Beneficial effect on onshore ecology from reduced predation from rats
  1. The proposed measure will involve the removal of rats from the island of Inchcolm, with the aim of 100% eradication. There is a potential for a beneficial effect to onshore ecology receptors from a reduction in predation caused by rats. The assessment presented here is based on the MDS presented within Table 2   Open ▸ .
  2. Inchcolm is known to support a number of plants typical of coastal grassland and sand dune habitats. These include sea rocket Cakile maritima and various Atriplex species (Morris 2003). Both of these plant species (along with pygmy shrew Sorex minutus, slow worm Anguis fragilis, common lizard Zootoca vivipara, lesser white-toothed shrew Crocidura suaveolens, bank vole Myodes glareolus and even moths (Thomas et al. 2017)") increased significantly following previous rat eradication from Handa, and it is possible that rodent removal from Inchcolm could benefit both these, and other plant species (CCM Evidence Report). However, it is noted that the beneficial effects to plants is short lived as the increase in other onshore ecology receptors results in increased grazing and a subsequent reduction in growth rates (CCM Evidence Report). Therefore the magnitude is considered to be low (beneficial). Given the previous history of eradications being beneficial, it is anticipated that the sensitivity of receptors to this effect is considered to be medium beneficial.
  3. Following the significance matrix utilised in this assessment ( Table 4   Open ▸ ), a magnitude of low and sensitivity of medium results in a minor beneficial significance of effect, which is not significant in EIA terms.

Shipping and navigation

Potential disturbance to usual operating procedures to factor in biosecurity measures
  • 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 on the biosecurity plan have not been established, however it will be compatible with guidance from the Biosecurity for Life programme (Biosecurity for Life, 2022), Measures to be taken may include regularly checking belongings and 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 if a stowaway is spotted on board. The assessment presented here is based on the MDS presented within Table 1.
  1. Given the nature of the anticipated measures, following the IMP and the Biosecurity for Life programme (Biosecurity for Life, 2022), it is anticipated that the disturbance to shipping and navigation receptors from these additional measures is likely to be minor, as the measures will only effect those vessels planning to land on the island, which would be limited to tourism vessels (see impacts to tourism due to biosecurity measures assessment above), private recreational vessels and ferries. Under a worst-case scenario if a stowaway was spotted on board a vessel this could result in the trip not continuing, which could adversely impact the vessel 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, resulting in a magnitude of effect of low (adverse). The proposed steps within the biosecurity plan (following the Biosecurity for Life programme (Biosecurity for Life, 2022) are standard for biosecurity, and they are implemented for other projects within Scotland (such as the Isle of May), with 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).
  2. 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.

Socio-economics

Beneficial effect on local industry resulting from increase birds on site
  1. The proposed measure will result in increased bird populations, and therefore there is a potential for increased visits to the island through bird-watching trips. This would be a beneficial effect to local industry and socio-economic receptors, such as vessel operators and the gift shop on the island. The assessment presented here is based on the MDS presented within Table 2   Open ▸ .
  2. The proposed measure is anticipated to result in a significant increase in the population of kittiwakes on the island. This is anticipated to increase the number of trips a small amount, as many trips will be undertaken regardless of changes to bird numbers but additional trips may be needed for additional numbers of visitors. Therefore, it is considered that the magnitude of activities on socio-economic receptors is low (beneficial). The various companies and receptors involved in this industry are sensitive to the amount of tourist activity so it is considered that their sensitivity is medium (beneficial).
  3. Following the significance matrix utilised in this assessment ( Table 4   Open ▸ ), a magnitude of low and sensitivity of medium results in a minor beneficial significance of effect, which is not significant in EIA terms.
Impacts to tourism due to biosecurity measures
  1. 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), and CRRU. 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.
  2. Given the nature of the anticipated measures, following the IMP and the Biosecurity for Life programme (Biosecurity for Life, 2022) and CRRU, it is anticipated that these measures may cause a minor inconvenience to boat operators and therefore potentially knock-on small scale economic effects. The measures mainly involve minor additional management from the operator regarding personal food storage and waste. However, under a worst-case scenario if a stowaway was spotted on board this could result in the trip not continuing, which may result in a refund for any tourists on the vessel, and a financial loss for the tourism operator.  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, resulting in 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 standard 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).
  3. 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.

