Breeding Seabird Assemblage

Of the components of the seabird assemblage, kittiwake was the only species for which a potential LSE2 was identified. An assessment of the impact on kittiwake is provided above.
If Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm is excluded it was found there will be an adverse impact to kittiwake. Whilst there might be a negative effect on the kittiwake population, the magnitude of that effect is small. It is not considered a sufficiently large affect that it could be said to adversely affect the probability of kittiwake being maintained as a viable component of the seabird assemblage. Furthermore, as kittiwake is the only species being significantly impacted, it could not be said to adversely affect the probability of the total seabird assemblage being maintained.
However, if Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm is included, then it is likely that the kittiwake population will decline more significantly. Kittiwake were a significant portion of the assemblage at designation, consisting 21,170 pairs. As of the Seabirds Count census, this had declined to 5,150 pairs (Burnell et al., 2023). It is concluded that the magnitude of decline if Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm is included is sufficient that it could adversely affect kittiwake being maintained as a viable component of the assemblage. It is also concluded that it could negatively affect the total size of the breeding seabird assemblage population.
Therefore, it is concluded, beyond reasonable scientific doubt, that there is no AEOI to the seabird assemblage feature of the St Abb’s Head to Fast Castle SPA if Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm is excluded, but there is a potential AEOI to the seabird assemblage feature of the St Abb’s Head to Fast Castle SPA from the in-combination displacement impact of the Array and other developments including Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm.
However, it should be noted that Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm identified an AEOI ‘alone’ for the kittiwake feature of the St Abb’s Head to Fast Castle SPA (SSE Renewables, 2022). Therefore, should Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm proceed, then its impact on the kittiwake feature of the St Abb’s Head to Fast Castle SPA will be fully mitigated and should not be included in the Array ‘in-combination’ assessment.
On this basis, it is appropriate to not include Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm in the in-combination assessment for this particular site and feature, in which case there is no AEOI alone or in-combination for the seabird assemblage feature of the St Abb’s Head to Fast Castle SPA.

St Kilda SPA

Gannet

The combined mortality from displacement and collision (using a simple additive approach of the values in Table 5.111 Open ▸ and Table 5.153 Open ▸ ) is presented in Table 5.182 Open ▸ . The approach sums the collision and disturbance impacts, with potential for double counting inherent in that approach.

Table 5.182: Gannet Combined Displacement and Collision Mortalities Apportioned to the St Kilda SPA In-Combination Totals

Project(s)	Adult Mortalities
	Pre-Breeding Season		Breeding Season		Post-Breeding Season		Annual Total
	Low	High	Low	High	Low	High	Low	High
UK North Sea projects	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0
Green Volt Offshore Wind Farm	0.1	0.2	0.7	0.8	0.0	0.0	0.8	1.0
West of Orkney Wind Farm	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.5	1.0	0.6	1.0
Pentland Floating Offshore Wind	0.0	0.0	0.2	0.2	0.0	0.0	0.2	0.2
Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0
Ossian	0.0	0.0	0.9	2.0	0.2	0.6	1.2	2.6
TotalBerwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm	0.1	0.2	1.9	3.1	0.8	1.6	2.8	4.9

With a population of 120,580 breeding adults (Burnell et al., 2023), 2.8 to 4.9 additional mortalities represents a 0.002 to 0.004 percentage point increase in mortality rates. Therefore, it can be concluded, beyond reasonable scientific doubt, that there is no risk of an AEOI to the gannet feature of St Kilda SPA resulting from combined displacement and collision impacts from the Array in-combination with other developments.

Breeding Seabird Assemblage

Of the components of the seabird assemblage, gannet was the only species for which a potential LSE2 was identified for combined displacement and collision. As detailed above, there is expected to be no AEOI on the gannet feature. Therefore, it can also be concluded, beyond reasonable scientific doubt, that there is no AEOI to the seabird assemblage feature of the St Kilda SPA as a result of combined displacement and collision from the Array in combination with other developments.

Troup, Pennan and Lion’s Head SPA

Kittiwake

The combined mortality from displacement and collision (using a simple additive approach of the values in Table 5.113 Open ▸ and Table 5.155 Open ▸ ) is presented in Table 5.183 Open ▸ . The approach sums the collision and disturbance impacts, with potential for double counting inherent in that approach.

Table 5.183: Kittiwake Combined Displacement and Collision Mortalities Apportioned to the Troup, Pennan and Lion’s Head SPA In-Combination Totals

Project(s)	Adult Mortalities
	Pre-Breeding Season		Breeding Season		Post-Breeding Season		Annual Total
	Low	High	Low	High	Low	High	Low	High
UK North Sea projects	34.8	47.5	12.3	20.7	25.0	34.3	72.1	102.5
Green Volt Offshore Wind Farm	0.1	0.1	1.0	1.1	0.2	0.2	1.3	1.4
West of Orkney Wind Farm	1.2	1.4	0.5	0.6	0.9	1.1	2.6	3.1
Pentland Floating Offshore Wind	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0
SEP & DEP	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.1	0.1	0.1	0.1
Outer Dowsing	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	1.8	1.8
Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm	5.4	8.8	2.2	3.5	3.0	6.1	10.6	18.4
Ossian	0.1	0.3	0.7	2.8	0.1	0.2	0.8	3.3
Total (Including Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm)	36.2	49.3	14.4	25.2	26.3	35.9	78.7	112.3
Total (Excluding Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm)	30.8	40.5	12.2	21.7	23.3	29.8	68.1	93.9

With a population of 21,232 breeding adults (Burnell et al., 2023), 68.1 to 112.3 additional mortalities represents a 0.321 to 0.529 percentage point increase in mortality rates. Therefore, PVA has been carried out both with and without Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm and for the high and low scenarios, to further assess the total in-combination impact.
The PVA results are summarised in Table 5.184 Open ▸ . Full details are available in appendix 3B.

Table 5.184: Summary of PVA Results for In-Combination Displacement and Collision Impacts on Kittiwake at the Troup, Pennan and Lion’s Head SPA

Scenario	Approach	Adult Mortality	Citation Population (Breeding Adults)	Recent Population (Burnell et al., 2023) (Breeding Adults)	Median Unimpacted Population After 35 Years	Median Impacted Population After 35 Years	Median CGR	Median CPS
Including Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm	Low	78.7	63,200	21,232	20,017	17,119	0.996	0.854
Including Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm	High	112.3				16,014	0.994	0.798
Excluding Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm	Low	68.1				17,495	0.996	0.872
Excluding Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm	High	93.9				16,621	0.995	0.828

The kittiwake population of the Troup, Pennan and Lion’s Head SPA has decreased between its citation level of 63,200 breeding adults to recent counts of 21,232 breeding adults (Burnell et al., 2023).
The median CGR is 0.994 to 0.996 which indicates the population growth rate declines by 0.4% to 0.6% compared to the counterfactual. After 35 years (the expected lifespan of the Array), the CPS ranges from 0.798 to 0.872. Whilst this level of impact is small, it is not negligible and in the context of a population that is already declining, the additional mortality from the Array in combination with other projects and plans would appear to have the potential to adversely affect the likelihood of the site meeting its conservation objectives for all assessment scenarios and both with and without Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm.
Therefore, it is concluded that there is a potential AEOI to the kittiwake feature of the Troup, Pennan and Lion’s Head SPA as a result of displacement and collision impacts from the Array in-combination with other developments.

