This section outlines the proposed monitoring proposed for marine mammals. Proposed monitoring measures are outlined in Table 10.63 Open ▸ .
As a part of the designed in measures ( Table 10.22 Open ▸ ), mooring lines and dynamic inter-array cables will undergo regular inspections during the operation and maintenance phase. The inspection frequency for mooring lines and dynamic inter-array cables is anticipated to be more frequent initially (e.g. years 1 and 2), and likely to decline in frequency after this, following a risk based approach. Any inspected or detected debris on the floating lines and cables will be recovered based on a risk assessment which considers impact on environment including risk to marine mammal, risk to asset integrity, and health & safety. In addition, Ossian OWFL will consider new technologies for monitoring of mooring lines/snagged gear and will agree approach to monitoring of mooring lines and associated removal of gear with NatureScot and MD-LOT prior to the operation and maintenance phase. This will reduce the risk of entanglement (largely secondary entanglement).
The Applicant will engage with MD-LOT, NatureScot, and other relevant key stakeholders to identify and contribute to targeted and proportionate regional or strategic monitoring to better understand the environmental effects of offshore wind taking account of known evidence gaps. This may involve engaging and contributing to ongoing strategic initiatives from ScotMER forum (Scottish Government, 2024). (see Table 10.63 Open ▸ ).

Table 10.63:
Proposed Monitoring and the Method of Implementation for Marine Mammals

Table 10.63: Proposed Monitoring and the Method of Implementation for Marine Mammals

No monitoring as a result of the CEA is proposed.

Previous part

Next part

Figures ▼

Figure 10.1
Marine Mammal Study Areas

Figure 10.2
Relevant Marine Mammal Management Units and Study Areas

Figure 10.3
Marine Mammals Relevant Designated Sites

Figure 10.4
The Probability of a Harbour Porpoise Response (24 hrs) in Relation to the Partial Contribution of Unweighted Received SELss for the First Location Piled (Purple Line), the Middle Location (Green Line) and the Final Location Piled (Grey Line) (Graham et al., 2019)

Figure 10.5
Predicted Decrease in Seal Density as a Function of Estimated Sound Exposure Level, Error Bars Show 95% Confidence Interval (CI) (Whyte et al., 2020)

Figure 10.6
Locations Modelled Within the Ossian Array (Red Line)

Figure 10.7
Simulated Harbour Porpoise Population Sizes for Both the Baseline (un-impacted) and the Impacted Populations Under the Maximum Temporal Scenario

Figure 10.8
Simulated Harbour Porpoise Population Sizes for Both the Baseline (un-impacted) and the Impacted Populations Under the Maximum Spatial Scenario

Figure 10.9
Unweighted SELss Contours as a Result of Concurrent Piling at Wind Turbine (3,000 kJ) at the Centre and OSP (4,400 kJ) at the Northern Limit of the Site Boundary

Figure 10.10
Unweighted SELss Contours as a Result of Concurrent Piling at Wind Turbine (3,000 kJ) at the Centre and OSP (4,400 kJ) at the Southern Limit of the Site Boundary and Southern North Sea SAC

Figure 10.11
Unweighted SELss Contours as a Result of Concurrent Piling at Wind Turbine (3,000 kJ) at the Centre and OSP (4,400 kJ) at the Northern Limit of the Site Boundary, CES2 MU and Moray Firth SAC

Figure 10.12
Simulated Bottlenose Dolphin Population Sizes for Both the Baseline (un-impacted) and the Impacted Populations Under the Maximum Temporal Scenario

Figure 10.13
Simulated Bottlenose Dolphin Population Sizes for Both the Baseline (un-impacted) and the Impacted Populations Under the Maximum Spatial Scenario

Figure 10.14
Unweighted SELss Contours as a Result of Concurrent Piling at Wind Turbine (3,000 kJ) at the Centre and OSP (4,400 kJ) at the Northern Limit of the Site Boundary and the Southern Trench ncMPA

Figure 10.15
Simulated Minke Whale Population Sizes for Both the Baseline (un-impacted) and the Impacted Populations Under the Maximum Temporal Scenario, Based on the SPLpk Metric

