:

Historic environment

Impact to cultural heritage from loss of black rats

149. The proposed measure will eradicate black rat from Inchcolm. This could potentially be considered to affect the cultural heritage of the island, as the colony of black rats represents one of the last remaining island colonies of black rats in the UK.  The assessment presented here is based on the MDS presented within Table 2   Open ▸ .
150. Historical records indicate black rats may have arrived on Inchcolm as recently as the start of the 20th century (post 1899), and are listed as a priority for conservation action on the Scottish Biodiversity List. Black rats are also listed as a naturalised, non-native species within the Red List for British Mammals. However, black rats are abundant in the Channel Isles (Sark and Alderney), continental Europe and globally, with further isolated populations understood to exist on mainland UK.
151. During stakeholder engagement, HES raised the concept of the cultural heritage of black rats. Neither NatureScot or the Mammal Society have objected during consultation to the rat eradication on Inchcolm, with the Mammal Society in particular regarding the black rat population on Inchcolm to be an “invasive alien species”.
152. It is considered that as black rat populations will remain around UK and Europe, and due to the fact that it is an invasive alien species, it is considered that the both the magnitude and sensitivity of the effect of the loss of black rats from Inchcolm is negligible (adverse).
153. Following the significance matrix utilised in this assessment (Table 2), a magnitude and sensitivity of negligible results in a negligible adverse significance of effect, which is not significant in EIA terms.

Infrastructure and other users

Impacts to tourism due to biosecurity measures

154. The proposed measure will involve the implementation of a biosecurity plan to ensure that no new rodents are brought onto the island. At the time of writing, details of the biosecurity plan have not yet been established, however it will be compatible with the Biosecurity for LIFE guidance (Biosecurity for Life, 2022), CRRU) and WMP document designed for the proposed measure.  The plan is likely to include measures such as requiring boat operators to regularly check vessels for stowaways, storing waste securely in rodent proof bins, storing personal food in mouse-proof containers, using rat guards on mooring lines and anchor chains, deploying chew cards or wax chew blocks on the vessel, and not landing at the destination if a stowaway is spotted on board. The assessment presented here is based on the MDS presented within Table 1.
155. Given the nature of the anticipated measures, following the IMP and the Biosecurity for Life programme (Biosecurity for Life, 2022), it is anticipated that these measures many cause a minor inconvenience to boat operators and visitors to the island. Disturbance to tourism from these additional measures is therefore likely to be minor as the measures mainly involve additional management from the operator or small adjustments from individuals regarding personal food storage. Under a worst-case scenario if a stowaway was spotted on board this could result in the trip not continuing, which could adversely impact the trip operator and visitors onboard.  However, the likelihood of this happening is considered to be relatively rare as the remainder of the measures as part of the biosecurity plan will aim to prevent stowaways from being on the vessel in the first place. Therefore, this potential effect has a high potential vulnerability but a low likelihood, enabling the magnitude of the effect to be low (adverse). The proposed steps within the biosecurity plan (following the Biosecurity for Life programme (Biosecurity for Life, 2022) are not novel suggestions for biosecurity, and they are implemented for other projects within Scotland (such as the Isle of May), with tourism vessel operators likely already familiar with them. Therefore, given the low impact of the majority of the measures within the biosecurity plan, the low likelihood of trips being curtailed, and the adoption of the measures elsewhere in the industry, the sensitivity of receptor is considered to be low (adverse).
156. Following the significance matrix utilised in this assessment (Table 2), a magnitude of low and a sensitivity of low results in a negligible to minor adverse significance of effect, which is not significant in EIA terms.

Offshore and intertidal ornithology

Potential for disturbance from human activity due to eradication and immediate monitoring phase of the programme

157. The proposed measure will involve the placement of approximately 170 bait stations during the eradication phase, and visits every two days to the stations for maintenance and monitoring purposes for the first four months. There is a potential for disturbance to offshore and intertidal ornithological receptors from these trips, as those undertaking the proposed work may cause disturbance and stress to birds on site. The assessment presented here is based on the MDS presented within Table 2   Open ▸ .
158. The spatial extent of disturbance would be small, limited to within visual range of the bait stations and access to and from them. The temporal extent is also anticipated to be small, with any disturbance caused being intermittent and temporary (typically in terms of hours). When factoring in the small spatial and temporal extent and the comparatively low numbers of birds on the island  it is considered that the magnitude of effect is low (adverse). As the eradication and immediate monitoring phases will be undertaken within the winter period (November to March), it therefore avoids the breeding season for offshore and intertidal ornithological receptors. Additionally, kittiwake are often found in and around human population centres so it is considered that they have a moderate level of resilience to human disturbance, especially on Inchcolm island as there are regular visitors to the site. Therefore, it is considered that the receptors have a sensitivity of negligible (adverse).
159. Following the significance matrix utilised in this assessment ( Table 4   Open ▸ ), a magnitude of low and sensitivity of negligible results in a negligible to minor adverse significance of effect, which is not significant in EIA terms.