Breeding Seabird Assemblage

Of the components of the seabird assemblage, kittiwake was the only species for which a potential LSE2 was identified for combined displacement and collision risk. As detailed above, there is expected to be a significant impact on the kittiwake population. The kittiwake population at citation was significantly higher than the current population (Burnell et al., 2023). Whilst the magnitude of the impact would not be deemed sufficient to risk entirely losing kittiwake as a viable component of the assemblage, the decline is sufficient to adversely affect the total population size of the overall assemblage.
Therefore, it is concluded that there is a potential AEOI to the seabird assemblage feature of the Troup, Pennan and Lion’s Head SPA as a result of the impact of combined displacement and collision from the Array in-combination with other developments.

Conclusion

It is concluded that the Array area in-combination with other plans and projects would have an adverse effects on certain qualifying features for several sites, as a result of the combined impact of collision risk and displacement during the operation and maintenance phase, which could therefore undermine the conservation objectives of the SPAs listed in Table 5‑18. An assessment of the impact of collision risk and displacement against each relevant conservation objective is presented in Table 5‑18, where the justifications and supporting evidence are the same for more than one conservation objective, the assessments have been grouped.

Table 5.185: Conclusions Against the Conservation Objectives of SPAs for In-Combination Combined Displacement and Collision During the Operation and Maintenance Phase

