5.4.6. Barrier to Movement

As previously stated within section 5.4.1, the current guidance from NatureScot (2023h) recommends treating both displacement and barrier effects together as “distributional responses” and, for breeding seabirds, recommends assessing these distributional responses together. For breeding seabirds, the approach to “disturbance and displacement” assessment covers both disturbance and barrier effects, whilst the assessment of “barrier to movement” only considers the barrier effect to migratory birds. Therefore, only migratory waterbirds are discussed and assessed separately within this section.
The LSE2 assessment during the HRA screening process identified that during operation and maintenance phases, LSE2 could not be ruled out for barrier to movement. This relates to the following site(s) and relevant marine ornithological features:

Cameron Reservoir SPA and Ramsar site

- pink-footed goose (non-breeding).

Din Moss – Hoselaw Loch SPA and Ramsar site

- pink-footed goose (non-breeding); and

- greylag goose (non-breeding).

Fala Flow SPA and Ramsar site

- pink-footed goose (non-breeding).

Firth of Forth SPA and Ramsar site

- bar-tailed godwit (non-breeding);

- golden plover (non-breeding);

- knot (non-breeding);

- pink-footed goose (non-breeding);

- red-throated diver (non-breeding);

- redshank (non-breeding);

- ringed plover (non-breeding);

- sandwich tern (non-breeding);

- 1lavonian grebe (non-breeding)

- turnstone (non-breeding); and

- non-breeding waterbird assemblage (due to potential impact on above species (except Sandwich tern) and common scoter, cormorant, curlew, dunlin, eider, goldeneye, great crested grebe, grey plover, lapwing, long-tailed duck, mallard, oystercatcher, red-breasted merganser, ringed plover, scaup, shelduck, velvet scoter and wigeon).

Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary SPA and Ramsar site

- bar-tailed godwit (non-breeding);

- non-breeding greylag goose;

- non-breeding pink-footed goose;

- non-breeding redshank; and

- non-breeding waterbird assemblage (due to potential impact on above species and common scoter, cormorant, dunlin, eider, goldeneye, goosander, grey plover, Icelandic black-tailed godwit, oystercatcher, long-tailed duck, red-breasted merganser, sanderling, shelduck and velvet scoter).

Gladhouse Reservoir SPA and Ramsar site

- pink-footed goose (non-breeding).

Greenlaw Moor SPA and Ramsar site

- pink-footed goose (non-breeding).

Holburn Lake and Moss SPA and Ramsar site

- greylag goose (non-breeding).

Lindisfarne SPA and Ramsar site

- bar-tailed godwit (non-breeding);

- common scoter (non-breeding);

- dunlin (non-breeding);

- eider (non-breeding);

- golden plover (non-breeding);

- grey plover(non-breeding);

- greylag goose (non-breeding);

- light-bellied brent goose (non-breeding);

- long-tailed duck (non-breeding);

- red-breasted merganser (non-breeding);

- redshank (non-breeding);

- ringed plover (non-breeding);

- sanderling (non-breeding);

- shelduck (non-breeding);

- whooper swan (non-breeding);

- wigeon (non-breeding); and

- waterbird assemblage (non-breeding).

Loch of Kinnordy SPA and Ramsar site

- pink-footed goose (non-breeding); and

- greylag goose (non-breeding).

Loch Leven SPA and Ramsar site

- pink-footed goose (non-breeding);

- shoveler (non-breeding);

- whooper swan (non-breeding); and

- non-breeding waterbird assemblage (due to potential impact on above species and cormorant, gadwall, goldeneye, pochard, teal and tufted duck).

Montrose Basin SPA and Ramsar site

- greylag goose (non-breeding);

- pink-footed goose (non-breeding);

- redshank (non-breeding); and

- non-breeding waterbird assemblage (due to potential impact on above species and oystercatcher, eider, wigeon, knot, dunlin and shelduck).

Northumbria Coast SPA and Ramsar site

- purple sandpiper (non-breeding); and

- turnstone (non-breeding).

Slamannan Platea SPA

- taiga bean goose (non-breeding).

South Tayside Goose Roosts SPA and Ramsar site

- pink-footed goose (non-breeding);

- greylag goose (non-breeding);

- wigeon (non-breeding); and

- non-breeding waterbird assemblage (due to potential impact on above species).

Westwater SPA and Ramsar site

- pink-footed goose (non-breeding); and

- non-breeding waterbird assemblage (due to potential impact on above species).

Ythan Estuary, Sands of Forvie and Meikle Loch SPA / Ythan Estuary and Meikle Loch Ramsar site

- pink-footed goose (non-breeding); and

- non-breeding waterbird assemblage (due to potential impact on above species and eider, lapwing and redshank).

The MDS considered within the assessment of barrier to movement is shown in Table 5.56 Open ▸ .

Table 5.56: MDS Considered for the Assessment of Potential Impacts to Marine Ornithological Features due to Barrier to Movement during the Operation and Maintenance Phase

Project Phase	MDS	Justification
Operation and maintenance	Wind turbines  up to 265 wind turbines;  maximum rotor diameter 236 m, hub height 148 m above LAT, minimum blade clearance 30 m above LAT, upper blade tip height 266 m above LAT; and  wind turbine spacing minimum 1,000 m, maximum 2,832 m. 6 OSPs, main structure 93 m above LAT in height (tallest point 104 m above LAT). Topside 121 m long x 89 m wide. Total Array area 858 km2.	Represents the maximum number and density of wind turbines and structures across the Array, which maximises the potential barrier to foraging grounds and migration routes for bird species.

Project Phase

MDS

Justification

Operation and maintenance

Wind turbines

 up to 265 wind turbines;

 maximum rotor diameter 236 m, hub height 148 m above LAT, minimum blade clearance 30 m above LAT, upper blade tip height 266 m above LAT; and

 wind turbine spacing minimum 1,000 m, maximum 2,832 m. 6 OSPs, main structure 93 m above LAT in height (tallest point 104 m above LAT). Topside 121 m long x 89 m wide.

Total Array area 858 km2.

Represents the maximum number and density of wind turbines and structures across the Array, which maximises the potential barrier to foraging grounds and migration routes for bird species.