9.3.3.    Cumulative Effect Assessment

  1. As the potential adverse effects are small in nature (spatial and temporal) with no significant adverse effects alone, no adverse effects are anticipated further afield than Inchcolm island 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.
  2. Following on from the above methodology, no other plans or projects have been identified as being planned on Inchcolm Island. Therefore it can be concluded that there is no potential for any significant cumulative effects between the proposed measure and any other projects.

9.3.4.    Transboundary Impacts

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

10. Conclusions

  1. This Derogation Case EIAR has considered the environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the following proposed compensatory measures:
  • Management of SA4 sandeel fishery;
  • Rat Eradication: Handa;
  • Dunbar Castle wardening role; and
  • Rat Eradication: Inchcolm (as a secondary measure)
    1. The assessment provided in this document is based on the current understanding of the location, scope and nature of the proposed compensatory measures as provided within the IMP. For each of the proposed compensatory measures, the MDS has been defined ( Table 1   Open ▸ and Table 2   Open ▸ ) and the potential impacts identified ( Table 5   Open ▸ ) following the process outlined in Section 5, with some impacts scoped out and others taken forward for assessment. The magnitude of impact and sensitivity of each receptor has been considered, and the level of significance have been derived following the matrix approach ( Table 4   Open ▸ ).
    2. Following the above methodology, a range of impacts were identified and assessed with respect to each compensatory measure. Those impacts which were identified as with a significance of effect with respect to the EIA regulations are summarised in Table 12   Open ▸ . No adverse impacts were considered to be significant in EIA terms with respect to any of the proposed compensatory measures, with all of the significant effects identified considered to have a beneficial impact (see Table 12   Open ▸ ).
Table 12:
Summary of impacts considered to have significance in EIA terms

Table 12: Summary of impacts considered to have significance in EIA terms


11. References

11.1. Literature

ABPmer, 2021. Evidence and recommendations for compensatory measures to support a Habitats Regulations Derogation. 

Biosecurity for Life. (2022). Biosecurity for Life Programme. Available at: https://biosecurityforlife.org.uk/. Accessed on 24/10/2022.

Cain, I. et al (2022a). Inchcolm Field Study Report: Tasks 1 and 2: SSER Berwick Bank Wind Farm: Predator Eradication Feasibility Study. Contract report prepared for SSE Renewables. 

Coleman, J.T., Coleman, A.E., Rickeard, A. & Anderson, R. (2011). Long-term monitoring of a colony of Black-legged Kittiwakes Rissa tridactyla in Scotland. Ringing and Migration, 26, 9-14.

Cury, P.M., Boyd, I.L., Bonhommeau, S., Anker-Nilssen, T., Crawford, R.J.M., Furness, R.W., Mills, J.A., Murphy, E.J., Österblom, H., Paleczny, M., Piatt, J.F., Roux, J-P., Shannon, L. and Sydeman, W.J. (2011).  Global seabird response to forage fish depletion – one-third for the birds.  Science, 334, 1703-1706.

Day, M. (Director) (2010). The Guga Hunters of Ness. BBC Documentary produced by Intrepid Cinema.

d’Entremont, K.J.N., Guzzwell, L.M., Wilhelm, S.I., Fiesen, V.L., Davoren, G.K., Walsh, C.J., Montevecchi, W.A. (2021). Northern Gannets (Morus bassanus) breeding at their southern limit struggle with prey shortages as a result of warming waters. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 0: 1-11.

Dunn, E. 2021. Revive our Seas: The case for stronger regulation of sandeel fisheries in UK waters. RSPB, Sandy.