SPA	Feature	Target/Conservation Objectives	Justification	Conclusion
Buchan Ness to Collieston Coast SPA	 breeding seabird assemblage (due to potential impact on breeding kittiwake).	 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 associated ZoI falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for the combined impact of collision risk and disturbance and displacement during all phases of the Array in-combination with other plans and projects to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, the combined impact of collision risk and disturbance and displacement associated with the Array in-combination with other plans and projects 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.	 seabird 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 in-combination impact level experienced during operations and maintenance on the named seabird assemblage component, kittiwake, at Buchan Ness to Collieston Coast SPA surpassed the advised threshold of 0.02 percentage points for increased mortality, as recommended by NatureScot (2023k). A PVA was therefore required to understand if the impact experienced would have detrimental effects on the populations. The PVA results for kittiwake ( Table 5.159 Open ▸ ) concluded that the in-combination impact from disturbance and combined collision risk and displacement during the operational and maintenance phase would result in the population growth rate decline of 0.5% or less. After 35 years (the expected lifespan of the Array), the CPS ranged from 0.828 to 0.876 depending on if Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm was included or excluded. The impacted population therefore would be between 12.4% to 17.2% smaller than the unimpacted population. These results indicate that the combined impact of collision and displacement from the Array in combination with other projects is of a magnitude that can be said to adversely affect the likelihood of the kittiwake population being maintained as a viable component of the Buchan Ness to Collieston Coast SPA. Consequently, it can be concluded that there is a risk during operation and maintenance, of the combined impact of collision and displacement significantly disrupting the named seabird assemblage component, kittiwake, populations as a qualifying species of the Buchan Ness to Collieston Coast SPA. Therefore, the combined impact of collision and displacement during operation and maintenance may 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 combined impact from collision and displacement during operation and maintenance may influence the long-term maintenance of the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.	 seabird assemblage = AEOI cannot be ruled out
East Caithness Cliffs SPA	 kittiwake (breeding); and  breeding seabird assemblage (due to potential impact on above species).	 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 associated ZoI falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for the combined impact of collision risk and disturbance and displacement during all phases of the Array in-combination with other plans and projects to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, the combined impact of collision risk and disturbance and displacement associated with the Array in-combination with other plans and projects 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.	 kittiwake = No AEOI  seabird 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 in-combination impact level experienced during operations and maintenance on kittiwake at East Caithness Cliffs SPA surpassed the advised threshold of 0.02 percentage points for increased mortality, as recommended by NatureScot (2023k). A PVA was therefore required to understand if the impact experienced would have detrimental effects on the populations. The PVA results ( Table 5.161 Open ▸ ) concluded that the in-combination impact from the combined impact of collision risk and displacement during the operational and maintenance phase would result in the population growth rate decline of no more than 1%. After 35 years (the expected lifespan of the Array), the CPS ranged from 0.687 to 0.784 depending on if Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm with included or excluded. The impacted population therefore would be between 21.6% to 31.3% smaller than the unimpacted population. These results indicate that the combined impact of collision risk and displacement from the Array in combination with other projects during operation and maintenance would be of a magnitude that can be said to adversely affect the likelihood of the kittiwake population being maintained as a viable component of the East Caithness Cliffs SPA. The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance to seabird assemblage was deemed to be of significant impact due to the large decline of kittiwake populations. Consequently, it can be concluded that there is a risk during operations and maintenance of the combined impact of collision risk and displacement significantly disrupting kittiwake, populations as a qualifying species of the East Caithness Cliffs SPA. The impact from collision and displacement during operation and maintenance may also influence the long-term maintenance of the distribution of the assessed qualifying features within the site.	 kittiwake = AEOI  seabird assemblage = AEOI cannot be ruled out
Farne Islands SPA	 breeding seabird assemblage (due to potential impact on breeding kittiwake).	 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 associated ZoI falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for the combined impact of collision risk and disturbance and displacement during all phases of the Array in-combination with other plans and projects to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, the combined impact of collision risk and disturbance and displacement associated with the Array in-combination with other plans and projects 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.	 seabird assemblage = 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 in-combination impact level experienced during operations and maintenance on the named seabird assemblage component, kittiwake, at Farne Island SPA surpassed the advised threshold of 0.02 percentage points for increased mortality, as recommended by NatureScot (2023k). A PVA was therefore required to understand if the impact experienced would have detrimental effects on the populations. The PVA results for kittiwake ( Table 5.163 Open ▸ ) concluded that the in-combination impact from the combined impact of collision and displacement during the operational and maintenance phase would result in the population growth rate decline of less than 0.7%. After 35 years (the expected lifespan of the Array), the CPS ranged from 0.768 to 0.936 depending on if Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm with included or excluded. The impacted population therefore would be between 6.40% to 23.2% smaller than the unimpacted population. Whilst there might be a negative effect on the kittiwake population, the magnitude of that effect is small. It is not considered a sufficiently large affect that it could be said to adversely affect the probability of kittiwake being maintained as a viable component of the seabird assemblage. Furthermore, as kittiwake is the only species being significantly impacted, it could not be said to adversely affect the probability of the total seabird assemblage being maintained. Therefore, the combined impact of collision risk and displacement 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 combined impact from collision risk and displacement during operation and maintenance will not influence the long-term maintenance of the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.	 seabird assemblage = No AEOI
Flamborough and Filey Coast SPA	 kittiwake (breeding);  gannet (breeding); and  breeding seabird assemblage (due to potential impact on above species).	 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 associated ZoI falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for the combined impact of collision risk and disturbance and displacement during all phases of the Array in-combination with other plans and projects to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, the combined impact of collision risk and disturbance and displacement associated with the Array in-combination with other plans and projects 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.	 kittiwake = No AEOI  gannet = No AEOI  seabird assemblage = 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 in-combination impact level experienced during operations and maintenance on kittiwake at Flamborough and Filey Coast SPA surpassed the advised threshold of 0.02 percentage points for increased mortality, as recommended by NatureScot (2023k). A PVA was therefore required to understand if the impact experienced would have detrimental effects on the populations. The PVA results for kittiwake ( Table 5.165 Open ▸ .) concluded that the in-combination impact from the combined impact of collision risk and displacement during the operational and maintenance phase would result in the population growth rate decline of less than 0.7%. After 35 years (the expected lifespan of the Array), the CPS ranged from 0.765 to 0.797 depending on if Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm with included or excluded. The impacted population therefore would be between 20.3% to 23.5% smaller than the unimpacted population. Similarly, the in-combination impact level experienced during operations and maintenance on gannet, at Flamborough and Filey Coast SPA surpassed the advised threshold of 0.02 percentage points for increased mortality, as recommended by NatureScot (2023k). A PVA was therefore required to understand if the impact experienced would have detrimental effects on the populations. The PVA results for gannet ( Table 5.167 Open ▸ ) concluded that the in-combination impact from the combined impact of collision risk and displacement during the operational and maintenance phase would result in the population growth rate decline of no more than 2.2%. After 35 years (the expected lifespan of the Array), the CPS ranged from 0.445 to 0.564. The impacted population therefore would be 43.6% to 55.5% smaller than the unimpacted population. This result does not take into account macro avoidance rates and so if applied, the impact would be sufficiently less. These results indicate that the impact of combined collision and displacement from the Array in combination with other projects during operations and maintenance is of a magnitude that can be said to adversely affect the likelihood of kittiwake and gannet populations being maintained as a viable component of the Flamborough and Filey Coast SPA. In addition, as the combined impact from collision and displacement on kittiwake and gannet populations was assessed as adverse, the risk to the seabird assemblage has been deemed adverse during operation and maintenance. Therefore, the combined impact of collision risk and displacement during operation and maintenance may 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 combined impact from collision risk and displacement during operation and maintenance may influence the long-term maintenance of the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.	 kittiwake = AEOI  gannet = AEOI  seabird assemblage = AEOI cannot be ruled out
Forth Islands SPA	 gannet (breeding); and  breeding seabird assemblage (due to potential impact on above species and breeding kittiwake).	 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 associated ZoI falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for the combined impact of collision risk and disturbance and displacement during all phases of the Array in-combination with other plans and projects to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, the combined impact of collision risk and disturbance and displacement associated with the Array in-combination with other plans and projects 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.	 gannet = No AEOI  seabird 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 in-combination impact level experienced during operations and maintenance on gannet at Forth Islands SPA surpassed the advised threshold of 0.02 percentage points for increased mortality, as recommended by NatureScot (2023k). A PVA was therefore required to understand if the impact experienced would have detrimental effects on the populations. The PVA results for gannet ( Table 5.171 Open ▸ ) concluded that the in-combination impact from combined collision risk and displacement during the operational and maintenance phase would result in the population growth rate decline of less than 0.9%. After 35 years (the expected lifespan of the Array), the CPS ranged from 0.712 to 0.822 depending on if Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm was included or excluded. The impacted population therefore would be between 17.8% to 28.8% smaller than the unimpacted population. The magnitude of impact is considered sufficient to create an impact that could be said to have an adverse effect on the population continuing to meet the site’s conservation objectives. These results indicate that the combined impact of collision and displacement from the Array in combination with other projects during operations and maintenance is of a magnitude that can be said to adversely affect the likelihood of gannet populations being maintained as a viable component of the Forth Islands SPA. In addition to the named qualifying feature, kittiwake was assessed due to being a named seabird assemblage component of the site. Like gannet, impacts surpassed the 0.02 threshold and so a PVA was carried out. PVA Results for kittiwake ( Table 5.169 Open ▸ .) showed that the population would be 14.6% to 35.5% smaller than the unimpacted population. As the impact from combined collision and displacement on gannet populations was assessed as adverse, with impacts to kittiwake populations seen as of a magnitude to cause decline, the overall risk to seabird assemblage has been deemed as adverse during operation and maintenance. Therefore, the combined impact from collision risk and displacement during operation and maintenance may 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 combined impact from collision risk and displacement during operation and maintenance may influence the long-term maintenance of the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.	 gannet = AEOI cannot be ruled out  seabird assemblage = AEOI cannot be ruled out
Fowlsheugh SPA	 kittiwake (breeding); and  breeding seabird assemblage (due to potential impact on above species).	 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 associated ZoI falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for the combined impact of collision risk and disturbance and displacement during all phases of the Array in-combination with other plans and projects to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, the combined impact of collision risk and disturbance and displacement associated with the Array in-combination with other plans and projects 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.	 kittiwake = No AEOI  seabird 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 in-combination impact level experienced during operations and maintenance on kittiwake at Fowlsheugh SPA surpassed the advised threshold of 0.02 percentage points for increased mortality, as recommended by NatureScot (2023k). A PVA was therefore required to understand if the impact experienced would have detrimental effects on the populations. The PVA results for kittiwake ( Table 5.173 Open ▸ .) concluded that the in-combination impact from combined collision and displacement during the operational and maintenance phase would result in the population growth rate decline of no more than 1.1%. After 35 years (the expected lifespan of the Array), the CPS ranged from 0.666 to 0.862 depending on if Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm was included or excluded. The impacted population therefore would be between 13.8% to 33.4% smaller than the unimpacted population. These results indicate that the combined impact of collision risk and displacement from the Array in combination with other projects during operation and maintenance would be of a magnitude that can be said to adversely affect the likelihood of the kittiwake population being maintained as a viable component of the Fowlsheugh SPA. In addition, as the impact from collision and displacement on kittiwake populations was assessed as adverse, the risk to the seabird assemblage has been deemed adverse during operation and maintenance due to the significant decrease. Therefore, the combined impact of collision risk and displacement during operation and maintenance may prevent the conservation objectives from being achieved for the kittiwake and seabird assemblage as viable components of the site. Furthermore, the impact from collision risk and displacement during operation and maintenance may therefore influence the long-term maintenance of the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site. As set out in Table 5.115 Open ▸ , razorbill was also identified as a named feature of the Fowlsheugh SPA seabird assemblage, and had potential AEOI for in-combination disturbance and displacement.	 kittiwake = AEOI  seabird assemblage = AEOI cannot be ruled out