Potential for disturbance from human activity due to long-term monitoring phase of the programme

160. The proposed measure will involve the monitoring of the approximate 170-bait stations every four weeks for two years. There is a potential for disturbance to offshore and intertidal ornithological receptors from these trips, as those undertaking the proposed work may cause disturbance and stress to birds on site. The assessment presented here is based on the MDS presented within Table 2   Open ▸ .
161. The spatial extent of disturbance would be small, with any disturbance from human presence being temporary and short-term. The temporal extent is also anticipated to be small, with any disturbance caused being temporary (typically in terms of hours). When factoring in the small spatial and temporal extent and the comparatively low numbers of birds on the island it is considered that the magnitude of effect is low (adverse). As the long-term monitoring phase will be undertaken year-round, and it therefore includes the breeding season for offshore and intertidal ornithological receptors, it therefore has a greater potential sensitivity than during other times of the year. Additionally, kittiwake are often found in and around human population centres so it is considered that they have a moderate level of resilience to human disturbance, especially on Inchcolm island as there are regular visitors to the site. Therefore, it is considered that the receptors have a sensitivity of low (adverse).
162. Following the significance matrix utilised in this assessment ( Table 4   Open ▸ ), a magnitude of low and sensitivity of low results in a negligible to minor adverse significance of effect, which is not significant in EIA terms.

Beneficial effect on seabird populations from reduced predation on eggs/juveniles

163. The proposed measure will result in reduced rat populations, and therefore a reduction in the predation on offshore and intertidal ornithological receptors at Inchcolm Island. This would be a beneficial effect to the ornithological receptors. The assessment presented here is based on the MDS presented within Table 2   Open ▸ .
164. The proposed measure is anticipated to result in a significant increase in the population of kittiwakes, puffin and razorbill on the island ( Table 11   Open ▸ – taken from the CCM Evidence Report), and therefore it is considered that the magnitude of activities is high (beneficial). Given the high sensitivity of the receptors to predation of eggs/juveniles from rats on the island, it is also considered that their sensitivity is high (beneficial).

Table 11: Preliminary conservation targets and associated increases for each key species on Inchcolm island. All numbers are expressed as single birds

165. Following the significance matrix utilised in this assessment ( Table 4   Open ▸ ), a magnitude of high and sensitivity of high results in a major beneficial significance of effect, which is significant (beneficial) in EIA terms.

Onshore ecology

Impacts to onshore plants and animals other than the targeted rat species

166. The proposed measure will involve the placement of bait stations during the eradication phase, which will remain in place for up to 5 months (November to March inclusive). There is a potential for accidental poisoning of non-target species (i.e. any species other than rats) and non-target species to be affected by secondary poisoning such as birds of prey ingesting poisoned rats. The assessment presented here is based on the MDS presented within Table 2   Open ▸ .
167. A NTSMP will be developed, which will consider the timing and location of predator eradication programme to ensure that it is undertaken at the optimal time/location and that it will have a minimal effect on non-target species. The inclusion of the NTSMP will follow current good practise design to minimise impact on sensitive habitats, non-target species and disruption to land use. Alongside the NTSMP there will also be a Waste Management Plan (WMP) document designed to ensure that any waste is efficiently stored and disposed of to reduce the risk of re-introductions of rats to the island. Therefore, due to the implementation of the NTSMP and WMP, the magnitude of effect is considered to be negligible (adverse). Furthermore it is anticipated that if any non-target species were to ingest bait or secondarily ingest a poisoned rat, only small numbers of animals would be affected and therefore resulting sensitivity is negligible to low (adverse) sensitivity.
168. Following the significance matrix utilised in this assessment ( Table 4   Open ▸ ), a magnitude of negligible and sensitivity of negligible to minor results in a negligible adverse significance of effect, which is not significant in EIA terms.

Potential for disturbance to onshore ecology from human activity due to eradication, immediate monitoring and long-term monitoring phases of the programme

169. The proposed measure will involve the placement of bait stations during the eradication phase, and various visits to the stations for maintenance and monitoring purposes. During the immediate monitoring phase the monitoring will be undertaken every two days, and during the long-term monitoring phase visits will be undertaken every 4 weeks. There is a potential for disturbance to any onshore ecology receptors from these trips, as those undertaking the proposed work may cause disturbance and stress to animals on site. The assessment presented here is based on the MDS presented within Table 2   Open ▸ .
170. The spatial extent of disturbance would be small, with any disturbance from human presence being temporary and short-term. The temporal extent is also anticipated to be small, with any disturbance caused being temporary (based on the intermittent nature of the monitoring trips and the short timescale associated with each trip, typically in terms of hours). Based on the small spatial and temporal extent, it is considered that the proposed activities have a magnitude of low (adverse). As the island regularly has visitors, any onshore animals on the island are likely to be used to human foot traffic and therefore it is anticipated that the receptors have a sensitivity of negligible (adverse).
171. Following the significance matrix utilised in this assessment ( Table 4   Open ▸ ), a magnitude of low and sensitivity of low results in a negligible to minor adverse significance of effect, which is not significant in EIA terms.