SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE: 13 JUNE 2012

OUTER HEBRIDES LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN MARINE FISH FARMING SUPPLEMENTARY GUIDANCE

Report by Director of Development

PURPOSE OF REPORT To report the outcome of consultation and agree proposed changes to the Supplementary Guidance for Marine Fish Farming

COMPETENCE 1.1 There are no legal, equalities, financial or other constraints to the recommendations being implemented.

SUMMARY 2.1 Draft Supplementary Guidance for Marine Fish Farming was approved at the August 2011 Comhairle series as part of the Outer Hebrides Local Development Plan (LDP) and formal public consultation carried out concurrently with the Proposed LDP.

2.1 82 representations to the document were received. Appendix 1 to this Report lists those who submitted representations. The main issues raised relate to the proposed spatial approach and the identification of factors that determine areas for potential growth; constrained or sensitive areas. Issues around the interaction with wild fisheries interests were also the subject of a number of comments.

2.2 All submissions have been considered and where appropriate modifications to the document are proposed. The representations and proposed actions are summarised in Appendix 2. Appendix 3 sets out any proposed modifications to the Supplementary Guidance.

2.3 Once the proposed changes have been agreed a revised version of the document will be published. This will become interim planning guidance and in due course will become an integral part of the statutory Development Plan. The Supplementary Guidance will be used to deliver LDP policy 22 as well as provide detailed guidance for developers and for the assessment of development proposals.

RECOMMENDATIONS 3.1 It is recommended that the Comhairle: a) approve the proposed responses to the representations and modifications to the document at Appendices 2 and 3 to this Report; and b) authorise the Director for Development to produce a revised Supplementary Guidance for Marine Fish Farming, incorporating the agreed modifications as interim planning guidance with a view to it becoming statutory Supplementary Guidance as part of the Outer Hebrides Local Development Plan once adopted.

Contact Officer: Mairi MacIver Tel: 01851 822690 [email protected] Appendices: 1. List of Representees 2. Consultation Responses Summary Table 3. Modifications proposed to the Outer Hebrides Supplementary Guidance for Marine Fish Farming Background Papers: 1. SD Committee Report August 2011

BACKGROUND

4.1 The purpose of statutory Supplementary Guidance is to provide more detail than might normally be included in the Development Plan. Where linked to a Strategic or Local Development Plan, Supplementary Guidance has statutory status under s22 of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006.

4.2 It was agreed to prepare Supplementary Guidance for Marine Fish Farming to provide a spatial and policy framework to plan, direct and assess marine fish farming activities in the Outer Hebrides. A draft was approved at the August 2011 Comhairle series for formal consultation as part of the Outer Hebrides Local Development Plan. The Supplementary Guidance will be used to deliver LDP policy 22 as well as provide detailed guidance for developers and for the assessment of development proposals. It will form part of the statutory Development Plan once adopted.

4.3 The format of the Supplementary Guidance is in line with Scottish Planning Policy in that it contains a spatial strategy that indicates the preferred areas for development. It also identifies sensitive areas where fish farm development is unlikely to be appropriate. The Spatial policies are supported by a set of Development policies that address specific topics.

CONSULTATION RESPONSES

5.1 Considerable informal consultation was carried out prior to publication of the draft guidance and the formal consultation process. This took the form of information gathering from various sections of the industry and other interested parties as well as one-to one meetings and telephone conversations with a wide range of stakeholders.

5.2 82 individuals and organisations responded to the formal consultation (Appendix 1). 53 of these concentrated on a single issue relating to specific loch systems. The overall aims of the Supplementary Guidance were generally welcomed by most and the comments received constructive. Where there are common issues these have been addressed collectively (Appendix 2).

5.3 The main issues can be summarised as follows: a) Amend the three tier spatial strategy to two tiers or better clarify distinctions; b) Identify additional loch systems as ‘sensitive’; c) Concerns about the impact of fish farming activities on wild fisheries; Issues were also raised in relation to cumulative impact; carrying capacity; control of sea lice infestation; conflict with other marine activities and potential damage to environmental and tourism assets.