Hermaness, Saxa Vord and Valla Field SPA	 gannet (breeding); and  breeding seabird assemblage (due to potential impact on above species).	 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 associated ZoI falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for the combined impact of collision risk and disturbance and displacement during all phases of the Array in-combination with other plans and projects to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, the combined impact of collision risk and disturbance and displacement associated with the Array in-combination with other plans and projects 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.	 gannet = No AEOI  seabird 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 in-combination impact level experienced during operations and maintenance on gannet at Hermaness, Saxa Vord and Valla Field SPA surpassed the advised threshold of 0.02 percentage points for increased mortality, as recommended by NatureScot (2023k). A PVA was therefore required to understand if the impact experienced would have detrimental effects on the populations. The PVA results for gaennet ( Table 5.175 Open ▸ ) concluded that the in-combination impact from combined collision risk and displacement during the operational and maintenance phase would result in the population growth rate decline of no more than 0.2%. After 35 years (the expected lifespan of the Array), the CPS ranged from 0.915 to 0.939 depending on if Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm was included or excluded. The impacted population therefore would be between 6.1% to 8.5% smaller than the unimpacted population. The counterfactual of population growth rate results indicate that the impact levels experienced during operation and maintenance would not adversely affect gannet at Hermaness, Saxa Vord and Valla Field SPA, as the maximum estimated change was a reduction in growth rate by less than 0.2%. Such a decrease indicates that this level of impact would not adversely affect the population and would likely remain undetectable against natural population fluctuations. Furthermore, it is not expected to significantly alter the background mortality rate. These results indicate that the impact of collision risk and displacement from the Array in combination with other projects during operation and maintenance would not be of magnitude that can be said to adversely affect the likelihood of the gannet population being maintained as a viable component of the Hermaness, Saxa Vord and Valla Field SPA. The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance to seabird assemblage was deemed to be of negligible impact; only gannet was deemed to have any potential LSE2 ( Table 3.1 Open ▸ ). As the impact from collision risk and displacement on gannet populations was assessed as not adverse, the risk to the seabird assemblage has been deemed not adverse. Therefore, the combined impact from collision risk and displacement during operation and maintenance will not influence the long-term maintenance of the distribution of the assessed gannet and seabird assemblage within the site.	 gannet = No AEOI  seabird assemblage = No AEOI
North Caithness Cliffs SPA	 breeding seabird assemblage (due to potential impact on breeding kittiwake).	 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 associated ZoI falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for the combined impact of collision risk and disturbance and displacement during all phases of the Array in-combination with other plans and projects to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, the combined impact of collision risk and disturbance and displacement associated with the Array in-combination with other plans and projects 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.	 seabird 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 in-combination impact level experienced during operations and maintenance on the named seabird assemblage component, kittiwake, at North Caithness Cliffs SPA surpassed the advised threshold of 0.02 percentage points for increased mortality, as recommended by NatureScot (2023k). A PVA was therefore required to understand if the impact experienced would have detrimental effects on the populations. The PVA results ( Table 5.177 Open ▸ ) concluded that the in-combination impact from collision risk and displacement during the operational and maintenance phase would result in the population growth rate decline of no more than 0.8%. After 35 years (the expected lifespan of the Array), the CPS ranged from 0.740 to 0.813 depending on if Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm was included or excluded. The impacted population therefore would be between 18.7% to 26.0% smaller than the unimpacted population. The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance to seabird assemblage was therefore deemed to be adverse due to the significant decline experienced by kittiwake populations. Therefore, the combined impact from collision risk and displacement during operation and maintenance may influence the population as a viable component of the site and may influence the long-term maintenance of the distribution of the assessed seabird assemblage within the site.	 seabird assemblage = AEOI cannot be ruled out
Noss SPA	 gannet (breeding); and  breeding seabird assemblage (due to potential impact on above species).	 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 associated ZoI falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for the combined impact of collision risk and disturbance and displacement during all phases of the Array in-combination with other plans and projects to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, the combined impact of collision risk and disturbance and displacement associated with the Array in-combination with other plans and projects 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.	 gannet = No AEOI  seabird 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 in-combination impact level experienced during operations and maintenance on gannet at Noss surpassed the advised threshold of 0.02 percentage points for increased mortality, as recommended by NatureScot (2023k). A PVA was therefore required to understand if the impact experienced would have detrimental effects on the populations. The PVA results for gannet ( Table 5.179 Open ▸ ) concluded that the in-combination impact from collision and displacement during the operational and maintenance phase would result in the population growth rate decline of no more than 0.2%. After 35 years (the expected lifespan of the Array), the CPS ranged from 0.918 to 0.944 depending on if Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm was included or excluded. The impacted population therefore would be between 5.6% to 8.2% smaller than the unimpacted population. The counterfactual of population growth rate results indicate that the impact levels experienced during operation and maintenance would not adversely affect gannet at Noss SPA, as the maximum estimated change was a reduction in growth rate by less than 0.2%. Such a decrease indicates that this level of impact would not adversely affect the population and would likely remain undetectable against natural population fluctuations. Furthermore, it is not expected to significantly alter the background mortality rate. These results indicate that the impact of collision risk and displacement from the Array in combination with other projects during operation and maintenance would not be of magnitude that can be said to adversely affect the likelihood of the gannet population being maintained as a viable component of the Noss SPA. The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance to seabird assemblage was deemed to be of negligible impact; only gannet was deemed to have any potential LSE2 ( Table 3.1 Open ▸ ). As the impact from collision risk and displacement on gannet populations was assessed as not adverse, the risk to the seabird assemblage has been deemed not adverse for operation and maintenance. Therefore, the combined impact of collision risk and displacement 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. The impact from collision risk and displacement during operation and maintenance will not influence the long-term maintenance of the distribution of the assessed gannet and seabird assemblage within the site.	 gannet = No AEOI  seabird assemblage = No AEOI
St Abb's Head to Fast Castle SPA	 breeding seabird assemblage (due to potential impact on breeding kittiwake).	 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 associated ZoI falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for the combined impact of collision risk and disturbance and displacement during all phases of the Array in-combination with other plans and projects to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, the combined impact of collision risk and disturbance and displacement associated with the Array in-combination with other plans and projects 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.	 seabird 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 in-combination impact level experienced during operations and maintenance on the named seabird assemblage component, kittiwake, at St Abb's Head to Fast Castle SPA surpassed the advised threshold of 0.02 percentage points for increased mortality, as recommended by NatureScot (2023k). A PVA was therefore required to understand if the impact experienced would have detrimental effects on the populations. The PVA results for kittiwake excluding Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm ( Table 5.181 Open ▸ .) concluded that the in-combination impact from collision risk and displacement during the operational and maintenance phase would result in the population growth rate decline of no more than 0.4%. After 35 years (the expected lifespan of the Array), the CPS excluding Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm ranged from 0.869 to 0.911 depending on the approach considered. The impacted population therefore would be between 8.9% to 13.1% smaller than the unimpacted population. However, the PVA results for kittiwake including Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm ( Table 5.181 Open ▸ ) concluded that the in-combination impact from collision risk and displacement during the operational and maintenance phase would result in the population growth rate decline of up to 4.6%. After 35 years (the expected lifespan of the Array), the CPS including Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm ranged from 0.354 to 0.180 depending on the approach considered. The impacted population therefore would be between 64.6% to 82.0% smaller than the unimpacted population. Given that the kittiwake population of the St Abb’s Head to Fast Castle SPA has decreased significantly from its citation level, the magnitude of impact is sufficient to create an impact that could be said to have an adverse effect on the population. The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance to seabird assemblage was deemed to be adverse if Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm impacts are included. Collision risk and displacement during operation and maintenance if Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm is included, may prevent the conservation objectives from being achieved for the assessed qualifying features and the population of the species as viable components of the site. If Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm impacts are included, the impact from collision risk and displacement during operation and maintenance may influence the long-term maintenance of the distribution of the assessed seabird assemblage within the site. For this assessment, it is determined that the impact from Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm should be excluded when considering AEOI. This is because Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm identified an AEOI ‘alone’ for the kittiwake feature of the St Abb’s Head to Fast Castle SPA (SSE Renewables, 2022). Therefore, should Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm proceed, then its impact on the kittiwake feature of the St Abb’s Head to Fast Castle SPA will be required to be fully compensated and should not be included in the Array ‘in-combination’ assessment.
St Kilda SPA	 gannet (breeding); and  breeding seabird assemblage (due to potential impact on above species).	 to ensure that the qualifying features of St Kilda SPA and the seas off St Kilda SPA are in favourable condition and make an appropriate contribution to achieving favourable conservation status;  to ensure that the integrity of St Kilda SPA and the seas off St Kilda SPA is restored in the context of environmental changes by meeting objectives 2a, 2b and 2c for each qualifying feature: – the supporting habitats and processes relevant to qualifying features and their prey/food resources are maintained, or where appropriate restored, at St Kilda SPA and/or seas off St Kilda SPA.	As the associated ZoI falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for the combined impact of collision risk and disturbance and displacement during all phases of the Array in-combination with other plans and projects to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, the combined impact of collision risk and disturbance and displacement associated with the Array in-combination with other plans and projects 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.	 gannet = No AEOI  seabird assemblage = No AEOI
 to ensure that the qualifying features of St Kilda SPA and the seas off St Kilda SPA are in favourable condition and make an appropriate contribution to achieving favourable conservation status;  to ensure that the integrity of St Kilda SPA and the seas off St Kilda SPA is restored in the context of environmental changes by meeting objectives 2a, 2b and 2c for each qualifying feature: – the populations of qualifying features are viable components of St Kilda SPA and seas off St Kilda SPA; and – the distributions of the qualifying features throughout St Kilda SPA and seas off St Kilda SPA are maintained by avoiding significant disturbance of the species.	The in-combination impact level experienced during operations and maintenance on gannet at St Kilda SPA remains below the advised threshold of 0.02 percentage points for increased mortality, as recommended by NatureScot (2023k) ( Table 5.182 Open ▸ ). Below this threshold 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 operation and maintenance, of the combined impact of collision risk and displacement from the Array in-combination with other plans and projects from significantly disrupting gannet populations as a qualifying species of the St Kilda SPA. In addition, as the impact from collision risk and displacement on gannet populations was assessed as negligible, the risk to the seabird assemblage has been deemed negligible. Therefore, collision risk and displacement 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 combined impact from collision risk and displacement operation and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species throughout St Kilda SPA.	 gannet = No AEOI  seabird assemblage = No AEOI
Troup, Pennan and Lion's Heads SPA	 kittiwake (breeding); and  breeding seabird assemblage (due to potential impact on above species).	 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 associated ZoI falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for the combined impact of collision risk and disturbance and displacement during all phases of the Array in-combination with other plans and projects to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species. Therefore, the combined impact of collision risk and disturbance and displacement associated with the Array in-combination with other plans and projects 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.	 kittiwake = No AEOI  seabird 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 in-combination impact level experienced during operations and maintenance on kittiwake at Troup, Pennan and Lion's Heads SPA surpassed the advised threshold of 0.02 percentage points for increased mortality, as recommended by NatureScot (2023k). A PVA was therefore required to understand if the impact experienced would have detrimental effects on the populations. The PVA results ( Table 5.184 Open ▸ .) concluded that the in-combination impact from collision risk and displacement during the operational and maintenance phase would result in the population growth rate decline of no more than 0.6%. After 35 years (the expected lifespan of the Array), the CPS ranged from 0.798 to 0.872 depending on if Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm was included or excluded. The impacted population therefore would be between 12.8% to 20.2% smaller than the unimpacted population. These results indicate that the impact of collision risk and displacement from the Array in combination with other projects during operation and maintenance would be of magnitude that can be said to adversely affect the likelihood of the kittiwake population being maintained as a viable component of the Troup, Pennan and Lion's Heads SPA. The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance to seabird assemblage was deemed to be of adverse due to the significant decline estimated; only kittiwake was deemed to have any potential LSE2 ( Table 3.1 Open ▸ ). As the impact from collision risk and displacement on kittiwake populations was assessed as adverse, the risk to the seabird assemblage has been deemed adverse for operation and maintenance. Therefore, the impact from collision risk and displacement during operation and maintenance will have an adverse effect on the population as a viable component of the site and will influence the long-term maintenance of the distribution of the assessed kittiwake and seabird assemblage within the site.	 kittiwake = AEOI  seabird assemblage = AEOI cannot be ruled out