Figure 10.16
Simulated Minke Whale Population Sizes for Both the Baseline (un-impacted) and the Impacted Populations Under the Maximum Spatial Scenario, Based on the SPLpk Metric

Figure 10.17
Simulated Minke Whale Population Sizes for Both the Baseline (un-impacted) and the Impacted Populations Under the Maximum Spatial Scenario, Based on the SELcum Metric

Figure 10.18
Simulated Minke Whale Population Sizes for Both the Baseline (un-impacted) and the Impacted Populations Under the Maximum Temporal Scenario, Based on the SELcum Metric

Figure 10.19
Unweighted SELss Contours as a Result of Concurrent Piling at Wind Turbine (3,000 kJ) at the Centre and OSP (4,400 kJ) at the Northern Limit of the Site Boundary overlaid with Carter et al. (2022) At-sea Density Maps

Figure 10.20
Unweighted SELss Contours as a Result of Concurrent Piling at Wind Turbine (3,000 kJ) at the Centre and OSP (4,400 kJ) at the Southern Limit of the Site Boundary Overlaid with Carter et al. (2022) At-sea Density Maps and Berwickshire and North Northumberland SAC

Figure 10.21
Simulated Grey Seal Population Sizes for Both the Baseline (un-impacted) and the Impacted Populations Under the Maximum Temporal Scenario

Figure 10.22
Simulated Grey Seal Population Sizes for Both the Baseline (un-impacted) and the Impacted Populations Under the Maximum Spatial Scenario

Figure 10.23
High Order UXO Clearance Mitigation Flow Chart for the Array (based upon Seagreen Wind Energy Ltd, 2021)

Figure 10.24
Other Projects/Plans Screened into the CEA for Marine Mammals

Figure 10.25
Simulated Harbour Porpoise Population Sizes for Both the Baseline and the Impacted Populations Under the Cumulative Scenario and no Vulnerable Subpopulation

Figure 10.26
Simulated Bottlenose Dolphin Population Sizes for Both the Baseline and the Impacted Populations Under the Cumulative Scenario and no Vulnerable Subpopulation.

Figure 10.27
Simulated Minke Whale Population Sizes for Both the Baseline and the Impacted Populations Under the Cumulative Scenario and no Vulnerable Subpopulation

Figure 10.28
Simulated Grey Seal Population Sizes for Both the Baseline and the Impacted Populations Under the Cumulative Scenario and no Vulnerable Subpopulation

Tables ▼

Table 10.1
Summary of Marine and Coastal Access (MCAA) Act 2009 Relevant to Marine Mammals

Table 10.2
Summary of Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 Relevant to Marine Mammals

Table 10.3
Summary of the Habitats Regulations Relevant to Marine Mammals

Table 10.4
Summary of Scotland’s National Marine Plan (2015) Relevant to Marine Mammals

Table 10.5
Summary of PMFs in Scotland’s Seas – Habitats Relevant to Marine Mammals (NatureScot, 2020)

Table 10.6
Summary of The Sectoral Marine Plan for Offshore Wind Energy 2020[2] Relevant to Marine Mammals

Table 10.7
Summary of the UK Marine Policy Statement Relevant to Marine Mammals

Table 10.8
Summary of the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004 Relevant to Marine Mammals

Table 10.9
Summary of The Scottish Biodiversity Strategy (Scottish Government 2023) Relevant to Marine Mammals

Table 10.10
Summary of Issues Raised During Consultation and Scoping Opinion Representations Relevant to Marine Mammals

Table 10.11
Summary of Key Desktop Reports

Table 10.12
Summary of Site-Specific Survey Data

Table 10.13
Summary of Marine Mammal Baseline

Table 10.14
Densities and Reference Populations for Each Species Taken Forward to the EIA

Table 10.15
Designated Sites and Relevant Qualifying Interest Features for the Marine Mammal Array EIA Report Chapter

Table 10.16
IEFs within the Array Marine Mammal Study Area

Table 10.17
Maximum Design Scenario Considered for Each Potential Impact as Part of the Assessment of LSE1 on Marine Mammals