5.4 a) Amend the three tier spatial strategy to two tiers

A number of comments were received suggesting that the 3 tier spatial strategy was ambiguous and did not provide sufficient clarity as to where development would be acceptable or otherwise. Views were expressed that either the distinction between the tiers needed to be clearer or that the middle tier (areas of potential constraint) should be either reclassified as ‘areas for potential growth’ or as ‘sensitive’ areas. In drafting a 3-tier strategy the intention was to show that while many areas had potential for growth some of these were constrained by a number of factors (listed in the policy) which require to be considered. These were classified as ‘areas of potential constraint’

After consideration of the comments received it is accepted that the strategy could be clearer in indicating where there is potential for growth. In response therefore, it is proposed that the spatial strategy be re-configured to consist of two elements – ‘areas for potential growth’ and ‘sensitive areas’. The draft policy for areas for potential growth will be revised to clarify that proposals within such areas will be assessed against the Development policies in the Supplementary Guidance and that where there are constraints that it may be possible to mitigate, additional assessment criteria will be applied. To further clarify the distinctions between tiers some constraints will be reclassified as sensitive including ‘Prime Beaches’.

5.5 b) Identify additional loch systems as ‘sensitive’ A significant number of submissions suggested that some of the loch systems listed as ‘constrained’ should be afforded greater protection and classified as ‘sensitive’ due to a number of factors such currently being undeveloped areas, pristine coastline, remoteness, adjacent designations, protected species, impact on wild fish, and reference to historic Government locational guidance protecting this area from fish farming. Lochs Resort, Tealsavay, Hamanavay and Cravadale are relatively remote, and undeveloped, and due to their high landscape and recreational value are attractive for recreational and freshwater fishing. The Comhairle may wish to recognise these areas as tourism assets and consequently it is proposed to reclassify them as areas sensitive to fish farming. It is considered that Loch Roag, Loch Erisort, Loch Seaforth and Broadbay for which representations were also received do not meet the same criteria nor fulfil the same role and should therefore remain as areas with potential for growth and any future proposals will be assessed accordingly.

5.6 c) Concerns about the impact of fish farming on wild fisheries A number of comments were received suggesting that the supplementary guidance did not give adequate protection to wild fisheries and that additional areas should be identified as ‘sensitive’. Marine Scotland Science’s (MSS) advice is that there is no evidence of an impact of lice from salmon farms on wild salmon in Scotland, but acknowledge that the relatively acute declines in salmon catches on the Scottish west coast give cause for concern. MSS also advise that there is evidence of an effect of sea lice from salmon farms on sea trout but the extent to which there is an effect at population level is not clear. Consideration of wild fish may be required if potential significant impacts are identified through the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process. In light of this advice it is proposed that a number of further lochs are classified as Sensitive Areas and amendments are made to the context and policy text of Development Policy 3: Other Marine Interests.

5.7 The full summary of all issues raised and actions proposed in response to them are set out in Appendix 2. Appendix 3 lists the consequential modifications required to produce a finalised version of the Supplementary Guidance. Changes of a minor nature are not listed in the Appendix, such as the need to update references, however will be incorporated into the revised version of the Supplementary Guidance.

NEXT STAGES

6.1 Once the Comhairle approves modifications to the Supplementary Guidance for Marine Fish Farming the revised document will be published as interim planning guidance until such time as the Outer Hebrides Local Development Plan (LDP) is adopted. The LDP is currently with Scottish Ministers for examination. The outcome of examination will be reported to the Comhairle in due course.