SPA

Feature

Target/Conservation Objectives

Justification

Conclusion

Buchan Ness to Collieston Coast SPA

 breeding seabird assemblage (due to potential impact on breeding kittiwake).

 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 associated ZoI falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no pathway for the combined impact of collision risk and disturbance and displacement during all phases of the Array in-combination with other plans and projects to result in adverse effects on the habitats of the qualifying species.

Therefore, the combined impact of collision risk and disturbance and displacement associated with the Array in-combination with other plans and projects 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.

 seabird 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 in-combination impact level experienced during operations and maintenance on the named seabird assemblage component, kittiwake, at Buchan Ness to Collieston Coast SPA surpassed the advised threshold of 0.02 percentage points for increased mortality, as recommended by NatureScot (2023k). A PVA was therefore required to understand if the impact experienced would have detrimental effects on the populations.

The PVA results for kittiwake ( Table 5.159 Open ▸ ) concluded that the in-combination impact from disturbance and combined collision risk and displacement during the operational and maintenance phase would result in the population growth rate decline of 0.5% or less. After 35 years (the expected lifespan of the Array), the CPS ranged from 0.828 to 0.876 depending on if Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm was included or excluded. The impacted population therefore would be between 12.4% to 17.2% smaller than the unimpacted population.

These results indicate that the combined impact of collision and displacement from the Array in combination with other projects is of a magnitude that can be said to adversely affect the likelihood of the kittiwake population being maintained as a viable component of the Buchan Ness to Collieston Coast SPA.

Consequently, it can be concluded that there is a risk during operation and maintenance, of the combined impact of collision and displacement significantly disrupting the named seabird assemblage component, kittiwake, populations as a qualifying species of the Buchan Ness to Collieston Coast SPA.

Therefore, the combined impact of collision and displacement during operation and maintenance may 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 combined impact from collision and displacement during operation and maintenance may influence the long-term maintenance of the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.

 seabird assemblage = AEOI cannot be ruled out

East Caithness Cliffs SPA

 kittiwake (breeding); and

 breeding seabird assemblage (due to potential impact on above species).

 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.

 kittiwake = No AEOI

 seabird 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 in-combination impact level experienced during operations and maintenance on kittiwake at East Caithness Cliffs SPA surpassed the advised threshold of 0.02 percentage points for increased mortality, as recommended by NatureScot (2023k). A PVA was therefore required to understand if the impact experienced would have detrimental effects on the populations.

The PVA results ( Table 5.161 Open ▸ ) concluded that the in-combination impact from the combined impact of collision risk and displacement during the operational and maintenance phase would result in the population growth rate decline of no more than 1%. After 35 years (the expected lifespan of the Array), the CPS ranged from 0.687 to 0.784 depending on if Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm with included or excluded. The impacted population therefore would be between 21.6% to 31.3% smaller than the unimpacted population.

These results indicate that the combined impact of collision risk and displacement from the Array in combination with other projects during operation and maintenance would be of a magnitude that can be said to adversely affect the likelihood of the kittiwake population being maintained as a viable component of the East Caithness Cliffs SPA.

The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance to seabird assemblage was deemed to be of significant impact due to the large decline of kittiwake populations.

