Magnitude of impact
  1. During construction, the Array and associated infrastructure, including wind turbines, floating foundations, mooring system, OSPs and foundations, inter-array cables and interconnector cable (and associated scour protection) represent potential snagging points for fishing gear both on the seabed and in the water column and could lead to damage to, or loss of, fishing gear. The safety aspects including potential loss of life as a result of snagging risk are assessed within volume 2, chapter 13.
  2. Statutory safety zones will be applied for including up to 500 m around structures where vessels are undertaking construction work and 50 m around partially completed or completed surface piercing structures prior to commissioning of the wind farm. Such safety zones will protect project vessels involved in construction which may be RAM. If on-site as deemed necessary via risk assessment, guard vessels will also assist with monitoring safety zones and alerting third‑party traffic to their presence.
  3. Snagging poses a risk to fishing equipment and in extreme cases may potentially lead to capsize of vessel and crew fatalities, as well as damage to subsea infrastructure. Three phases of interaction are possible: initial impact of gear and subsea infrastructure; pullover of gear across subsea infrastructure; and snagging or hooking of gear on the subsea infrastructure. The snagging or hooking of fishing gear with infrastructure/cables on the seabed is the most hazardous to the vessel and crew due to the possibility of capsizing.
  4. In the instance that snagging does occur, the Applicant will adhere to guidance produced by FLOWW (2014), in particular section 10: Fouling or loss of gear/equipment and section 11: Dealing with claims for loss or damage of gear.
  5. If mobile gear strikes or becomes fastened to a cable, the Applicant recommends the following approach (SSE Renewables, 2024), based on Seafish and KIS-ORCA guidance (KIS-ORCA, 2024).
  • If the fastened gear is not easily retrieved, fishers should not apply excessive winch, line or net hauler loads; or engine powers in attempts to retrieve fastened gear.
  • Fishers should advise the coastguard and company Fisheries Liaison Officer (CFLO) immediately, giving an accurate position of the vessel and/or lost gear.
  • If the coastguard confirms that the vessel is in the immediate vicinity of a cable, serious consideration will be given to the slipping of the gear and buoying and recording of its position.
  • If the gear is slipped, after buoying off the gear, the position should be confirmed with the coastguard and CFLO.
  • The skipper should contact the local Fishery Office and register the incident in the normal manner
  • On no account should skippers grapple in an attempt to recover fishing gear lost or cut away in the vicinity of offshore cables.
  1. It is considered likely that fishermen will operate appropriately (i.e. adhering to Safety Zones and exclusion zones, and avoiding under construction infrastructure and cable protection at the defined locations) given adequate notification of the locations of any snagging hazards; and are highly likely to avoid the under construction infrastructure within the Array. In addition, it is assumed that fishers will follow MCA guidance MGN661 (MCA, 2021), which advises that fishing vessels should avoid fishing activity near either side of submarine cables in order to minimize the risk of damage as much as possible.
  2. In relation to mooring system failure and loss of station, the MCA require under their Regulatory Expectations on Moorings for Floating Wind and Marine Devices (MCA and HSE, 2017) that developers arrange Third Party Verification (TPV) of the mooring systems by an independent and competent person/body. The Regulatory Expectations state that TPV is a “continuous activity”, and that if any modifications to a system occur or if new information becomes available with regard to its reliability, additional TPV would be required. This TPV will facilitate management of any risk of failure of the mooring lines. On this basis, a loss of station is considered highly unlikely.
  3. The impact is predicted to be of local spatial extent, medium term duration, continuous (over construction phase) and with low reversibility. It is predicted that the impact will affect the receptor directly. Based on the designed in measures that will be implemented as part of the Array (including safety zones and commitment to adhere to guidance produced by FLOWW (2014), in particular section 10: Fouling or loss of gear/equipment and section 11: Dealing with claims for loss or damage of gear) and the commitment to follow standard protocols should snagging occur, the magnitude is considered to be low for all fleets.
Sensitivity of the receptor
  1. Mobile demersal gear, including demersal otter trawl, demersal seine and dredge fishing gear is actively towed and directly penetrates the seabed with near continuous contact. The gear on the seabed is connected to the fishing vessels via both the fishing gear itself and the ropes connecting it to the mechanical trawling systems on board the vessels. Mobile demersal gear is therefore sensitive to both seabed infrastructure (including scour protection) and infrastructure in the water column and at sea-level. MGN 661 is noted as advising that fishing activity is avoided either side of submarine cables.
  2. Pelagic otter trawl gear does not typically make contact with the seabed, with nets pulled through the mid-water column to catch shoaling pelagic fish species. Pelagic trawl gear is therefore sensitive to infrastructure in the water column and at sea-level.
  3. Potting gear is placed on the seabed and is not actively towed (through the water column or along the seabed), it therefore has a lower risk of entanglement. Never-the-less, tidal movements have the potential to move strings of pots that can become entangled around anchor mooring systems and other seabed infrastructure.
  4. The sensitivity for all fleets is assessed to be medium.
                        Significance of the effect
  1. All fisheries: overall, the magnitude of the impact is deemed to be low and the sensitivity of the receptor is considered to be medium. The effect will, therefore, be of minor adverse significance, which is not significant in EIA terms.
                        Secondary mitigation and residual effect
  1. No commercial fisheries mitigation is considered necessary because the likely effect in the absence of mitigation is not significant in EIA terms.