Operation and maintenance phase

JNCC et al. (2022) defines barrier effects as “A barrier is a physical factor that limits the migration, or free movement of individuals or populations, thus requiring them to divert from their intended path in order to reach their original destination. This effect is expected to increase the energy expenditure of birds if they have to fly around the area in question in order to reach their goal”. It is typically considered to affect birds in flight only, either whilst they are on migration between breeding and wintering areas (for example) or between a breeding colony and a foraging area. The latter of these scenarios may impose an additional energetic cost to movements at a key period in the annual cycle when seabirds are making daily commutes between foraging grounds at sea and breeding sites. Additional energetic costs could have long term implications for individuals, impacting bird fitness (breeding productivity and survival) and for populations. Barrier effects are considered to be less impactful when affecting migratory flights as avoidance of a single wind farm may be trivial relative to the total length and cost of the journey (Masden et al., 2010; 2012).
For breeding seabirds, NatureScot (2023h) consider barrier effects alongside displacement as “distributional responses”. This is because it can be difficult to distinguish barrier effects from the effects of displacement, for breeding seabirds foraging in the region. NatureScot (2023h) advise that distributional responses are assessed using the matrix approach, and therefore for breeding seabirds, no separate assessment of barrier to movement is carried out, with impacts considered to be included in the assessments carried out under the impact Disturbance and Displacement.
This section therefore only considers the impact of the barrier to movement on migratory receptors. In the absence of quantitative information available for individual species, the magnitude is considered qualitatively for all receptors.
The diversion of flight lines as a result of a barrier effect created by the presence of the Array for migratory birds is considered less of an impact than for those barrier effects to daily foraging flights. Speakman et al. (2009) and Masden et al. (2010; 2012) calculated that the costs of one-off avoidances during migration were small, accounting for less than 2% of available fat reserves.
A bird reaching the Array and following the perimeter around to resume the same flight path on the other side would fly a maximum of approximately 80 km to resume the flight path, compared to the approximately 20 km straight line across the middle of the array area, i.e. a 60 km increase in flight path. The shortest flight path from the east coast of Scotland to the west coast of Scandinavia that would pass through the Array is approximately 565 km. Therefore, the maximum impact would be an increase in migration route of 10.6%. In reality, this level of impact is unrealistic, as most birds will deviate by less, either by altering their flight path in a more efficient manner or by increasing their altitude to fly above the wind farm without any change in direction. It should also be noted that the shortest potential flightlines between the UK and Scandinavia would not pass through the Array at all, with the shortest mainland route being from south-west Norway to the north-east Aberdeenshire coast, or else “island hopping” through Shetland, Fair Isle and Orkney.
This impact would have a negligible impact on the survival of any bird, and therefore there is no potential for an AEOI to any site.

Conclusion

It is concluded, beyond reasonable scientific doubt, that no adverse effects on the qualifying interest features which could undermine the conservation objectives of the SPAs listed in Table 5.57 Open ▸ , will occur as a result of barrier to movement impacts during the operation and maintenance phase for the Array. An assessment of the impact of barrier to movement against each relevant conservation objective is presented in Table 5.57 Open ▸ . Where the justifications and supporting evidence are the same for more than one conservation objective, the assessments have been grouped.

Table 5.57: Conclusions Against the Conservation Objectives of SPAs and their Qualifying Features from Barrier to Movement during the Operation and Maintenance Phase