Consequently, it can be concluded that there is a risk during operations and maintenance of the combined impact of collision risk and displacement significantly disrupting kittiwake, populations as a qualifying species of the East Caithness Cliffs SPA. The impact from collision and displacement during operation and maintenance may also influence the long-term maintenance of the distribution of the assessed qualifying features within the site.

 kittiwake = AEOI

 seabird assemblage = AEOI cannot be ruled out

Farne Islands SPA

 breeding seabird assemblage (due to potential impact on breeding kittiwake).

 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.

 seabird assemblage = No AEOI

– the populations of each of the qualifying features; and

– the distribution of qualifying features within the site.

The in-combination impact level experienced during operations and maintenance on the named seabird assemblage component, kittiwake, at Farne Island SPA surpassed the advised threshold of 0.02 percentage points for increased mortality, as recommended by NatureScot (2023k). A PVA was therefore required to understand if the impact experienced would have detrimental effects on the populations.

The PVA results for kittiwake ( Table 5.163 Open ▸ ) concluded that the in-combination impact from the combined impact of collision and displacement during the operational and maintenance phase would result in the population growth rate decline of less than 0.7%. After 35 years (the expected lifespan of the Array), the CPS ranged from 0.768 to 0.936 depending on if Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm with included or excluded. The impacted population therefore would be between 6.40% to 23.2% smaller than the unimpacted population. Whilst there might be a negative effect on the kittiwake population, the magnitude of that effect is small. It is not considered a sufficiently large affect that it could be said to adversely affect the probability of kittiwake being maintained as a viable component of the seabird assemblage.

Furthermore, as kittiwake is the only species being significantly impacted, it could not be said to adversely affect the probability of the total seabird assemblage being maintained.

Furthermore, the combined impact from collision risk and displacement during operation and maintenance will not influence the long-term maintenance of the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.

 seabird assemblage = No AEOI

Flamborough and Filey Coast SPA

 kittiwake (breeding);

 gannet (breeding); and

 breeding seabird assemblage (due to potential impact on above species).

– 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.

 kittiwake = No AEOI

 gannet = No AEOI

 seabird assemblage = No AEOI

– the populations of each of the qualifying features; and

– the distribution of qualifying features within the site.

The in-combination impact level experienced during operations and maintenance on kittiwake at Flamborough and Filey Coast SPA surpassed the advised threshold of 0.02 percentage points for increased mortality, as recommended by NatureScot (2023k). A PVA was therefore required to understand if the impact experienced would have detrimental effects on the populations.

The PVA results for kittiwake ( Table 5.165 Open ▸ .) concluded that the in-combination impact from the combined impact of collision risk and displacement during the operational and maintenance phase would result in the population growth rate decline of less than 0.7%. After 35 years (the expected lifespan of the Array), the CPS ranged from 0.765 to 0.797 depending on if Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm with included or excluded. The impacted population therefore would be between 20.3% to 23.5% smaller than the unimpacted population.

Similarly, the in-combination impact level experienced during operations and maintenance on gannet, at Flamborough and Filey Coast SPA surpassed the advised threshold of 0.02 percentage points for increased mortality, as recommended by NatureScot (2023k). A PVA was therefore required to understand if the impact experienced would have detrimental effects on the populations.

The PVA results for gannet ( Table 5.167 Open ▸ ) concluded that the in-combination impact from the combined impact of collision risk and displacement during the operational and maintenance phase would result in the population growth rate decline of no more than 2.2%. After 35 years (the expected lifespan of the Array), the CPS ranged from 0.445 to 0.564. The impacted population therefore would be 43.6% to 55.5% smaller than the unimpacted population. This result does not take into account macro avoidance rates and so if applied, the impact would be sufficiently less.

These results indicate that the impact of combined collision and displacement from the Array in combination with other projects during operations and maintenance is of a magnitude that can be said to adversely affect the likelihood of kittiwake and gannet populations being maintained as a viable component of the Flamborough and Filey Coast SPA.

In addition, as the combined impact from collision and displacement on kittiwake and gannet populations was assessed as adverse, the risk to the seabird assemblage has been deemed adverse during operation and maintenance.

Therefore, the combined impact of collision risk and displacement during operation and maintenance may 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 combined impact from collision risk and displacement during operation and maintenance may influence the long-term maintenance of the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.

 kittiwake = AEOI

 gannet = AEOI

 seabird assemblage = AEOI cannot be ruled out

Forth Islands SPA

 gannet (breeding); and

 breeding seabird assemblage (due to potential impact on above species and breeding kittiwake).

 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.

 gannet = No AEOI

 seabird 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 in-combination impact level experienced during operations and maintenance on gannet at Forth Islands SPA surpassed the advised threshold of 0.02 percentage points for increased mortality, as recommended by NatureScot (2023k). A PVA was therefore required to understand if the impact experienced would have detrimental effects on the populations.

The PVA results for gannet ( Table 5.171 Open ▸ ) concluded that the in-combination impact from combined collision risk and displacement during the operational and maintenance phase would result in the population growth rate decline of less than 0.9%. After 35 years (the expected lifespan of the Array), the CPS ranged from 0.712 to 0.822 depending on if Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm was included or excluded. The impacted population therefore would be between 17.8% to 28.8% smaller than the unimpacted population. The magnitude of impact is considered sufficient to create an impact that could be said to have an adverse effect on the population continuing to meet the site’s conservation objectives.

These results indicate that the combined impact of collision and displacement from the Array in combination with other projects during operations and maintenance is of a magnitude that can be said to adversely affect the likelihood of gannet populations being maintained as a viable component of the Forth Islands SPA.

In addition to the named qualifying feature, kittiwake was assessed due to being a named seabird assemblage component of the site. Like gannet, impacts surpassed the 0.02 threshold and so a PVA was carried out.

PVA Results for kittiwake ( Table 5.169 Open ▸ .) showed that the population would be 14.6% to 35.5% smaller than the unimpacted population. As the impact from combined collision and displacement on gannet populations was assessed as adverse, with impacts to kittiwake populations seen as of a magnitude to cause decline, the overall risk to seabird assemblage has been deemed as adverse during operation and maintenance.

Therefore, the combined impact from collision risk and displacement during operation and maintenance may prevent the conservation objectives from being achieved for the assessed qualifying features and the population of the species as viable components of the site.

 gannet = AEOI cannot be ruled out

 seabird assemblage = AEOI cannot be ruled out

Fowlsheugh SPA

 kittiwake (breeding); and

 breeding seabird assemblage (due to potential impact on above species).

 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.

 kittiwake = No AEOI

 seabird 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 in-combination impact level experienced during operations and maintenance on kittiwake at Fowlsheugh SPA surpassed the advised threshold of 0.02 percentage points for increased mortality, as recommended by NatureScot (2023k). A PVA was therefore required to understand if the impact experienced would have detrimental effects on the populations.

The PVA results for kittiwake ( Table 5.173 Open ▸ .) concluded that the in-combination impact from combined collision and displacement during the operational and maintenance phase would result in the population growth rate decline of no more than 1.1%. After 35 years (the expected lifespan of the Array), the CPS ranged from 0.666 to 0.862 depending on if Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm was included or excluded. The impacted population therefore would be between 13.8% to 33.4% smaller than the unimpacted population.