                        Operation and maintenance phase

                        Magnitude of impact
  1. During operation and maintenance designed in measures will be implemented to reduce the risk of snagging of fishing gear on project infrastructure.  The NSVMP will outline the navigational safety measures to be implemented during normal operations and periods of major maintenance, and will include details of marine coordination, summaries of the LMP. In addition, the Applicant will ensure that the final as-built infrastructure is marked appropriately on UKHO admiralty charts and other electronic charts so fishers are aware of the presence of any subsurface infrastructure. A full LMP will be prepared and lighting and marking will be maintained as agreed prior to construction throughout the operational phase of the Array.
  2. For any major maintenance works safety zones will be applied for including up to 500 m around structures where vessels are RAM. Such safety zones will protect project vessels and third-party vessels involved in major maintenance. If on-site (determined via risk assessment of major maintenance activities), guard vessels will assist with monitoring safety zones and alerting third‑party traffic to their presence. Similarly to the construction phase, details of major maintenance activities including the presence of safety zones and any advisory safe passing distances, as defined by risk assessment, will be suitably promulgated (e.g. via NtMs, Kingfisher bulletin) to maximise awareness of ongoing major maintenance activities. .
  3. The FMMS will include a procedure for claims in the event of loss of, or damage to fishing gear.
  1. The magnitude of impact of snagging gear due to the presence the Array and associated infrastructure during the operation and maintenance phase is expected to be the same or similar to that during construction for all commercial fishing fleets (see paragraphs 176 to 183). The impact is predicted to be of regional spatial extent, long term duration, intermittent and with high reversibility. It is predicted that the impact will affect the receptor directly. Based on the justifications above and the designed in measures in place, the magnitude is therefore, considered to be low for all fisheries.
                        Sensitivity of the receptor
  1. The sensitivity of the commercial fisheries receptors is the same as that presented for construction in paragraphs 184 to 187, summarised as medium for all fisheries.
                        Significance of the effect
  1. All fisheries: overall, the magnitude of the impact is deemed to be low and the sensitivity of the receptor is considered to be medium. The effect will, therefore, be of minor adverse significance, which is not significant in EIA terms.
                        Secondary mitigation and residual effect
  1. No commercial fisheries mitigation is considered necessary because the likely effect in the absence of mitigation is not significant in EIA terms.

                        Decommissioning phase

                        Magnitude of impact
  1. The magnitude of impact of snagging gear due to the presence the Array and associated infrastructure during the decommissioning phase is expected to be the same or similar to that during construction for all commercial fishing fleets (see paragraphs 176 to 183). The impact is predicted to be of regional spatial extent, medium term duration, intermittent and with high reversibility. It is predicted that the impact will affect the receptor directly. Based on the explanations above, the magnitude is therefore, considered to be low for all fisheries.
                        Sensitivity of the receptor
  1. The sensitivity of the commercial fisheries receptors is the same as that presented for construction in paragraphs 184 to 187, summarised as medium for all fisheries.
                        Significance of the effect
  1. All fisheries: overall, the magnitude of the impact is deemed to be low and the sensitivity of the receptor is considered to be medium. The effect will, therefore, be of minor adverse significance, which is not significant in EIA terms.
                        Secondary mitigation and residual effect
  1. No commercial fisheries mitigation is considered necessary because the likely effect in the absence of mitigation is not significant in EIA terms.

Increased steaming/Vessel Transit times

  1. A detailed Navigational Risk Assessment (NRA) (volume 3, appendix 13.1) has been undertaken and is discussed in volume 2, chapter 13, which includes full consideration of commercial fishing vessels while transiting (e.g. from a collision and allision perspective). This assessment focuses on the LSE1 arising from longer steaming distances to alternative fishing grounds during the construction, operation and maintenance and decommissioning phases.