SPA	Assessed Features	Conservation Objectives	Justification	Conclusion
Cameron Reservoir SPA and Ramsar site	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding)	 to avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained: – to ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: – distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and – structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species.	As the Array falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for barrier to movement during all operations and maintenance of the Array to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, barrier to movement associated with the Array will not prevent the extent, distribution, structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying species or the supporting processes on which the habitats of qualifying species rely from being maintained or restored.	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI
 to avoid significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained;  to ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: – population of the species as a viable component of the site; – distribution of the species within site; and – no significant disturbance of the species.	The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on pink-footed goose at Cameron Reservoir SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible on the species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population. Consequently, as the impact on mortality rate falls within the natural fluctuations of background mortality for the populations, it can be concluded that there is a negligible risk during operations and maintenance, of barrier to movement significantly disrupting pink-footed goose populations as a qualifying species at Cameron Reservoir SPA and Ramsar site. Therefore, collision risk during operation and maintenance, will not prevent the conservation objectives from being achieved for the assessed qualifying features and the population of the species as viable components of the site. Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI
Din M–ss - Hoselaw Loch SPA and Ramsar site	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding)  greylag goose (non-breeding)	 to avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained; – to ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: – distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and – structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species.	As the Array falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for barrier to movement during all operations and maintenance of the Array to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, barrier to movement associated with the Array will not prevent the extent, distribution, structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying species or the supporting processes on which the habitats of qualifying species rely from being maintained or restored.	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI  greylag goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI
 to avoid significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained;  to ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: – population of the species as a viable component of the site; – distribution of the species within site; and – no significant disturbance of the species.	The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on pink-footed goose and greylag goose at Din Moss – Hoselaw Loch SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible for all species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population. Consequently, as the impact on mortality rate falls within the natural fluctuations of background mortality for the populations, it can be concluded that there is a negligible risk during operations and maintenance, of barrier to movement significantly disrupting pink-footed goose and greylag goose populations as a qualifying species of Din M–ss - Hoselaw Loch SPA and Ramsar site. Therefore, barrier to movement during operation and maintenance, will not prevent the conservation objectives from being achieved for the assessed qualifying features and the population of the species as viable components of the site. Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI  greylag goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI
Fala Flow SPA and Ramsar site	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding)	 to avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained: – to ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: – distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and – structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species.	As the Array falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for barrier to movement during all operations and maintenance of the Array to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, barrier to movement associated with the Array will not prevent the extent, distribution, structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying species or the supporting processes on which the habitats of qualifying species rely from being maintained or restored.	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI
 to avoid significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained;  to ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: – population of the species as a viable component of the site; – distribution of the species within site; and – no significant disturbance of the species.	The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on pink-footed goose at Fala Flow SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible on the species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population. Consequently, as the impact on mortality rate falls within the natural fluctuations of background mortality for the populations, it can be concluded that there is a negligible risk during operations and maintenance, of barrier to movement significantly disrupting pink-footed goose populations as a qualifying species of Fala Flow SPA and Ramsar site. Therefore, barrier to movement during operation and maintenance, will not prevent the conservation objectives from being achieved for the assessed qualifying features and the population of the species as viable components of the site. Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI
Firth of Forth SPA and Ramsar site	 bar-tailed godwit (non-breeding)  golden plover (non-breeding)  knot (non-breeding)  pink-footed goose (non-breeding)  red-throated diver (non-breeding)  redshank (non-breeding)  ringed plover (non-breeding)  sandwich tern (non-breedi1lavoniannian grebe (non-breeding)  turnstone (non-breeding)  non-breeding waterbird assemblage (consisting of the above species (except sandwich tern) and common scoter, cormorant, curlew, dunlin, eider, goldeneye, great crested grebe, grey plover, lapwing, long-tailed duck, mallard, oystercatcher, red-breasted merganser, ringed plover, scaup, shelduck, velvet scoter and wigeon)	 to avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained: – to ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: – distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and – structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species.	As the Array falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for barrier to movement during all operations and maintenance of the Array to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, barrier to movement associated with the Array will not prevent the extent, distribution, structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying species or the supporting processes on which the habitats of qualifying species rely from being maintained or restored.	 bar-tailed godwit (non-breeding) = No AEOI  golden plover (non-breeding) = No AEOI  knot (non-breeding) = No AEOI  pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI  red-throated diver (non-breeding) = No AEOI  redshank (non-breeding) = No AEOI  ringed plover (non-breeding) = No AEOI  sandwich tern (non-breeding) = No A1lavoniannian grebe (non-breeding) = No AEOI  turnstone (non-breeding) = No AEOI  non-breeding waterbird assemblage = No AEOI
 to avoid significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained;  to ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: – population of the species as a viable component of the site; – distribution of the species within site; and – no significant disturbance of the species.	The impact level experienced during the operations and maintenance phase on bar-tailed godwit, golden plover, knot, pink-footed goose, red-throated diver, redshank, ringed plover, Sandwich tern, Slavonian grebe, turnstone, as well as the non-breeding waterbird assemblage consisting of common scoter, cormorant, curlew, dunlin, eider, goldeneye, great crested grebe, grey plover, lapwing, long-tailed duck, mallard, oystercatcher, red-breasted merganser, scaup, shelduck, velvet scoter, and wigeon, at Firth of Forth SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible for all species. The impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population. Consequently, as the impact on mortality rate falls within the natural fluctuations of background mortality for the populations, it can be concluded that there is a negligible risk during operations and maintenance of barrier to movement significantly disrupting the populations of bar-tailed godwit, golden plover, knot, pink-footed goose, red-throated diver, redshank, ringed plover, Sandwich tern, Slavonian grebe, and turnstone, as well as the non-breeding waterbird assemblage consisting of common scoter, cormorant, curlew, dunlin, eider, goldeneye, great crested grebe, grey plover, lapwing, long-tailed duck, mallard, oystercatcher, red-breasted merganser, scaup, shelduck, velvet scoter, and wigeon, as qualifying species of Firth of Forth SPA and Ramsar site. In addition, as impacts from barrier to movement were deemed negligible, impacts to waterbird assemblage is also deemed negligible. Therefore, barrier to movement during operation and maintenance, will not prevent the conservation objectives from being achieved for the assessed qualifying features and the population of the species as viable components of the site. Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.	 bar-tailed godwit (non-breeding) = No AEOI  golden plover (non-breeding) = No AEOI  knot (non-breeding) = No AEOI  pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI  red-throated diver (non-breeding) = No AEOI  redshank (non-breeding) = No AEOI  ringed plover (non-breeding) = No AEOI  sandwich tern (non-breeding) = No A1lavoniannian grebe (non-breeding) = No AEOI  turnstone (non-breeding) = No AEOI  non-breeding waterbird assemblage = No AEOI
Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary SPA and Ramsar site	 bar-tailed godwit (non-breeding)  greylag goose (non-breeding)  pink-footed goose (non-breeding)  redshank (non-breeding)  waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) consisting of the above species and common scoter, cormorant, dunlin, eider, goldeneye, goosander, grey plover, icelandic black-tailed godwit, oystercatcher, long-tailed duck, red-breasted merganser, sanderling, shelduck and velvet scoter)	 to avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained: – to ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: – distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and – structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species.	As the Array falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for barrier to movement during all operations and maintenance of the Array to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, barrier to movement associated with the Array will not prevent the extent, distribution, structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying species or the supporting processes on which the habitats of qualifying species rely from being maintained or restored.	 bar-tailed godwit (non-breeding) = No AEOI  non-breeding greylag goose = No AEOI  non-breeding pink-footed goose = No AEOI  non-breeding redshank = No AEOI  waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI
 to avoid significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained;  to ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: – population of the species as a viable component of the site; – distribution of the species within site; and – no significant disturbance of the species.	The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on bar-tailed godwit, as well as the as well as the non-breeding waterbird assemblage consisting of common scoter, cormorant, dunlin, eider, goldeneye, goosander, grey plover, greylag goose, Icelandic black-tailed godwit, long-tailed duck, oystercatcher, pink-footed goose, red-breasted merganser, redshank, sanderling, shelduck and velvet scoter at Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible for all species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population. Consequently, as the impact on mortality rate falls within the natural fluctuations of background mortality for the populations, it can be concluded that there is a negligible risk during operations and maintenance, of barrier to movement significantly disrupting bar-tailed godwit, as well as the non-breeding waterbird assemblage consisting of common scoter, cormorant, dunlin, eider, goldeneye, goosander, grey plover, greylag goose, Icelandic black-tailed godwit, long-tailed duck, oystercatcher, pink-footed goose, red-breasted merganser, redshank, sanderling, shelduck and velvet scoter populations as a qualifying species at Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary SPA and Ramsar site. In addition, as impacts from barrier to movement were deemed negligible, impacts to waterbird assemblage is also deemed negligible. Therefore, barrier to movement during operation and maintenance, will not prevent the conservation objectives from being achieved for the assessed qualifying features and the population of the species as viable components of the site. Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.	 bar-tailed godwit (non-breeding) = No AEOI  non-breeding greylag goose = No AEOI  non-breeding pink-footed goose = No AEOI  non-breeding redshank = No AEOI  waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI
Gladhouse Reservoir SPA and Ramsar site	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding)	 to avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained: – to ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: – distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and – structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species.	As the Array falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for barrier to movement during all operations and maintenance of the Array to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, barrier to movement associated with the Array will not prevent the extent, distribution, structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying species or the supporting processes on which the habitats of qualifying species rely from being maintained or restored.	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI
 to avoid significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained;  to ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: – population of the species as a viable component of the site; – distribution of the species within site; and – no significant disturbance of the species.	The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on pink-footed goose at Gladhouse Reservoir SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible on the species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population. Consequently, as the impact on mortality rate falls within the natural fluctuations of background mortality for the populations, it can be concluded that there is a negligible risk during operations and maintenance, of barrier to movement significantly disrupting pink-footed goose populations as a qualifying species of Gladhouse Reservoir SPA and Ramsar site. Therefore, barrier to movement during operation and maintenance, will not prevent the conservation objectives from being achieved for the assessed qualifying features and the population of the species as viable components of the site. Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI
Greenlaw Moor SPA and Ramsar site	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding)	 to avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained: – to ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: – distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and – structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species.	As the Array falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for barrier to movement during all operations and maintenance of the Array to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, barrier to movement associated with the Array will not prevent the extent, distribution, structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying species or the supporting processes on which the habitats of qualifying species rely from being maintained or restored.	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI
 to avoid significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained;  to ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: – population of the species as a viable component of the site; – distribution of the species within site; and – no significant disturbance of the species.	The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on pink-footed goose at Greenlaw Moor SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible on the species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population. Consequently, as the impact on mortality rate falls within the natural fluctuations of background mortality for the populations, it can be concluded that there is a negligible risk during operations and maintenance, of barrier to movement significantly disrupting pink-footed goose populations as a qualifying species of Greenlaw Moor SPA and Ramsar site. Therefore, barrier to movement during operation and maintenance, will not prevent the conservation objectives from being achieved for the assessed qualifying features and the population of the species as viable components of the site. Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI
Holburn Lake and Moss SPA and Ramsar site	 greylag goose (non-breeding)	 ensure that the integrity of the site is maintained or restored as appropriate, and ensure that the site contributes to achieving the aims of the Wild Birds Directive, by maintaining or restoring: – the extent and distribution of the habitats of the qualifying features; – the structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying features; and – the supporting processes on which the habitats of the qualifying features rely.	As the Array falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for barrier to movement during all operations and maintenance of the Array to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, barrier to movement associated with the Array will not prevent the extent, distribution, structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying species or the supporting processes on which the habitats of qualifying species rely from being maintained or restored.	 greylag goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI
 ensure that the integrity of the site is maintained or restored as appropriate, and ensure that the site contributes to achieving the aims of the Wild Birds Directive, by maintaining or restoring: – the populations of each of the qualifying features; and – the distribution of qualifying features within the site.	The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on greylag goose at Holburn Lake and Moss SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible on the species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population. Consequently, as the impact on mortality rate falls within the natural fluctuations of background mortality for the populations, it can be concluded that there is a negligible risk during operations and maintenance, of barrier to movement significantly disrupting greylag goose populations as a qualifying species of Holburn Lake and Moss SPA and Ramsar site. Therefore, barrier to movement during operation and maintenance, will not prevent the conservation objectives from being achieved for the assessed qualifying features and the population of the species as viable components of the site. Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.	 greylag goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI
Lindisfarne SPA and Ramsar site	 bar-tailed godwit (non-breeding)  common scoter (non-breeding)  dunlin (non-breeding)  eider (non-breeding)  golden plover (non-breeding)  grey plover(non-breeding)  greylag goose (non-breeding)  light-bellied brent goose (non-breeding)  long-tailed duck (non-breeding)  red-breasted merganser (non-breeding)  redshank (non-breeding)  ringed plover (non-breeding)  sanderling (non-breeding)  shelduck (non-breeding)  whooper swan (non-breeding)  wigeon (non-breeding)  waterbird assemblage (non-breeding)	 ensure that the integrity of the site is maintained or restored as appropriate, and ensure that the site contributes to achieving the aims of the Wild Birds Directive, by maintaining or restoring: – The extent and distribution of the habitats of the qualifying features; – The structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying features; and – The supporting processes on which the habitats of the qualifying features rely.	As the Array falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for a barrier to movement during all operations and maintenance of the Array to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, collision risk associated with the Array will not prevent the extent, distribution, structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying species or the supporting processes on which the habitats of qualifying species rely from being maintained or restored.	 bar-tailed godwit (non-breeding) = No AEOI  common scoter (non-breeding) = No AEOI  dunlin (non-breeding) = No AEOI  eider (non-breeding) = No AEOI  golden plover (non-breeding) = No AEOI  grey plover(non-breeding) = No AEOI  greylag goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI  light-bellied brent goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI  long-tailed duck (non-breeding) = No AEOI  red-breasted merganser (non-breeding) = No AEOI  redshank (non-breeding) = No AEOI  ringed plover (non-breeding) = No AEOI  sanderling (non-breeding) = No AEOI  shelduck (non-breeding) = No AEOI  whooper swan (non-breeding) = No AEOI  wigeon (non-breeding) = No AEOI  waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI
 ensure that the integrity of the site is maintained or restored as appropriate, and ensure that the site contributes to achieving the aims of the Wild Birds Directive, by maintaining or restoring: – the populations of each of the qualifying features; and – the distribution of qualifying features within the site.	The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on bar-tailed godwit, common scoter, dunlin, eider, golden plover, grey plover, greylag goose, light-bellied brent goose, long-tailed duck, red-breasted merganser, redshank, ringed plover, sanderling, shelduck and whooper swan and wigeon at Lindisfarne SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible for all species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population. Consequently, as the impact on mortality rate falls within the natural fluctuations of background mortality for the populations, it can be concluded that there is a negligible risk during operations and maintenance, of barrier to movement significantly disrupting bar-tailed godwit, common scoter, dunlin, eider, golden plover, grey plover, greylag goose, light-bellied brent goose, long-tailed duck, red-breasted merganser, redshank, ringed plover, sanderling, shelduck and whooper swan and wigeon populations as a qualifying species at Lindisfarne SPA and Ramsar site. In addition, as impacts from barrier to movement were deemed negligible, impacts to waterbird assemblage is also deemed negligible. Therefore, barrier to movement during operation and maintenance, will not prevent the conservation objectives from being achieved for the assessed qualifying features and the population of the species as viable components of the site. Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.	 bar-tailed godwit (non-breeding) = No AEOI  common scoter (non-breeding) = No AEOI  dunlin (non-breeding) = No AEOI  eider (non-breeding) = No AEOI  golden plover (non-breeding) = No AEOI  grey plover(non-breeding) = No AEOI  greylag goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI  light-bellied brent goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI  long-tailed duck (non-breeding) = No AEOI  red-breasted merganser (non-breeding) = No AEOI  redshank (non-breeding) = No AEOI  ringed plover (non-breeding) = No AEOI  sanderling (non-breeding) = No AEOI  shelduck (non-breeding) = No AEOI  whooper swan (non-breeding) = No AEOI  wigeon (non-breeding) = No AEOI  waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI
Loch of Kinnordy SPA and Ramsar site	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding)  greylag goose (non-breeding)	 to avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained: – to ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: – distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and – structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species.	As the Array falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for barrier to movement during all operations and maintenance of the Array to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, barrier to movement associated with the Array will not prevent the extent, distribution, structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying species or the supporting processes on which the habitats of qualifying species rely from being maintained or restored.	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI  greylag goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI
 to avoid significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained;  to ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: – population of the species as a viable component of the site; – distribution of the species within site; and – no significant disturbance of the species.	The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on pink-footed goose and greylag goose at Loch of Kinnordy SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible for all species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population. Consequently, as the impact on mortality rate falls within the natural fluctuations of background mortality for the populations, it can be concluded that there is a negligible risk during operations and maintenance, of barrier to movement significantly disrupting pink-footed goose and greylag goose populations as a qualifying species of Loch of Kinnordy SPA and Ramsar site. Therefore, barrier to movement during operation and maintenance, will not prevent the conservation objectives from being achieved for the assessed qualifying features and the population of the species as viable components of the site. Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI  greylag goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI
Loch Leven SPA and Ramsar site	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding)  shoveler (non-breeding)  whooper swan (non-breeding)  waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) consisting of the above species and cormorant, gadwall, goldeneye, pochard, teal and tufted duck	 to avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained: – to ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: – distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and – structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species.	As the Array falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for barrier to movement during all operations and maintenance of the Array to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, barrier to movement associated with the Array will not prevent the extent, distribution, structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying species or the supporting processes on which the habitats of qualifying species rely from being maintained or restored.	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI  shoveler (non-breeding) = No AEOI  whooper swan (non-breeding) = No AEOI  waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI
 to avoid significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained;  to ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: – population of the species as a viable component of the site; – distribution of the species within site; and – no significant disturbance of the species.	The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on cormorant, gadwall, goldeneye, pink-footed goose, pochard, shoveler, teal, tufted duck and whooper swan at Loch Leven SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible for all species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population. Consequently, as the impact on mortality rate falls within the natural fluctuations of background mortality for the populations, it can be concluded that there is a negligible risk during operations and maintenance, of barrier to movement significantly disrupting cormorant, gadwall, goldeneye, pink-footed goose, pochard, shoveler, teal, tufted duck and whooper swan populations as a qualifying species of Loch Leven SPA and Ramsar site. In addition, as impacts from barrier to movement were deemed negligible, impacts to waterbird assemblage is also deemed negligible. Therefore, barrier to movement during operation and maintenance, will not prevent the conservation objectives from being achieved for the assessed qualifying features and the population of the species as viable components of the site. Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI  shoveler (non-breeding) = No AEOI  whooper swan (non-breeding) = No AEOI  waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI
Montrose Basin SPA and Ramsar site	 greylag goose (non-breeding)  pink-footed goose (non-breeding)  redshank (non-breeding)  waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) consisting of the above species and oystercatcher, eider, wigeon, knot, dunlin and shelduck	 to avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained: – to ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: - distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and - structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species.	As the Array falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for barrier to movement during all operations and maintenance of the Array to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, barrier to movement associated with the Array will not prevent the extent, distribution, structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying species or the supporting processes on which the habitats of qualifying species rely from being maintained or restored.	 greylag goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI  pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI  redshank (non-breeding) = No AEOI  waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI
 to avoid significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained;  to ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: – population of the species as a viable component of the site; – distribution of the species within site; and – no significant disturbance of the species.	The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on dunlin, eider, greylag goose, knot, oystercatcher, pink-footed goose, redshank, shelduck and wigeon at Montrose Basin SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible for all species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population. Consequently, as the impact on mortality rate falls within the natural fluctuations of background mortality for the populations, it can be concluded that there is a negligible risk during operations and maintenance, of barrier to movement significantly disrupting dunlin, eider, greylag goose, knot, oystercatcher, pink-footed goose, redshank, shelduck and wigeon populations as a qualifying species of Montrose Basin SPA and Ramsar site. In addition, as impacts from barrier to movement were deemed negligible, impacts to waterbird assemblage is also deemed negligible. Therefore, barrier to movement during operation and maintenance, will not prevent the conservation objectives from being achieved for the assessed qualifying features and the population of the species as viable components of the site. Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.	 greylag goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI  pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI  redshank (non-breeding) = No AEOI  waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI
Northumbria Coast SPA and Ramsar site	 purple sandpiper (non-breeding)  turnstone (non-breeding)	 ensure that the integrity of the site is maintained or restored as appropriate, and ensure that the site contributes to achieving the aims of the Wild Birds Directive, by maintaining or restoring: – the extent and distribution of the habitats of the qualifying features; – the structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying features; and – the supporting processes on which the habitats of the qualifying features rely.	As the Array falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for barrier to movement during all operations and maintenance of the Array to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, barrier to movement associated with the Array will not prevent the extent, distribution, structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying species or the supporting processes on which the habitats of qualifying species rely from being maintained or restored.	 purple sandpiper (non-breeding) = No AEOI  turnstone (non-breeding) = No AEOI
 ensure that the integrity of the site is maintained or restored as appropriate, and ensure that the site contributes to achieving the aims of the Wild Birds Directive, by maintaining or restoring: – the populations of each of the qualifying features; and – the distribution of qualifying features within the site.	The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on purple sandpiper and turnstone at Northumbria Coast SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible for all species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population. Consequently, as the impact on mortality rate falls within the natural fluctuations of background mortality for the populations, it can be concluded that there is a negligible risk during operations and maintenance, of barrier to movement significantly disrupting purple sandpiper and turnstone populations as a qualifying species of Northumbria Coast SPA and Ramsar site. Therefore, barrier to movement during operation and maintenance, will not prevent the conservation objectives from being achieved for the assessed qualifying features and the population of the species as viable components of the site. Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.	 purple sandpiper (non-breeding) = No AEOI  turnstone (non-breeding) = No AEOI
Slamannan Plateau SPA	 taiga bean goose (non-breeding)	 to avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained: – to ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: – distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and – structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species.	As the Array falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for barrier to movement during all operations and maintenance of the Array to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, barrier to movement associated with the Array will not prevent the extent, distribution, structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying species or the supporting processes on which the habitats of qualifying species rely from being maintained or restored.	 taiga bean goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI
 to avoid significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained;  to ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: – population of the species as a viable component of the site; – distribution of the species within site; and – no significant disturbance of the species.	The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on taiga bean goose at Slamannan Platea SPA was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible on the species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population. Consequently, as the impact on mortality rate falls within the natural fluctuations of background mortality for the populations, it can be concluded that there is a negligible risk during operations and maintenance, of barrier to movement significantly disrupting taiga bean goose populations as a qualifying species of Slamannan Platea SPA. Therefore, barrier to movement during operation and maintenance, will not prevent the conservation objectives from being achieved for the assessed qualifying features and the population of the species as viable components of the site. Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.	 taiga bean goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI
South Tayside Goose Roosts SPA and Ramsar site	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding)  greylag goose (non-breeding)  wigeon (non-breeding)  waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) consisting of the species listed above	 to avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained: – to ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: – distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and – structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species.	As the Array falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for barrier to movement during all operations and maintenance of the Array to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, barrier to movement associated with the Array will not prevent the extent, distribution, structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying species or the supporting processes on which the habitats of qualifying species rely from being maintained or restored.	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI  greylag goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI  wigeon (non-breeding) = No AEOI  waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI
 to avoid significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained;  to ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: – population of the species as a viable component of the site; – distribution of the species within site; and – no significant disturbance of the species.	The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on pink-footed goose, greylag goose and wigeon at South Tayside Goose Roosts SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible for all species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population. Consequently, as the impact on mortality rate falls within the natural fluctuations of background mortality for the populations, it can be concluded that there is a negligible risk during operations and maintenance, of barrier to movement significantly disrupting on pink-footed goose, greylag goose and wigeon populations as a qualifying species of South Tayside Goose Roosts SPA and Ramsar site. In addition, as impacts from barrier to movement were deemed negligible, impacts to waterbird assemblage is also deemed negligible. Therefore, collision risk during operation and maintenance, will not prevent the conservation objectives from being achieved for the assessed qualifying features and the population of the species as viable components of the site. Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI  greylag goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI  wigeon (non-breeding) = No AEOI  waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI
Westwater SPA and Ramsar site	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding)  waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) consisting of the species listed above	 to avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained: – to ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: – distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and – structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species.	As the Array falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for barrier to movement during all operations and maintenance of the Array to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, barrier to movement associated with the Array will not prevent the extent, distribution, structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying species or the supporting processes on which the habitats of qualifying species rely from being maintained or restored.	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI  waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI
 to avoid significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained;  to ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: – population of the species as a viable component of the site; – distribution of the species within site; and – no significant disturbance of the species.	The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on pink-footed goose at Westwater SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible for all species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population. Consequently, as the impact on mortality rate falls within the natural fluctuations of background mortality for the populations, it can be concluded that there is a negligible risk during operations and maintenance, of barrier to movement significantly disrupting on pink-footed goose as a qualifying species of Westwater SPA and Ramsar site. In addition, as impacts from barrier to movement were deemed negligible, impacts to waterbird assemblage is also deemed negligible. Therefore, barrier to movement during operation and maintenance, will not prevent the conservation objectives from being achieved for the assessed qualifying features and the population of the species as viable components of the site. Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI  waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI
Ythan Estuary, Sands of Forvie and Meikle Loch SPA/Ythan Estuary and Meikle Loch Ramsar site	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding)  waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) consisting of the species listed above and eider, lapwing and redshank	 ensure that the integrity of the site is maintained or restored as appropriate, and ensure that the site contributes to achieving the aims of the Wild Birds Directive, by maintaining or restoring: – the extent and distribution of the habitats of the qualifying features; – the structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying features; and – the supporting processes on which the habitats of the qualifying features rely.	As the Array falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for barrier to movement during all operations and maintenance of the Array to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, barrier to movement associated with the Array will not prevent the extent, distribution, structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying species or the supporting processes on which the habitats of qualifying species rely from being maintained or restored.	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI  waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI
 ensure that the integrity of the site is maintained or restored as appropriate, and ensure that the site contributes to achieving the aims of the Wild Birds Directive, by maintaining or restoring: – the populations of each of the qualifying features; and – the distribution of qualifying features within the site.	The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on eider, lapwing, pink-footed goose and redshank at Ythan Estuary, Sands of Forvie and Meikle Loch SPA/Ythan Estuary and Meikle Loch Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible for all species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population. Consequently, as the impact on mortality rate falls within the natural fluctuations of background mortality for the populations, it can be concluded that there is a negligible risk during operations and maintenance, of barrier to movement significantly disrupting on eider, lapwing, pink-footed goose and redshank as a qualifying species of Ythan Estuary, Sands of Forvie and Meikle Loch SPA/Ythan Estuary and Meikle Loch Ramsar site. In addition, as impacts from barrier to movement were deemed negligible, impacts to waterbird assemblage is also deemed negligible. Therefore, barrier to movement during operation and maintenance, will not prevent the conservation objectives from being achieved for the assessed qualifying features and the population of the species as viable components of the site. Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.	 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI  waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI

SPA

Assessed Features

Conservation Objectives

Justification

Conclusion

Cameron Reservoir SPA and Ramsar site

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding)

 to avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained:

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

– distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and

– structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species.

As the Array falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for barrier to movement during all operations and maintenance of the Array to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species.

Therefore, barrier to movement associated with the Array will not prevent the extent, distribution, structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying species or the supporting processes on which the habitats of qualifying species rely from being maintained or restored.

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 to avoid significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained;

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

– population of the species as a viable component of the site;

– distribution of the species within site; and

– no significant disturbance of the species.

The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on pink-footed goose at Cameron Reservoir SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible on the species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population.

Therefore, collision risk during operation and maintenance, will not prevent the conservation objectives from being achieved for the assessed qualifying features and the population of the species as viable components of the site.

Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

Din M–ss - Hoselaw Loch SPA and Ramsar site

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding)

 greylag goose (non-breeding)

 to avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained;

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

– distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and

– structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species.

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 greylag goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 to avoid significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained;

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

– population of the species as a viable component of the site;

– distribution of the species within site; and

– no significant disturbance of the species.

The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on pink-footed goose and greylag goose at Din Moss – Hoselaw Loch SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible for all species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population.

Therefore, barrier to movement during operation and maintenance, will not prevent the conservation objectives from being achieved for the assessed qualifying features and the population of the species as viable components of the site.

Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 greylag goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

Fala Flow SPA and Ramsar site

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding)

 to avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained:

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

– distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and

– structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species.

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 to avoid significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained;

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

– population of the species as a viable component of the site;

– distribution of the species within site; and

– no significant disturbance of the species.

The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on pink-footed goose at Fala Flow SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible on the species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population.

Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

Firth of Forth SPA and Ramsar site

 bar-tailed godwit (non-breeding)

 golden plover (non-breeding)

 knot (non-breeding)

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding)

 red-throated diver (non-breeding)

 redshank (non-breeding)

 ringed plover (non-breeding)

 sandwich tern (non-breedi1lavoniannian grebe (non-breeding)

 turnstone (non-breeding)

 non-breeding waterbird assemblage (consisting of the above species (except sandwich tern) and common scoter, cormorant, curlew, dunlin, eider, goldeneye, great crested grebe, grey plover, lapwing, long-tailed duck, mallard, oystercatcher, red-breasted merganser, ringed plover, scaup, shelduck, velvet scoter and wigeon)

 to avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained:

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

– distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and

– structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species.

 bar-tailed godwit (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 golden plover (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 knot (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 red-throated diver (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 redshank (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 ringed plover (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 sandwich tern (non-breeding) = No A1lavoniannian grebe (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 turnstone (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 non-breeding waterbird assemblage = No AEOI

 to avoid significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained;

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

– population of the species as a viable component of the site;

– distribution of the species within site; and

– no significant disturbance of the species.