In addition, as the impact from collision and displacement on kittiwake populations was assessed as adverse, the risk to the seabird assemblage has been deemed adverse during operation and maintenance due to the significant decrease.

Therefore, the combined impact of collision risk and displacement during operation and maintenance may prevent the conservation objectives from being achieved for the kittiwake and seabird assemblage as viable components of the site.

Furthermore, the impact from collision risk and displacement during operation and maintenance may therefore influence the long-term maintenance of the distribution of the assessed qualifying species within the site.

As set out in Table 5.115 Open ▸ , razorbill was also identified as a named feature of the Fowlsheugh SPA seabird assemblage, and had potential AEOI for in-combination disturbance and displacement.

 kittiwake = AEOI

 seabird assemblage = AEOI cannot be ruled out

Hermaness, Saxa Vord and Valla Field SPA

 gannet (breeding); and

 breeding seabird assemblage (due to potential impact on above species).

 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.

 gannet = No AEOI

 seabird 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 in-combination impact level experienced during operations and maintenance on gannet at Hermaness, Saxa Vord and Valla Field SPA surpassed the advised threshold of 0.02 percentage points for increased mortality, as recommended by NatureScot (2023k). A PVA was therefore required to understand if the impact experienced would have detrimental effects on the populations.

The PVA results for gaennet ( Table 5.175 Open ▸ ) concluded that the in-combination impact from combined collision risk and displacement during the operational and maintenance phase would result in the population growth rate decline of no more than 0.2%. After 35 years (the expected lifespan of the Array), the CPS ranged from 0.915 to 0.939 depending on if Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm was included or excluded. The impacted population therefore would be between 6.1% to 8.5% smaller than the unimpacted population. The counterfactual of population growth rate results indicate that the impact levels experienced during operation and maintenance would not adversely affect gannet at Hermaness, Saxa Vord and Valla Field SPA, as the maximum estimated change was a reduction in growth rate by less than 0.2%. Such a decrease indicates that this level of impact would not adversely affect the population and would likely remain undetectable against natural population fluctuations. Furthermore, it is not expected to significantly alter the background mortality rate.

These results indicate that the impact of collision risk and displacement from the Array in combination with other projects during operation and maintenance would not be of magnitude that can be said to adversely affect the likelihood of the gannet population being maintained as a viable component of the Hermaness, Saxa Vord and Valla Field SPA. The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance to seabird assemblage was deemed to be of negligible impact; only gannet was deemed to have any potential LSE2 ( Table 3.1 Open ▸ ).

As the impact from collision risk and displacement on gannet populations was assessed as not adverse, the risk to the seabird assemblage has been deemed not adverse.

Therefore, the combined impact from collision risk and displacement during operation and maintenance will not influence the long-term maintenance of the distribution of the assessed gannet and seabird assemblage within the site.

 gannet = No AEOI

 seabird assemblage = No AEOI

North Caithness Cliffs SPA

 breeding seabird assemblage (due to potential impact on breeding kittiwake).

 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.

 seabird 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 in-combination impact level experienced during operations and maintenance on the named seabird assemblage component, kittiwake, at North Caithness Cliffs SPA surpassed the advised threshold of 0.02 percentage points for increased mortality, as recommended by NatureScot (2023k). A PVA was therefore required to understand if the impact experienced would have detrimental effects on the populations.

The PVA results ( Table 5.177 Open ▸ ) concluded that the in-combination impact from collision risk and displacement during the operational and maintenance phase would result in the population growth rate decline of no more than 0.8%. After 35 years (the expected lifespan of the Array), the CPS ranged from 0.740 to 0.813 depending on if Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm was included or excluded. The impacted population therefore would be between 18.7% to 26.0% smaller than the unimpacted population. The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance to seabird assemblage was therefore deemed to be adverse due to the significant decline experienced by kittiwake populations.

Therefore, the combined impact from collision risk and displacement during operation and maintenance may influence the population as a viable component of the site and may influence the long-term maintenance of the distribution of the assessed seabird assemblage within the site.

 seabird assemblage = AEOI cannot be ruled out

Noss SPA

 gannet (breeding); and

 breeding seabird assemblage (due to potential impact on above species).

 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.

 gannet = No AEOI

 seabird 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 in-combination impact level experienced during operations and maintenance on gannet at Noss surpassed the advised threshold of 0.02 percentage points for increased mortality, as recommended by NatureScot (2023k). A PVA was therefore required to understand if the impact experienced would have detrimental effects on the populations.

The PVA results for gannet ( Table 5.179 Open ▸ ) concluded that the in-combination impact from collision and displacement during the operational and maintenance phase would result in the population growth rate decline of no more than 0.2%. After 35 years (the expected lifespan of the Array), the CPS ranged from 0.918 to 0.944 depending on if Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm was included or excluded. The impacted population therefore would be between 5.6% to 8.2% smaller than the unimpacted population. The counterfactual of population growth rate results indicate that the impact levels experienced during operation and maintenance would not adversely affect gannet at Noss SPA, as the maximum estimated change was a reduction in growth rate by less than 0.2%. Such a decrease indicates that this level of impact would not adversely affect the population and would likely remain undetectable against natural population fluctuations. Furthermore, it is not expected to significantly alter the background mortality rate.

These results indicate that the impact of collision risk and displacement from the Array in combination with other projects during operation and maintenance would not be of magnitude that can be said to adversely affect the likelihood of the gannet population being maintained as a viable component of the Noss SPA. The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance to seabird assemblage was deemed to be of negligible impact; only gannet was deemed to have any potential LSE2 ( Table 3.1 Open ▸ ).

As the impact from collision risk and displacement on gannet populations was assessed as not adverse, the risk to the seabird assemblage has been deemed not adverse for operation and maintenance.

Therefore, the combined impact of collision risk and displacement 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. The impact from collision risk and displacement during operation and maintenance will not influence the long-term maintenance of the distribution of the assessed gannet and seabird assemblage within the site.

 gannet = No AEOI

 seabird assemblage = No AEOI

St Abb's Head to Fast Castle SPA

 breeding seabird assemblage (due to potential impact on breeding kittiwake).

 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.

 seabird 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 in-combination impact level experienced during operations and maintenance on the named seabird assemblage component, kittiwake, at St Abb's Head to Fast Castle SPA surpassed the advised threshold of 0.02 percentage points for increased mortality, as recommended by NatureScot (2023k). A PVA was therefore required to understand if the impact experienced would have detrimental effects on the populations.

The PVA results for kittiwake excluding Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm ( Table 5.181 Open ▸ .) concluded that the in-combination impact from collision risk and displacement during the operational and maintenance phase would result in the population growth rate decline of no more than 0.4%. After 35 years (the expected lifespan of the Array), the CPS excluding Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm ranged from 0.869 to 0.911 depending on the approach considered. The impacted population therefore would be between 8.9% to 13.1% smaller than the unimpacted population.

However, the PVA results for kittiwake including Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm ( Table 5.181 Open ▸ ) concluded that the in-combination impact from collision risk and displacement during the operational and maintenance phase would result in the population growth rate decline of up to 4.6%. After 35 years (the expected lifespan of the Array), the CPS including Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm ranged from 0.354 to 0.180 depending on the approach considered. The impacted population therefore would be between 64.6% to 82.0% smaller than the unimpacted population.