                        Construction phase

                        Magnitude of impact
  1. Details of the Array’s construction activities will be promulgated in advance of, and during construction via the usual means (e.g. NtMs, Kingfisher bulletin) so that mariners are made aware of the ongoing works. Localised construction works will necessitate minor deviations for fishing vessels. Localised impacts are anticipated but will be limited to the immediate area of construction activity and associated construction vessels. The shipping and navigation assessment found transiting fishing vessels moving north-east to south-west (see volume 3, appendix 13.1) through analysis of 12-months of AIS data in 2022, however this is considered at low frequency, with no clear transit routes to any notable fishing grounds evidenced within EMSA AIS data from 2019 to 2022 (Figures 4.44 and 4.45 of volume 3, appendix 12.1). It is therefore not expected that additional steaming would be required to access fishing grounds normally targeted beyond the Array.
  2. The impact is predicted to be of regional spatial extent, medium term duration, intermittent and with high reversibility. It is predicted that the impact will affect the receptor directly. Based on the justifications above, the magnitude is therefore, considered to be low for all fisheries.
                        Sensitivity of the receptor
  1. The demersal otter trawl, demersal seine, dredge and pelagic otter trawl fisheries targeting the local and regional study areas are understood to operate across wider areas of the North Sea and in the case of larger vessels, beyond this range. Given adequate notification it is expected that these vessels will be in a position to avoid construction areas and the Array with limited impact upon steaming times.
  2. The UK potting fleet active in the local and regional study areas operate across a range of grounds to haul and re-set different fleets of traps/pots/nets on a daily basis. Their normal operating range is expected to be inshore from the Array. Given adequate notification it is expected that these vessels will be in a position to avoid construction areas with limited impact upon steaming times.
  3. In relation to ground within the Array, all commercial fisheries fleets are considered to have high availability of alternative fishing grounds and an operational range that is not limited to the Array. The sensitivity of the receptor is therefore, considered to be low for all fisheries.
                        Significance of the effect
  1. All fisheries: overall, the magnitude of the impact is deemed to be low and the sensitivity of the receptor is considered to be low. The effect will, therefore, be of minor adverse significance, which is not significant in EIA terms.
                        Secondary mitigation and residual effect
  1. No commercial fisheries mitigation is considered necessary because the likely effect in the absence of mitigation is not significant in EIA terms.

                        Operation and maintenance phase

                        Magnitude of impact
  1. The magnitude of impact of increased steaming times due to the presence of the Array and associated infrastructure during the operation and maintenance phase is expected to be the same or similar to that during construction for all commercial fishing fleets (see paragraphs 202 to 203). While the operational phase in longer duration (35 years) compared to construction (eight years), it is expected that fishing vessels will adjust to the presence of the Array over time. The impact is predicted to be of regional spatial extent, long term duration, intermittent and with high reversibility. It is predicted that the impact will affect the receptor directly. Based on the justifications above, the magnitude is therefore, considered to be low for all fisheries.
                        Sensitivity of the receptor
  1. The sensitivity of the commercial fisheries receptors is the same as that presented for construction in paragraphs 204 to 206, summarised as low for all fisheries.
                        Significance of the effect
  1. All fisheries: overall, the magnitude of the impact is deemed to be low and the sensitivity of the receptor is considered to be low. The effect will, therefore, be of minor adverse significance, which is not significant in EIA terms.
                        Secondary mitigation and residual effect
  1. No commercial fisheries mitigation is considered necessary because the likely effect in the absence of mitigation is not significant in EIA terms.

                        Decommissioning phase

                        Magnitude of impact
  1. The magnitude of impact of increased steaming times due to the presence of the Array and associated infrastructure during the decommissioning phase is expected to be the same or similar to that during construction for all commercial fishing fleets (see paragraphs 202 to 203). The impact is predicted to be of regional spatial extent, medium term duration, intermittent and with high reversibility. It is predicted that the impact will affect the receptor directly. Based on the explanations above, the magnitude is therefore, considered to be low for all fisheries.
                        Sensitivity of the receptor
  1. The sensitivity of the commercial fisheries receptors is the same as that presented for construction in paragraphs 204 to 206, summarised as low for all fisheries.
                        Significance of the effect
  1. All fisheries: overall, the magnitude of the impact is deemed to be low and the sensitivity of the receptor is considered to be low. The effect will, therefore, be of minor adverse significance, which is not significant in EIA terms.
                        Secondary mitigation and residual effect
  1. No commercial fisheries mitigation is considered necessary because the likely effect in the absence of mitigation is not significant in EIA terms.

Impacts to commercial exploited species populations

  1. Noise and seabed disturbances during the construction, operation and maintenance and decommissioning phases may decrease or displace commercially important fish and shellfish populations from the area. This section assesses the subsequent effect for the owners of fishing vessels, where commercially important stocks may be disturbed or displaced to a point where normal fishing practices would be affected.