The impact level experienced during the operations and maintenance phase on bar-tailed godwit, golden plover, knot, pink-footed goose, red-throated diver, redshank, ringed plover, Sandwich tern, Slavonian grebe, turnstone, as well as the non-breeding waterbird assemblage consisting of common scoter, cormorant, curlew, dunlin, eider, goldeneye, great crested grebe, grey plover, lapwing, long-tailed duck, mallard, oystercatcher, red-breasted merganser, scaup, shelduck, velvet scoter, and wigeon, at Firth of Forth SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible for all species. The impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population.

Consequently, as the impact on mortality rate falls within the natural fluctuations of background mortality for the populations, it can be concluded that there is a negligible risk during operations and maintenance of barrier to movement significantly disrupting the populations of bar-tailed godwit, golden plover, knot, pink-footed goose, red-throated diver, redshank, ringed plover, Sandwich tern, Slavonian grebe, and turnstone, as well as the non-breeding waterbird assemblage consisting of common scoter, cormorant, curlew, dunlin, eider, goldeneye, great crested grebe, grey plover, lapwing, long-tailed duck, mallard, oystercatcher, red-breasted merganser, scaup, shelduck, velvet scoter, and wigeon, as qualifying species of Firth of Forth SPA and Ramsar site.

In addition, as impacts from barrier to movement were deemed negligible, impacts to waterbird assemblage is also deemed negligible.

Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.

 bar-tailed godwit (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 golden plover (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 knot (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 red-throated diver (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 redshank (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 ringed plover (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 sandwich tern (non-breeding) = No A1lavoniannian grebe (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 turnstone (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 non-breeding waterbird assemblage = No AEOI

Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary SPA and Ramsar site

 bar-tailed godwit (non-breeding)

 greylag goose (non-breeding)

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding)

 redshank (non-breeding)

 waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) consisting of the above species and common scoter, cormorant, dunlin, eider, goldeneye, goosander, grey plover, icelandic black-tailed godwit, oystercatcher, long-tailed duck, red-breasted merganser, sanderling, shelduck and velvet scoter)

 to avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained:

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

– distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and

– structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species.

 bar-tailed godwit (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 non-breeding greylag goose = No AEOI

 non-breeding pink-footed goose = No AEOI

 non-breeding redshank = No AEOI

 waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 to avoid significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained;

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

– population of the species as a viable component of the site;

– distribution of the species within site; and

– no significant disturbance of the species.

The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on bar-tailed godwit, as well as the as well as the non-breeding waterbird assemblage consisting of common scoter, cormorant, dunlin, eider, goldeneye, goosander, grey plover, greylag goose, Icelandic black-tailed godwit, long-tailed duck, oystercatcher, pink-footed goose, red-breasted merganser, redshank, sanderling, shelduck and velvet scoter at Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible for all species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population.

Consequently, as the impact on mortality rate falls within the natural fluctuations of background mortality for the populations, it can be concluded that there is a negligible risk during operations and maintenance, of barrier to movement significantly disrupting bar-tailed godwit, as well as the non-breeding waterbird assemblage consisting of common scoter, cormorant, dunlin, eider, goldeneye, goosander, grey plover, greylag goose, Icelandic black-tailed godwit, long-tailed duck, oystercatcher, pink-footed goose, red-breasted merganser, redshank, sanderling, shelduck and velvet scoter populations as a qualifying species at Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary SPA and Ramsar site.

In addition, as impacts from barrier to movement were deemed negligible, impacts to waterbird assemblage is also deemed negligible.

Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.

 bar-tailed godwit (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 non-breeding greylag goose = No AEOI

 non-breeding pink-footed goose = No AEOI

 non-breeding redshank = No AEOI

 waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI

Gladhouse Reservoir SPA and Ramsar site

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding)

 to avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained:

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

– distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and

– structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species.

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 to avoid significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained;

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

– population of the species as a viable component of the site;

– distribution of the species within site; and

– no significant disturbance of the species.

The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on pink-footed goose at Gladhouse Reservoir SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible on the species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population.

Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

Greenlaw Moor SPA and Ramsar site

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding)

 to avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained:

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

– distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and

– structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species.

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 to avoid significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained;

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

– population of the species as a viable component of the site;

– distribution of the species within site; and

– no significant disturbance of the species.

The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on pink-footed goose at Greenlaw Moor SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible on the species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population.

Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

Holburn Lake and Moss SPA and Ramsar site

 greylag goose (non-breeding)

 ensure that the integrity of the site is maintained or restored as appropriate, and ensure that the site contributes to achieving the aims of the Wild Birds Directive, by maintaining or restoring:

– the extent and distribution of the habitats of the qualifying features;

– the structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying features; and

– the supporting processes on which the habitats of the qualifying features rely.

 greylag goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

– the populations of each of the qualifying features; and

– the distribution of qualifying features within the site.

The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on greylag goose at Holburn Lake and Moss SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible on the species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population.

Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.

 greylag goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

Lindisfarne SPA and Ramsar site

 bar-tailed godwit (non-breeding)

 common scoter (non-breeding)

 dunlin (non-breeding)

 eider (non-breeding)

 golden plover (non-breeding)

 grey plover(non-breeding)

 greylag goose (non-breeding)

 light-bellied brent goose (non-breeding)

 long-tailed duck (non-breeding)

 red-breasted merganser (non-breeding)

 redshank (non-breeding)

 ringed plover (non-breeding)

 sanderling (non-breeding)

 shelduck (non-breeding)

 whooper swan (non-breeding)

 wigeon (non-breeding)

 waterbird assemblage (non-breeding)

– The extent and distribution of the habitats of the qualifying features;

– The structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying features; and

– The supporting processes on which the habitats of the qualifying features rely.

As the Array falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for a barrier to movement during all operations and maintenance of the Array to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species.

Therefore, collision risk associated with the Array will not prevent the extent, distribution, structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying species or the supporting processes on which the habitats of qualifying species rely from being maintained or restored.

 bar-tailed godwit (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 common scoter (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 dunlin (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 eider (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 golden plover (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 grey plover(non-breeding) = No AEOI

 greylag goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 light-bellied brent goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 long-tailed duck (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 red-breasted merganser (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 redshank (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 ringed plover (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 sanderling (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 shelduck (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 whooper swan (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 wigeon (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI

– the populations of each of the qualifying features; and

– the distribution of qualifying features within the site.

The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on bar-tailed godwit, common scoter, dunlin, eider, golden plover, grey plover, greylag goose, light-bellied brent goose, long-tailed duck, red-breasted merganser, redshank, ringed plover, sanderling, shelduck and whooper swan and wigeon at Lindisfarne SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible for all species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population.