Engelhard, G.H., Peck, M.A., Rindorf, A., Smout, S.C., van Deurs, M., Raab, K., Andersen, K.H., Garthe, S., Lauerburg, R.A.M., Scott, F., Brunel, T., Aarts, G., van Kooten, T. and Dickey-Collas, M. (2014). Forage fish, their fisheries, and their predators: who drives whom? ICES Journal of Marine Science, 71, 90-104.

Forth Islands Heritage Group (2021). Annual Report 2021. Part 1.

Frederiksen, M., Edwards, M., Mavor, R. A., and Wanless, S. (2007a). Regional and annual variation in black-legged kittiwake breeding productivity is related to sea surface temperature. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 350, 137-143.

Frederiksen, M., Furness, R.W. and Wanless, S. (2007b). Regional variation in the role of bottom-up and top-down processes in controlling sandeel abundance in the North Sea. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 337, 279-286.

Furness, R.W. and Tasker, M.L. (2000). Seabird-fishery interactions: quantifying the sensitivity of seabirds to reductions in sandeel abundance, and identification of key areas for sensitive seabirds in the North Sea. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 202, 253–264.

Furness, R.W. (2015). Non-breeding season populations of seabirds in UK waters: Population sizes for Biologically Defined Minimum Population Scales (BDMPS). Natural England Commissioned Reports, Number 164.

Haswell-Smith, H. (2004). The Scottish Island, Edinburgh: Cannongate. ISBN 978-1-84195-454-7

Hebridean Connections. (2022). The Guga hunt. Available online: https://www.hebrideanconnections.com/subjects/57372

Heessen, H.J.L., Daan, N. and Ellis, J.R. (2015). Fish Atlas of the Celtic Sea, North Sea, and Baltic Sea. KNNV Publishing, The Netherlands.

Hill, S.L., Hinke, J., Bertrand, S., Fritz, L., Furness, R.W., Ianelli, J.N., Murphy, M., Oliveros-Ramos, R., Pichegru, L., Sharp, R., Stillman, R.A., Wright, P.J. and Ratcliffe, N. (2020). Reference points for predators will progress ecosystem-based management of fisheries. Fish and Fisheries, 21, 368-378.

ICES. (2021). ICES Ecosystem Overviews Greater North Sea Ecoregion.

ICES. (2022). Herring Assessment Working Group for the area south of 62oN (HAWG). 4:16.

Lindegren, M., van Deurs, M., MacKenzie, B.R., Clausen, L.W., Christensen, A. and Rindorf, A. (2018). Productivity and recovery of forage fish under climate change and fishing: North Sea sandeel as a case study. Fisheries Oceanography, 27, 212-221.

MacArthur Green (2021). Report to Crown Estate Scotland and SOWEC: HRA Derogation Scope B – Review of seabird strategic compensation options. Crown Estate Scotland, Edinburgh: 166 pp.

Morris, R. (2003). The Wildlife of Inchcolm. Hillside, Edinburgh. ISBN: 0-9544760-1-8.

Oro, D. (1999) Trawler discards: a threat or a resource for opportunistic seabirds? In: Adams NJ, Slotow RH (eds) Proceedings 22 International Ornithol Congress Durban. BirdLife South Africa, Johannesburg, pp 717–730. Seabirds & Cetaceans: Joint Nature Conservation Committee. ISBN: 1 86107 5057.

Pichegru, L., Ryan, P.G., van Eeden, R., Reid, T., Gremillet, D. and Wanless, R. (2012). Industrial fishing, no-take zones and endangered penguins. Biological Conservation, 156, 117-125.

Pierce, G., M. Santos, R. Reid, I. Patterson, and Ross, H. (2004). Diet of minke whales Balaenoptera acutorostrata in Scottish (UK) waters with notes on strandings of this species in Scotland 1992–2002. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 84, pp.1241-1244.

Pierce, G. J., Santos, M. B. and Cervino, S. (2007). Assessing sources of variation underlying estimates of cetacean diet composition: a simulation study on analysis of harbour porpoise diet in Scottish (UK) waters. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 87, pp. 213-221.