                        Construction phase

                        Magnitude of impact
  1. Detailed assessments of the following potential construction impacts have been undertaken in volume 2, chapter 9:
  • temporary habitat loss and disturbance;
  • long term habitat loss and disturbance; and
  • underwater noise impacting fish and shellfish receptors.
  1. With respect to the magnitude of this impact on commercial fisheries, the overall significance of the effect on fish and shellfish species is considered (i.e. both the magnitude and sensitivity of fish and shellfish species are considered to assess the magnitude on commercial fishing fleets). This is because the overall effect on the fish and/or shellfish species relates directly to the availability and amount of exploitable resource. For instance, where an effect of negligible significance is assessed for a species, a negligible magnitude is assessed for commercial fishing; where an effect of minor adverse significance is assessed for a species, a low magnitude is assessed for commercial fishing, and so on.
  2. Details of the fish and shellfish ecology assessment, together with the supporting evidence and justification are summarised in volume 2, chapter 9. Temporary and long term habitat loss and disturbance during construction phase is not expected to affect fish and shellfish resources; and underwater noise (assessed for piling installation) is expected to be highly localised with high recoverability. The fish and shellfish ecology assessment found all construction impacts to be of negligible to minor adverse significance for all fish and shellfish receptors.
  3. The magnitude of impact is predicted to be of regional spatial extent, of relevance to international fishing fleets, and of medium term duration. It is predicted that the impact will affect the receptor directly through loss of resources. The magnitude is therefore considered to be low for all species and all potential impacts.
                        Sensitivity of the receptor
  1. Exposure to the impact is likely and commercial fleets targeting key species may be affected, including Nephrops, haddock, monkfish and herring.
  2. Due to the range of alternative areas targeted and the distribution of key commercial species throughout the northern, central and southern North Sea, all fleets are deemed to be of low vulnerability, high recoverability and medium-low value. The sensitivity of the receptor for all fisheries is therefore, considered to be low.
                        Significance of the effect
  1. All fisheries: overall, the magnitude of the impact is deemed to be low and the sensitivity of the receptor is considered to be low. The effect will, therefore, be of minor adverse significance, which is not significant in EIA terms.
                        Secondary mitigation and residual effect
  1. No commercial fisheries mitigation is considered necessary because the likely effect in the absence of mitigation is not significant in EIA terms.

                        Operation and maintenance phase

                        Magnitude of impact
  1. Detailed assessments of the following potential operation and maintenance impacts have been undertaken in volume 2, chapter 9:
  • temporary habitat loss and disturbance;
  • long term habitat loss and disturbance;
  • colonisation of hard structures;
  • increased SSCs and associated deposition; and
  • effects to fish and shellfish receptors due to electromagnetic fields (EMF) from subsea electrical cabling.
  1. Details of the fish and shellfish ecology assessment, together with the supporting evidence and justification are summarised in volume 2, chapter 9. The fish and shellfish ecology assessment found all operation and maintenance impacts to be of negligible to minor adverse significance for all fish and shellfish receptors. The potential effect on resources is not expected to be beyond what could be discernible from baseline conditions for fish and shellfish resources.
  2. The magnitude of impact is predicted to be of regional spatial extent, of relevance to international fishing fleets, of long term duration and to affect the receptor directly. The magnitude is therefore considered to be low for all species and all potential impacts.
                        Sensitivity of the receptor
  1. The sensitivity of the commercial fisheries receptors is the same as that presented for construction in paragraphs 222 to 223, summarised as low for all fisheries.
                        Significance of the effect
  1. All fisheries: overall, the magnitude of the impact is deemed to be low and the sensitivity of the receptor is considered to be low. The effect will, therefore, be of minor adverse significance, which is not significant in EIA terms.
                        Secondary mitigation and residual effect
  1. No commercial fisheries mitigation is considered necessary because the likely effect in the absence of mitigation is not significant in EIA terms.

                        Decommissioning phase

                        Magnitude of impact
  1. Detailed assessments of the following potential decommissioning impacts have been undertaken in volume 2, chapter 9:
  • temporary habitat loss and disturbance; and
  • long term habitat loss and disturbance.
  1. The magnitude of impact during the decommissioning phase is expected to be the same or similar to that during construction for all commercial fishing fleets (see paragraphs 218 to 221). The magnitude of impact is predicted to be of regional spatial extent, of relevance to international fishing fleets, of long term duration and to affect the receptor directly. The magnitude is therefore considered to be low for all species and all potential impacts.
                        Sensitivity of the receptor
  1. The sensitivity of the commercial fisheries receptors is the same as that presented for construction in paragraphs 222 to 223, summarised as low for all fisheries.
                        Significance of the effect
  1. All fisheries: overall, the magnitude of the impact is deemed to be low and the sensitivity of the receptor is considered to be low. The effect will, therefore, be of minor adverse significance, which is not significant in EIA terms.
                        Secondary mitigation and residual effect
  1. No commercial fisheries mitigation is considered necessary because the likely effect in the absence of mitigation is not significant in EIA terms.