Table 10.18
Impact Scoped Out of the Assessment for Marine Mammals (Tick Confirms the Impact is Scoped Out)

Table 10.19
Definition of Terms Relating to the Magnitude of an Impact Within a Defined Geographic Frame of Reference

Table 10.20
Definition of Terms Relating to the Sensitivity of Individuals to Effects

Table 10.21
Matrix Used for the Assessment of the Significance of the Effect

Table 10.22
Designed In Measures Adopted as Part of the Array

Table 10.23
Summary of Acoustic Thresholds for PTS Onset in Relevant Hearing Groups (Southall et al., 2019)

Table 10.24
Swim Speeds Used in the Underwater Noise Modelling

Table 10.25
Summary of Criteria Used in The Impact Assessment of Behavioural Disturbance for Different Marine Mammal Species

Table 10.26
Management Units and Population Estimates for Species Included in iPCoD Models

Table 10.27
Marine Mammal Vital Rates Used to Parameterise iPCoD Models (from Sinclair et al. (2020))

Table 10.28
Summary of Potential PTS Ranges for Single Pile Installation at Wind Turbines (3,000 kJ) and OSPs (4,400 kJ) Using Both Metrics – SPLpk and SELcum (N/E = Threshold Not Exceeded)

Table 10.29
Summary of Potential PTS Ranges for Concurrent Pile Installation at Wind Turbines (3,000 kJ) and at Wind Turbines (3,000 kJ) and OSPs (4,400 kJ) Using SELcum (N/E = Threshold Not Exceeded)

Table 10.30
Summary of Maximum Potential PTS Ranges due to Single Pile Installation (at OSPs, Hammer Energy 4,400 kJ) Using SPLpk Metric, Indicating Whether the Individual Can Move Beyond the Injury Range During the 30 minutes of ADD Activation

Table 10.31
Summary of Maximum Potential PTS Ranges due to Concurrent Pile Installation (at Wind Turbine and OSP, Hammer Energies of 3,000 kJ and 4,400 kJ) Using SELcum Metric With and Without 30 Minutes of ADD Activation (N/E = Threshold Note Exceeded)

Table 10.32
Potential Number of Animals Predicted to be Disturbed Within Weighted SELss Sound Contours Based on Relevant Dose-Responses (Graham et al., 2019, Whyte et al., 2020) for the Array Piling Scenarios. Numbers in Bold Represent the Modelling Location Scenarios with the Highest Number of Animals Potentially Impacted

Table 10.33
Maximum Potential PTS Ranges For Low Order Clearance Donor Charge and Clearance Shot (N/E = Threshold Not Exceeded). Bold Number Represents the Maximum Potential PTS Range For All Species

Table 10.34
Maximum Potential PTS Ranges for High Order Detonation of Maximum and Realistic Maximum Case. Bold Number Represents the Maximum Potential PTS Range For All Species

Table 10.35
Maximum Potential Number of Animals With the Potential to Experience PTS Due to Low Order Clearance Donor Charge and Clearance Shot (N/A = Not Applicable As the Threshold Was Not Exceeded)

Table 10.36
Maximum Potential Number of Animals With the Potential to Experience PTS Due to High Order Detonation of Maximum and Realistic Maximum Case (Prior to Any Mitigation)

Table 10.37
Indicative Displacement Distances based upon Designed in ADD (30 minutes) for Marine Mammal Receptors, based upon Conservative Swim Speeds

Table 10.38
Maximum Potential Strong Behavioural Disturbance Ranges (TTS Used As a Proxy) For Low Order Clearance Donor Charge and Clearance Shot (N/E = Threshold Not Exceeded)

Table 10.39
Maximum Potential Strong Behavioural Disturbance Ranges (TTS Used As a Proxy) for High Order Detonation of Maximum and Realistic Maximum Case

Table 10.40
Maximum Number of Animals With the Potential to Experience Strong Disturbance (TTS Used as a Proxy) Due to Low Order Clearance Donor Charge and Clearance Shot