6.2 The Comhairle’s response to the representations received will be relayed to all those who submitted comments.

APPENDIX 1

LIST OF REPRESENTEES

MFF NO NAME MFF/1 Pauline McGrow, Royal Yachting Assocation Scotland MFF/2 Ian Steuart Fothringham MFF/3 Annabel Morbey MFF/4 Keith Dunbar MFF/5 Mark TJ Molyneux MFF/6 Karen Davidson MFF/7 Ben Wilson MFF/8 Gordon Simpson MFF/9 Sir Peter Cresswell, Uig & Hamanavay Estate MFF/10 Michael Herring MFF/11 R R Steel MFF/12 ADM Thomas MFF/13 Robert Norton MFF/14 Harry Chichester MFF/15 Beverely Fairey MFF/16 Katy Poett MFF/17 Andrew WB Duncan MFF/18 John Caston MFF/19 Edward Davidson MFF/20 Patrick Leavey MFF/21 Russell Hird MFF/22 Alasdair Murray MFF/23 J W A Ireland MFF/24 Michael Palmer MFF/25 Cerian MacInnes, Scottish Environment Protection Agency MFF/26 Rod Thurman MFF/27 Mark & Dorothee Cresswell, Uig & Hamanavay MFF/28 AK Metcalfe MFF/29 Alex Massey MFF/30 Charles Lousada, Lousada Plc MFF/31 Flora Maclay MFF/32 Alexander Davidson MFF/33 Kate Davidson MFF/34 Christopher Pask MFF/35 Gary Gilbert MFF/36 Anna Morgan MFF/37 Dr Wolfgang Daniel MFF/38 Peter Urpeth MFF/39 Charles Hignett MFF/40 Julian de Haan MFF/41 Peter Hague MFF/42 Gillian Granlund

MFF/43 Peter Martin MFF/44 Innes Morrison MFF/45 Charles Fairweather MFF/46 The Scottish Salmon Company MFF/47 H F Cooper MFF/48 Bruce Laidlaw MFF/49 Antionette Charteris MFF/50 John Charteris MFF/51 Roderick Hague MFF/52 Susanne Hague MFF/53 Dr Colin & Mrs Donella MacDonald MFF/54 Andrew Rodger MFF/55 R A Kennedy MFF/56 Vaughan Lewis, Windrush AEC Ltd MFF/57 Nick Malicka MFF/58 James Barlow MFF/59 Simon Scott, Grimersta Estate Ltd MFF/60 Roddy MacMinn, Scottish Natural Heritage MFF/61 M Robertson MFF/62 Alison Laurie MFF/63 Huw Francis, Storas Uibhist MFF/64 Fred Martin, Aline Estate Ltd MFF/65 Tony Ingle-Finch MFF/66 Andrew Harris MFF/67 Roddy A Campbell MFF/68 Alan Wells, Association of Salmon Fisheries Boards / Rivers And Fisheries Trusts of Scotland (RAFTS) MFF/69 Alastair Collett MFF/70 Anton Michel MFF/71 Richard P Kershaw, Soval Estate MFF/72 Alex Adrian, The Crown Estate MFF/73 Willie Fulton, Harris Sustainable Business Group MFF/74 David Kelly, Outer Hebrides Fisheries Trust and Western Isles District Salmon Fisheries Board MFF/75 Steven Driver, Northern Lighthouse Board MFF/76 Anna Donald, Marine Scotland Science MFF/77 Dr Maggie Keegan, Scottish Wildlife Trust MFF/78 Chris Read, Marine Harvest Scotland MFF/79 Will Paton, Scottish Water MFF/80 Stephen Bell, Scottish Salmon Producers Organisation MFF/81 Kate Mavor, National Trust for Scotland MFF/82 I Watson MFF/83 James Caithie

APPENDIX 2

SUMMARY OF REPRESENTATIONS AND PROPOSED RESPONSES

ISSUE REPRESENTATION PROPOSED RESPONSE/ACTION REPS National Under 'National Context', include Accept, already noted in Annex D 80 Context page 2 reference to "Delivering Planning Reform Further Sources of Information. for Aquaculture” and "Delivering Planning Reform for Aquaculture 2" Local Context Additional text to the penultimate Proposed text change (pg 3): "The 60 page 3 paragraph to reflect the high quality of the Outer Hebrides has an extensive

marine natural heritage of the Outer coastline offering a clean high Hebrides sought. quality water environment which supports a rich marine natural heritage and provides ideal conditions for growing farmed fish and shellfish." Identify, list and locate all existing fish and Given the very dynamic nature of 68, 74, shellfish farm sites, i.e. leased sites, this data not appropriate to include 80 planning permitted sites and active sites, within the Guidance document

in Local Context section. itself. No change. The Guidance is contrary to sustainability Comment noted. No action. 62 and the 'clean high quality water environment' noted in the Context. SG Approach As well as LDP Policy 28 Natural Heritage LDP Policy 5 Landscape does not 60 and Format another relevant policy in the LDP would deal with seascape specifically.