Pollock, C.M., Mavor, R., Weir, C.R., Reid, A., White, R.W., Tasker, M.L., Webb, A., and Reid, J.B. (2000). The distribution of seabirds and marine mammals in the Atlantic Frontier, north and west of Scotland.

Ratcliffe, N., Mitchell, I., Varnham, K., Verboven, N., and Higson, P. (2009). How to prioritise rat management for the benefit of petrels: a case study of the UK, Channel Islands and Isle of Man. Ibis 151: 699-708.

Santos, M.B., Pierce, G.J., Reid, R.J., I.A.P., Patterson, H.M. Ross, and E. Mente. (2001). Stomach contents of bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) in Scottish waters. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 81: 873-878.

Saraux, C., Sydeman, W., Piatt, J., Anker-Nilssen, T., Hentati-Sundberg, J., Bertrand, S., Cury, P., Furness, R.W., Mills, J.A., Österblom, H., Passuni, G., Roux, J-P., Shannon, L.J. and Crawford, R.J.M. (2020). Seabird-induced natural mortality of forage fish varies with fish abundance: evidence from five ecosystems. Fish and Fisheries, doi 10.1111/faf.12517.

Sciberras, M., Hiddink, J.G., Jennings, S., Szostek, C.L., Hughes, K.M., Kneafsey, B., Clarke, L.J., Ellis, N., Rijnsdorp, A.D., McConnaughey, R.A., Hilborn, R., Collie, J.S., Pitcher, C.R., Amoroso, R.O., Parma, A.M., Suuronen, P., and Kaiser, M.J. (2018). Response of benthic fauna to experimental bottom fishing: A global meta-analysis.

Scottish Natural Heritage. (2011). Firth of Forth Site of Special Scientific Interest Site Management Statement. Available online: https://sitelink.nature.scot/site/8163

Sea Energy Renewables. (2010). Inch Cape Offshore Wind Farm: Offshore wind turbines, inter-array cabling and associated offshore infrastructure. Available online: https://marine.gov.scot/sites/default/files/inch_cape_scoping_report_redacted.pdf

Sherman, K., Jones, C., Sullivan, L., Smith, W., Berrien, P. and Ejsymont, L. 1981. Congruent shifts in sandeel abundance in western and eastern North Atlantic ecosystems. Nature, 291, 486–489.

SSE Renewables. (2021). Berwick Bank Wind Farm Offshore Scoping Report. Available online: https://berwickbank-eia.com/offshore-scoping/berwickbank.pdf

Stanbury, A., Thomas, S., Aergeter, J., Brown, A., Bullock, D., Eaton, M., Lock, L., Luxmoore, R., Roy, S., Whittaker, S., and Oppel, S. (2017). Prioritising islands in the UK and crown dependencies for the eradication of invasive alien vertebrates and rodent biosecurity. Eur J Wildl Res.

Statistics Denmark. (2022). Fishery. Available online at: https://www.dst.dk/en/Statistik/emner/erhvervsliv/fiskeri-og-akvakultur/fiskeri

STECF, 2020. 2020 Data Collection Framework Fisheries Dependent Information (FDI) data call. Available at: https://jeodpp.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ftp/jrc-opendata/FAD/fdi/

[Accessed 8 11 2021].Tasker, M.L., Camphuysen, C.J., Cooper, J., Garthe, S., Montevecchi, W.A., Blaber, S.J.M. (2000). The impacts of Fishing on marine birds. ICES, Journal of Marine Science, 57:531–547.

The Press and Journal. (2021). Controversial hunt for baby gannets takes place in Outer Hebrides. Available online: https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/highlands-islands/3445529/controversial-hunt-for-baby-gannets-takes-place-in-outer-hebrides/

Thomas, S., and Varnham, S. (2016). Island Biosecurity Manual. Seabird Island Restoration Project, RSPB. RSPB, Sandy, Bedfordshire.

Thomas, S., Brown, A., Bullock, D., Lock, L. Luxmoore, R., Roy, S., Stanbury, A., and Varnham, K. (2017). Island restoration in the UK – past, present and future. British Wildlife 28:4, p.231-243.