Table 10.41
Maximum Number of Animals With the Potential to Experience Strong Disturbance (TTS Used as a Proxy) Due to High Order Detonation of Maximum and Realistic Maximum Case

Table 10.42
Recommended ADD Duration for Low Order and High Order UXO Clearance and Sizes, and Associated Displacement Distance

Table 10.43
Potential Injury (PTS) Impact Ranges (m) For Geophysical Site-Investigation Surveys (N/E = Threshold Not Exceeded, Comparison to Ranges for SPLpk Where Threshold was Exceeded Shown in Brackets)

Table 10.44
Potential Injury (PTS) Impact Ranges (m) For Geotechnical Site-Investigation Surveys (N/E = Threshold Not Exceeded, Comparison to Ranges for SPLpk Where Threshold was Exceeded Shown in Brackets)

Table 10.45
Estimated Number of Animals With the Potential To Experience Injury (PTS) During Geophysical and Geotechnical Site-Investigation Surveys (Number of Animals Based on SPLpk Where Threshold was Exceeded Shown in Brackets)

Table 10.46
Potential Disturbance Ranges For Geophysical and Geotechnical Site-Investigation Surveys

Table 10.47
Estimated Number of Animals With the Potential To Be Disturbed During Geophysical and Geotechnical Site-Investigation Surveys

Table 10.48
Estimated Potential PTS Ranges From Different Vessels For Marine Mammals (N/E = Threshold Not Exceeded)

Table 10.49
Estimated Potential Disturbance Ranges From Different Vessels For All Marine Mammals (N/E = Threshold Not Exceeded)

Table 10.50
Maximum Number of Animals With the Potential to Experience Disturbance Due to Vessel use and Other Noise Producing Activities

Table 10.51
Modelled Maximum Distances to Weighted SELcum TTS Threshold for 15 Knots Wind Speed (Burns et al., 2022)

Table 10.52
List of Other Projects and Plans Considered within the CEA for Marine Mammals

Table 10.53
Maximum Design Scenario Considered for Each Impact as part of the Assessment of Likely Significant Cumulative Effects on Marine Mammals

Table 10.54
Numbers Predicted to be Disturbed as a Result of Underwater Noise During Piling for Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm (SSE Renewables, 2022c)

Table 10.55
Sources for Density Estimates used in Hornsea Three Assessment of Piling (Ørsted, 2018)

Table 10.56
Harbour Porpoise Cumulative Assessment – Numbers Predicted to be Disturbed as a Result of Underwater Noise During Piling for Tier 1 Projects

Table 10.57
Bottlenose Dolphin Cumulative Assessment – Numbers Predicted to be Disturbed as a Result of Underwater Noise During Piling for Tier 1 Projects

Table 10.58
White-Beaked Dolphin Cumulative Assessment – Numbers Predicted to be Disturbed as a Result of Underwater Noise During Piling for Tier 1 Projects

Table 10.59
Minke Whale Cumulative Assessment – Numbers Predicted to be Disturbed as a Result of Underwater Noise During Piling for Tier 1 Projects

Table 10.60
Grey Seal Cumulative Assessment – Numbers Predicted to be Disturbed as a Result of Underwater Noise During Piling for Tier 1 Projects

Table 10.61
UXO Clearance Parameters for the Array and Berwick Bank Wind Farm

Table 10.62
Number of Animals with the Potential to Experience PTS During UXO Clearance at Tier 1 Projects prior to any mitigation, and residual magnitude assessed in the EIA

Table 10.63
Proposed Monitoring and the Method of Implementation for Marine Mammals

Table 10.64
Summary of Likely Significant Inter-Related Effects for Marine Mammals from Individual Effects Occurring Across the Construction, Operation and Maintenance and Decommissioning Phases of the Array (Array Lifetime Effects) and from Multiple Effects Interacting Across all Phases (Receptor-led Effects)

Table 10.65
Summary of Likely Significant Environmental Effects, Secondary Mitigation and Monitoring

Table 10.66
Summary of Likely Significant Cumulative Environment Effects, Mitigation and Monitoring

Download