(Pg 4) be Policy 5 Landscape to address Reference to SNH studies is made seascape aspects. in context to Development Policy 1 Siting and Design in the Landscape. No change. The Guidance does not meet objectives Comment noted. No action. 62 of ‘A Fresh Start – The Renewed Framework for Scottish Aquaculture’. Overall Spatial Q1 - Support approach Comment noted. 22, 68, Approach & Q1 74 Clearer distinction between Spatial It is proposed to amend the Spatial 60 Strategy Policy 2 and 3 sought and that Strategy policies to clarify these

this characterisation should either be distinctions. clarified or the two possibly merged. Objects to use of 3 area types as It is proposed to amend the Spatial 80 opposed to the 2 suggested in Scottish Strategy policies to clarify these

Planning Policy. distinctions. Further protection of the undeveloped This is addressed through the 38 coast also sought. Development Plan which will be

considered in conjunction with the Supplementary Guidance. No change. Marine Science Scotland state that there Incorporate as a footnote on page 5 76 is a need to note that areas not (Spatial Strategy Context).

categorised (in government locational guidelines) may be suitable for development and those in category 3 are defined because of their inshore nature. MSS may undertake modelling in response to applications in previously undeveloped areas. Status of isolated coast and better Map Change – plot Isolated Coast 60 referencing in Supplementary Guidance. on a spatial strategy background Also note SNH ongoing mapping of map.

ISSUE REPRESENTATION PROPOSED RESPONSE/ACTION REPS wilderness qualities. Spatial strategy Re-designate as Spatial Strategy Policy 3 It is proposed to revise 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8; 9; – Loch Resort, on grounds of the spatial strategy 10; 11; 12; 13; 14; Tealsavay, wild fisheries and/or policies and categorise 15; 16; 17; 18; 19; Hamanavay these lochs as 20; 21; 23; 24; 26; sea lice infestation and/or and Cravadale ‘Sensitive Areas’ due to 27; 28; 29; 30; 31; remoteness and/or their remoteness, 32; 33; 34; 35; 36; wildlife and/or undeveloped nature, 37; 39; 40; 41; 42; adjacent to SAC; and/or and high recreational, 43; 44; 45; 47; 48; natural heritage and 49; 50; 51; 55; 56; recreation and tourism interests tourism value. 57; 58; 69; 74; 82; pristine coastline EU designations /protected species Spatial strategy Re-designate as Spatial Strategy Policy 3 The Comhairle does not accept that – Broad Bay on grounds of development of Broad Bay should 22, 74, be restricted as no robust planning wild fisheries and/or 38 reasons have been presented sealice infestation and/or support restricting development. It anchorage and/or is proposed to retain Broad Bay as seal haul out sites an area for potential growth in the as a sea trout nursery/feeding area Spatial Strategy. Any development proposal will be required to take should be mapped under Map 6a as a account of existing constaints. designated anchorage Spatial – Loch Re-designate as Spatial Strategy Policy 3 The Comhairle does not accept that 64 Seaforth on grounds of development of Loch Seaforth impact on wild fisheries and/or should be restricted on the basis that is already a well developed fin NSA and shellfish farm area. It is narrowness of loch proposed to retain Loch Seaforth as scope to restore sea trout stocks an area for potential growth in the Spatial Strategy. Spatial – Loch Re-designate as Spatial Strategy Policy 3 The Comhairle does not accept that 5, 6 Roag on grounds of development of Loch Roag should wild fisheries and/or be restricted on the basis that is already a well developed fin and sea lice infestation shellfish farm area. It is proposed to No further development in Loch Roag as retain Loch Roag as an area for benefits and importance of Hebridean potential growth in the Spatial fisheries and river fishing outweigh fish Strategy. farming expansion. Fish farming damages indigenous fish stocks. Spatial - Loch Spatial - Loch Erisort to be designated as The Comhairle does not accept that 71 Erisort Sensitive Area and Laxay River to have development of Loch Erisort should greater protection of wild fish stocks. be restricted on the basis that is already developed for fish farming with any further development subject to the Supplementary Guuidance. It is proposed to retain Loch Erisort as an area for potential growth in the Spatial Strategy. Spatial Need to recognise cumulative risks and Assessment of individual, multiple 38 Strategy Policy impacts and that areas of 'potential and/or cumulative constraints will 1 growth' which have multiple and diverse be undertaken for all development potential constraints should be designated proposals. The Spatial Strategy as 'sensitive areas'. i.e. where two or Policies identify a range of potential more (disconnected constraints apply). constraint which must be addressed or mitigated. Development Policy 6 addresses Cumulative Impacts. No change.