Given that the kittiwake population of the St Abb’s Head to Fast Castle SPA has decreased significantly from its citation level, the magnitude of impact is sufficient to create an impact that could be said to have an adverse effect on the population.

The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance to seabird assemblage was deemed to be adverse if Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm impacts are included.

Collision risk and displacement during operation and maintenance if Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm is included, may prevent the conservation objectives from being achieved for the assessed qualifying features and the population of the species as viable components of the site.

If Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm impacts are included, the impact from collision risk and displacement during operation and maintenance may influence the long-term maintenance of the distribution of the assessed seabird assemblage within the site.

For this assessment, it is determined that the impact from Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm should be excluded when considering AEOI. This is because Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm identified an AEOI ‘alone’ for the kittiwake feature of the St Abb’s Head to Fast Castle SPA (SSE Renewables, 2022). Therefore, should Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm proceed, then its impact on the kittiwake feature of the St Abb’s Head to Fast Castle SPA will be required to be fully compensated and should not be included in the Array ‘in-combination’ assessment.

St Kilda SPA

 gannet (breeding); and

 breeding seabird assemblage (due to potential impact on above species).

 to ensure that the qualifying features of St Kilda SPA and the seas off St Kilda SPA are in favourable condition and make an appropriate contribution to achieving favourable conservation status;

 to ensure that the integrity of St Kilda SPA and the seas off St Kilda SPA is restored in the context of environmental changes by meeting objectives 2a, 2b and 2c for each qualifying feature:

– the supporting habitats and processes relevant to qualifying features and their prey/food resources are maintained, or where appropriate restored, at St Kilda SPA and/or seas off St Kilda SPA.

 gannet = No AEOI

 seabird assemblage = No AEOI

 to ensure that the qualifying features of St Kilda SPA and the seas off St Kilda SPA are in favourable condition and make an appropriate contribution to achieving favourable conservation status;

 to ensure that the integrity of St Kilda SPA and the seas off St Kilda SPA is restored in the context of environmental changes by meeting objectives 2a, 2b and 2c for each qualifying feature:

– the populations of qualifying features are viable components of St Kilda SPA and seas off St Kilda SPA; and

– the distributions of the qualifying features throughout St Kilda SPA and seas off St Kilda SPA are maintained by avoiding significant disturbance of the species.

The in-combination impact level experienced during operations and maintenance on gannet at St Kilda SPA remains below the advised threshold of 0.02 percentage points for increased mortality, as recommended by NatureScot (2023k) ( Table 5.182 Open ▸ ). Below this threshold 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 operation and maintenance, of the combined impact of collision risk and displacement from the Array in-combination with other plans and projects from significantly disrupting gannet populations as a qualifying species of the St Kilda SPA.

In addition, as the impact from collision risk and displacement on gannet populations was assessed as negligible, the risk to the seabird assemblage has been deemed negligible.

Therefore, collision risk and displacement 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 combined impact from collision risk and displacement operation and maintenance will not significantly influence the distribution of the assessed qualifying species throughout St Kilda SPA.

 gannet = No AEOI

 seabird assemblage = No AEOI

Troup, Pennan and Lion's Heads SPA

 kittiwake (breeding); and

 breeding seabird assemblage (due to potential impact on above species).

 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.

 kittiwake = No AEOI

 seabird 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 in-combination impact level experienced during operations and maintenance on kittiwake at Troup, Pennan and Lion's Heads SPA surpassed the advised threshold of 0.02 percentage points for increased mortality, as recommended by NatureScot (2023k). A PVA was therefore required to understand if the impact experienced would have detrimental effects on the populations.

The PVA results ( Table 5.184 Open ▸ .) concluded that the in-combination impact from collision risk and displacement during the operational and maintenance phase would result in the population growth rate decline of no more than 0.6%. After 35 years (the expected lifespan of the Array), the CPS ranged from 0.798 to 0.872 depending on if Berwick Bank Offshore Wind Farm was included or excluded. The impacted population therefore would be between 12.8% to 20.2% smaller than the unimpacted population.

These results indicate that the impact of collision risk and displacement from the Array in combination with other projects during operation and maintenance would be of magnitude that can be said to adversely affect the likelihood of the kittiwake population being maintained as a viable component of the Troup, Pennan and Lion's Heads SPA.

The impact level experienced during operations and maintenance to seabird assemblage was deemed to be of adverse due to the significant decline estimated; only kittiwake was deemed to have any potential LSE2 ( Table 3.1 Open ▸ ).

As the impact from collision risk and displacement on kittiwake populations was assessed as adverse, the risk to the seabird assemblage has been deemed adverse for operation and maintenance.

Therefore, the impact from collision risk and displacement during operation and maintenance will have an adverse effect on the population as a viable component of the site and will influence the long-term maintenance of the distribution of the assessed kittiwake and seabird assemblage within the site.

 kittiwake = AEOI

 seabird assemblage = AEOI cannot be ruled out

As detailed in Table 5.185 Open ▸ , adverse effects on the qualifying seabird features of seven SPAs were identified. This is the result of impacts which would undermine the conservation objective to maintain or restore the populations of the features of the SPA as a result of in-combination combined collision and displacement during operation and maintenance phase activities.
There is risk therefore of undermining the following Conservation Objectives of the sites:

Maintain the long term population of the species as a viable component of the site: Given the level of impact arising from collision and disturbance and displacement from the Array area, there is potential for the Array to influence the population of designated features as viable components of:

- Buchan Ness to Collieston Coast SPA (seabird assemblage with regards to kittiwake);

- East Caithness Cliffs SPA (kittiwake and seabird assemblage with regards to kittiwake);

- Flamborough and Filey Coast SPA (gannet, kittiwake and seabird assemblage with regards to gannet and kittiwake);

- Forth Islands SPA (gannet and seabird assemblage with regards to gannet and kittiwake);

- Fowlsheugh SPA (kittiwake and seabird assemblage with regards to kittiwake and razorbill);

- North Caithness Cliffs SPA (seabird assemblage with regards to kittiwake); and

- Troup, Pennan and Lion’s Heads SPA (kittiwake and seabird assemblage with regards to kittiwake).

Maintain the long term distribution of the species within site and avoid significant disturbance of the species: Given the level of impact arising from collision and disturbance and displacement from the Array area, there is potential for the Array to disturb the distribution of features within the following SPAs:

- Buchan Ness to Collieston Coast SPA (seabird assemblage with regards to kittiwake);

- East Caithness Cliffs SPA (kittiwake and seabird assemblage with regards to kittiwake);

- Flamborough and Filey Coast SPA (gannet, kittiwake and seabird assemblage with regards to gannet and kittiwake);

- Forth Islands SPA (gannet and seabird assemblage with regards to gannet and kittiwake);

- Fowlsheugh SPA (kittiwake and seabird assemblage with regards to kittiwake and razorbill);

- North Caithness Cliffs SPA (seabird assemblage with regards to kittiwake); and

- Troup, Pennan and Lion’s Heads SPA (kittiwake and seabird assemblage with regards to kittiwake).

For all sites considered, there is no risk to undermining the following Conservation Objectives:

Maintain the long term distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species: As the Array and associated ZoI falls outside the SPA boundary, there is no potential for the Array to impact on the distribution and extent of habitats within the SPA; and
Maintain the long term structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species: As the Array and associated ZoI 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.

Previous part

Next part

Tables ▼