Votier, S.C., Furness, R.W., Bearhop, S., Crane, J.E., Caldow, R.W.G., Catry, P., Ensor, K., Hamer, K.C., Hudson, A.V., Kalmbach, E., Klomp, N.I., PfeiVer, S., Phillips, R.A., Prieto, I., Thompson, D.R. (2004). Changes in Wsheries discard rates and seabird communities. Nature, 427:727–730.

Wanless, S., Murray, S., & Harris, M.P. (2005). The Status of Northern Gannet in Britain & Ireland in 2003/4. British Birds 98: 280-294.

Wanless, S., Harris, M.P, and Greenstreet, SP.R. (1998). Summer sandeel consumption by breeding in the Firth of Forth, south-east Scotland. ICES Journal of Marine Sciences, 55: 1141-1151.

Wilson, L., and Hammond, P. (2016). Harbour seal diet composition and diversity. Marine Mammal Scientific Support Research Programme MMSS/001/11 CSD 3.2. Report to the Scottish Government.  Available online: https://data.marine.gov.scot/dataset/harbour-seal-diet-composition-and-diversity.

Woodward, I., Thaxter, C.B., Owen, E., and Cook, A.S.C.P. (2019). Desk-based revision of seabird foraging ranges used for HRA screening. BTO Research Report No. 724. ISBN 978-1-912642-12-0.

11.2. Websites

EMODnet. (2022). EMODnet Data Viewer. (Accessed 20.10.22). Available online: https://www.emodnet-humanactivities.eu/view-data.php

Forth Boat Tours. (undated). Forth Boat Tours Homepage. (Accessed 31.10.22). Available online: https://www.forthtours.com/

Historic Environment Scotland. (2021). Dunbar Castle Park,settlements,burials and defences. (Accessed 01.11.22). Available online: http://portal.historicenvironment.scot/designation/SM5960

ICES 2017. OSPAR request on the production of spatial layers of fishing intensity/pressure. ICES Technical Service sr.2017.17 (Accessed 06.04.22) https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.advice.4683. SMP, 2021. Seabird Monitoring Programme Database. Available online: https://app.bto.org/seabirds/public/data.jsp

Lothian and Borders GeoConservation. (2022). Dunbar Geology Walk. (Accessed 01.11.22). Available online: http://edinburghgeolsoc.org/downloads/lbgcleaflet_dunbar.pdf

Maid of the Forth. (undated). Maid of the Forth Homepage. (Accessed 31.10.22). Available online: https://www.maidoftheforth.co.uk/

Visit Scotland. (undated). Inchcolm Abbey. Accessed (20.10.22). Available online: https://www.visitscotland.com/info/see-do/inchcolm-abbey-p247601


This page is intentionally blank

 

 

[1] The Electricity Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2017, The Marine Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2017 and The Marine Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2007.

[2] As noted above, this is included as a secondary measure that may be implemented for adaptive management purposes and the intention is not to take this measure forward as compensation at this stage. An assessment of this measure is included in the case this may be required to be implemented in the future, following stakeholder consultation, so any further assessments would not need to be undertaken.

[3] For the assessment of this measure, the commercial fishing and socio-economic receptors have been combined into one receptor, as the only pathway to socio-economic receptors is through the impact to commercial fishing receptors.

[4] For the assessment of this measure, the commercial fishing and socio-economic receptors have been combined as the only pathway for impact socio-economic receptors is through the impact to commercial fisheries.

[5] For the assessment of this measure, the commercial fishing and socio-economic receptors have been combined as the only pathway for impact socio-economic receptors is through the impact to commercial fisheries.

[6] Conservation targets for Handa have been set by multiplying the number of additional adult birds per year that would be generated by rat removal (as calculated above) by the 35 year operational lifetime of the Proposed Development, and then adding to this the number of birds that are currently present.

[7] Conservation targets for Inchcolm are expressed as the total number of birds that would be generated throughout the 35 year operational lifespan