ISSUE REPRESENTATION PROPOSED RESPONSE/ACTION REPS The document does not seem to try to It is not a planning function to 76 identify areas of opportunity, based either determine technical feasibility.

on where industry would like to develop or Existing footnote 1 on page 5 areas of technical feasibility. More acknowledges that the Areas for technical and industry preference Potential Growth require individual reflected in areas of potential growth case feasibility. No change. sought. Need to ensure locational and Comment noted. The project data 74/68 environmental considerations taken referred to may when available

account of in all areas. RAFTs notes that inform future reviews of the its ‘Aquaculture: Managing Interactions’ Guidance. No change. project will support this requirements. It is recommended that the Council liaise Opportunities for stakeholder liaison 80 with the fish farm companies locally in were afforded to companies during order to identify areas of interest for preparation of the guidance. Limited development and, in addition to adopting spatial planning data was shared at a general presumption in favour of fish that stage. farming throughout the coastline, other than in sensitive areas, specifically allocate the areas so identified. Q 2 & 3 Supports approach. Comment noted. 72, 75 It is proposed that 'significant shipping This would be determined on a 76 zones' and 'areas of particular interest to case by case basis. Note the

inshore fishing' are defined and advice statutory consultation process in sought from these sectors on areas where place also. No change fish farming would be acceptable to improve spatial planning. Reduction in number and extent of Areas It is proposed to amend the Spatial 80 of Potential Constraint and Sensitive Strategy policies. (See Appendix 3). Areas sought. Spatial North Uist Estates west coast salmonoid No specific data provided. 54 Strategy Policy fisheries to be noted in Freshwater and Comment noted. No change.

2 & 3 Coastal Fisheries Add’ Anchorages’ beside ‘Harbour Orders Anchorages are considered in 75 and Key Navigational Routes’ in Spatial Development policy 3 Other Marine

Strategy Policy 2. Interests. Developers should refer to admiralty charts for site specific data. No change Add footnote to spatial policy tables re Accept. Footnote to be added. 54 60 periodic updating by Marine Scotland 76

Science of Locational Guidelines.

Request that the list of Designated Sites List reviewed - Strategy policies 60, 81, is reviewed. revised. 74/68 Make National Scenic Areas (NSAs) as It is considered that some areas 81 ‘Sensitive Areas’. within NSAs may be appropriate for

development. It is proposed to retain NSAs as areas for potential growth in the Spatial Strategy. Proposals within NSAs will be assessed accordingly. Undeveloped areas of detrimental risk to The Spatial Strategy Policies 74/68 the salmonid populations should be address this. No change.

established as ‘Sensitive’ or ‘Firebreak’ areas. Existing ‘Sensitive’ aquaculture sites This will be assessed on a case by 74/68 biomass should be capped due to the case basis through the statutory

‘value or sensitivity’ of the nearby consultee process by other

ISSUE REPRESENTATION PROPOSED RESPONSE/ACTION REPS fisheries. regulatory bodies. Assessment of biomass is not a planning function. No change. Amend or clarify text "sensitive to finfish Further cross referencing between 54 only" in Designated Shellfish Water Policies and Annex A will clarify Spatial Strategy Policy Table. this. Strengthen Spatial Strategy Policy 3: Current text in line with Scottish Sensitive Areas wording as a presumption Planning Policy. No change. against development within these areas. CnES should place a scientifically robust Where it concludes that a 74/68 buffer around the coastlines of the two development proposal unconnected