Consequently, as the impact on mortality rate falls within the natural fluctuations of background mortality for the populations, it can be concluded that there is a negligible risk during operations and maintenance, of barrier to movement significantly disrupting bar-tailed godwit, common scoter, dunlin, eider, golden plover, grey plover, greylag goose, light-bellied brent goose, long-tailed duck, red-breasted merganser, redshank, ringed plover, sanderling, shelduck and whooper swan and wigeon populations as a qualifying species at Lindisfarne SPA and Ramsar site.

In addition, as impacts from barrier to movement were deemed negligible, impacts to waterbird assemblage is also deemed negligible.

Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.

 bar-tailed godwit (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 common scoter (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 dunlin (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 eider (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 golden plover (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 grey plover(non-breeding) = No AEOI

 greylag goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 light-bellied brent goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 long-tailed duck (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 red-breasted merganser (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 redshank (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 ringed plover (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 sanderling (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 shelduck (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 whooper swan (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 wigeon (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI

Loch of Kinnordy SPA and Ramsar site

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding)

 greylag goose (non-breeding)

 to avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained:

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

– distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and

– structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species.

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 greylag goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 to avoid significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained;

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

– population of the species as a viable component of the site;

– distribution of the species within site; and

– no significant disturbance of the species.

The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on pink-footed goose and greylag goose at Loch of Kinnordy SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible for all species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population.

Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 greylag goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

Loch Leven SPA and Ramsar site

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding)

 shoveler (non-breeding)

 whooper swan (non-breeding)

 waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) consisting of the above species and cormorant, gadwall, goldeneye, pochard, teal and tufted duck

 to avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained:

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

– distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and

– structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species.

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 shoveler (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 whooper swan (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 to avoid significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained;

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

– population of the species as a viable component of the site;

– distribution of the species within site; and

– no significant disturbance of the species.

The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on cormorant, gadwall, goldeneye, pink-footed goose, pochard, shoveler, teal, tufted duck and whooper swan at Loch Leven SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible for all species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population.

In addition, as impacts from barrier to movement were deemed negligible, impacts to waterbird assemblage is also deemed negligible.

Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 shoveler (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 whooper swan (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI

Montrose Basin SPA and Ramsar site

 greylag goose (non-breeding)

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding)

 redshank (non-breeding)

 waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) consisting of the above species and oystercatcher, eider, wigeon, knot, dunlin and shelduck

 to avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained:

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

- distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and

- structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species.

 greylag goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 redshank (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 to avoid significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained;

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

– population of the species as a viable component of the site;

– distribution of the species within site; and

– no significant disturbance of the species.

The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on dunlin, eider, greylag goose, knot, oystercatcher, pink-footed goose, redshank, shelduck and wigeon at Montrose Basin SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible for all species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population.

In addition, as impacts from barrier to movement were deemed negligible, impacts to waterbird assemblage is also deemed negligible.

Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.

 greylag goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 redshank (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI

Northumbria Coast SPA and Ramsar site

 purple sandpiper (non-breeding)

 turnstone (non-breeding)

– the extent and distribution of the habitats of the qualifying features;

– the structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying features; and

– the supporting processes on which the habitats of the qualifying features rely.

 purple sandpiper (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 turnstone (non-breeding) = No AEOI

– the populations of each of the qualifying features; and

– the distribution of qualifying features within the site.

The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on purple sandpiper and turnstone at Northumbria Coast SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible for all species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population.

Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.

 purple sandpiper (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 turnstone (non-breeding) = No AEOI

Slamannan Plateau SPA

 taiga bean goose (non-breeding)

 to avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained:

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

– distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and

– structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species.

 taiga bean goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 to avoid significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained;

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

– population of the species as a viable component of the site;

– distribution of the species within site; and

– no significant disturbance of the species.

The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on taiga bean goose at Slamannan Platea SPA was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible on the species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population.

Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.

 taiga bean goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

South Tayside Goose Roosts SPA and Ramsar site

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding)

 greylag goose (non-breeding)

 wigeon (non-breeding)

 waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) consisting of the species listed above

 to avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained:

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

– distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and

– structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species.

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 greylag goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 wigeon (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 to avoid significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained;

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

– population of the species as a viable component of the site;

– distribution of the species within site; and

– no significant disturbance of the species.

The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on pink-footed goose, greylag goose and wigeon at South Tayside Goose Roosts SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible for all species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population.

In addition, as impacts from barrier to movement were deemed negligible, impacts to waterbird assemblage is also deemed negligible.

Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 greylag goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 wigeon (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI

Westwater SPA and Ramsar site

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding)

 waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) consisting of the species listed above

 to avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained:

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

– distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and

– structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species.

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 to avoid significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained;

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

– population of the species as a viable component of the site;

– distribution of the species within site; and

– no significant disturbance of the species.

The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on pink-footed goose at Westwater SPA and Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible for all species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population.

In addition, as impacts from barrier to movement were deemed negligible, impacts to waterbird assemblage is also deemed negligible.

Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI

Ythan Estuary, Sands of Forvie and Meikle Loch SPA/Ythan Estuary and Meikle Loch Ramsar site

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding)

 waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) consisting of the species listed above and eider, lapwing and redshank

– the extent and distribution of the habitats of the qualifying features;

– the structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying features; and

– the supporting processes on which the habitats of the qualifying features rely.

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI

– the populations of each of the qualifying features; and

– the distribution of qualifying features within the site.

The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance phase on eider, lapwing, pink-footed goose and redshank at Ythan Estuary, Sands of Forvie and Meikle Loch SPA/Ythan Estuary and Meikle Loch Ramsar site was qualitatively assessed. The outcome of the assessment deemed the impact from barrier to movement to be negligible for all species as the impacts are considered non-material, falling within the natural fluctuations of the population.

In addition, as impacts from barrier to movement were deemed negligible, impacts to waterbird assemblage is also deemed negligible.

Furthermore, the impact from barrier to movement during operations and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.

 pink-footed goose (non-breeding) = No AEOI

 waterbird assemblage (non-breeding) = No AEOI

As detailed in Table 5.57 Open ▸ , it can be concluded, beyond reasonable scientific doubt, that there is no risk of an adverse effect on the integrity of any of the SPAs listed in Table 5.57 Open ▸ or their qualifying features due to barrier to movement resulting from the operation and maintenance of the Array alone. There is no risk of undermining the Conservation Objectives of the sites considered due to the following:

given the Array falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no potential for the Array to impact on the distribution and extent of habitats within the SPA;
given the Array falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no potential for the Array to influence the distribution of birds within the SPA;
given the Array falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no potential for the Array to influence the structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species;
given the level of impact arising from barrier to movement from the Array area, there is no potential for the Array to influence the population of the species as a viable component of the site; and
given the level of impact arising from barrier to movement from the Array area, there is no potential for the Array to influence the disturbance of the species within the SPA.

Previous part

Next part

Tables ▼