(salmon) SACs in order to protect their with the nature conservation integrity. management of a Natura 2000 site is likely to have a significant effect on that site, the Comhairle is required to undertake an appropriate assessment of the implications for the conservation interests for which the area has been designated. These sites would be identified following consultation with Scottish Natural Heritage in line with LDP Policy 28. No change. Better protection for St Kilda sought. St Kilda is afforded highest level of 61 protection (Sensitive Area) in the guidance. Any fish farm proposal would be subject to assessment in accordance with the spatial strategy policy and the specific policies on St Kilda in the Local Development Plan. Note also a St Kilda Management Plan is in place. Spatial Use of different blue shading confusing. Spatial mapping to be amended 70 Strategy Map Map 5C Add Traighe Mhor, Lewis to the 'Prime Accept. 38 Beaches' Shellfish – Greater clarification between fin-fish and ‘Fish farming’ resolved as the 54, 72 various shellfish required. preferred term. It is proposed to references include definition at the start of document specifying that the term fish farming includes for shellfish farming, other than for MSS locational guidelines. Carrying Concerned that carrying capacity is the As set out in the Guidance, carrying 22 capacity primary assessment tool in cumulative capacity is only one of a number of impact assessment factors considered. No change. Wild fish buffer Greater buffer than 2km sought – up to The 2km buffer is intended to 22, 27, 20km safeguard against potential conflicts 38, 71 with other marine users including 10km sought with 30km from river mouths 74/68 recreational fishing rather than to OHFT propose buffer of 10 -20 km wild fisheries. See response to 70 point below on wild fish. No change. 2 -5 km from river mouths sought. Wild fish Fish farming damages wild fish – Marine Scotland Science’s (MSS) 6, 52, assumed wants fish farming stopped. advice is that there is no evidence 70, 71 of an impact of lice from salmon Sea lice damage and treatment on wild farms on wild salmon in Scotland, 66, 62 fish stocks. but acknowledge that the relatively Impact on and proximity of fish farms to acute declines in salmon catches 22 on the Scottish west coast give

ISSUE REPRESENTATION PROPOSED RESPONSE/ACTION REPS wild fish most significant impact. cause for concern. MSS advise that there is evidence of an effect of sea 27 Impact on wild fish underplayed. lice from salmon farms on sea trout 30 Value of wild fish stocks but the extent to which there is an effect at population level is not 76 Need to take account of wild fisheries. clear. Consideration of wild fish may Guidance lacks consideration of fish be required if potential significant 68 farming interaction with wild salmonids impacts are identified through the which is topical Section on interaction with Environmental Impact Assessment wild salmonids suggested. (EIA) process. In light of this advice it is proposed that a number of Protection of areas for wild fishery further lochs are classified as 74/68 interests is of great importance as Sensitive Areas and amendments recovery or restoration schemes at the are made to the context and policy population level remain largely untested. text of Development Policy 3: Other Marine Interests Environmental Notes economic cost to wild fish Comment noted. This is addressed 27, 62 and economic populations and damaging views for in the Spatial Strategy. damage visitors. High value should be placed on

unique, scarce and endangered environmental populations and features. Guidance needs to provide far greater Comment noted. Adequate 38 protection of key environments and other protection is awarded through the sectors. Spatial Strategy. Distance Increased distance between An appropriate distance between 27, between farm developments sought. sites will be considered on a site by sites site basis taking account of local conditions. No change. Development Expansion of the section on colour to It is proposed to amend 60 Policy 1 Siting include an analysis of why the proposed Development Policy 1 accordingly. and Design colour scheme for cages, barges and top-

nets is appropriate for the site and any mitigation measures that will help minimise landscape and visual impacts sought. Development Signposting to related Local Development Development Policy 2 refers to LDP 25 Policy 2 Water Plan policy sought. Policy 9 and duplication of policies

Quality and between documents is undesirable. Benthic Impact No Change. Include reference to following documents: It is proposed to include these 25 SEPA LUPS GU17 Marine Development references within in Annex D and Marine Aquaculture Planning Further Sources of Information. Guidance and SEPA Fish Farm Manual in LUPS GU17 is also referenced in Development Policy 2. the LDP Policy 22. Development Include reference to public sewer outfall in It is not appropriate to map all 25 Policy 3 Other policy. public sewer outfalls in the

Marine Guidance. Developers should

Interests identify where there are site specific issues. No change. Re-title as ‘Other Marine and Fishery The section of the policy addressing 74 Interests’ to eliminate any confusion as to other fishery interests has been whether freshwater fisheries should be amended to provide further consulted at an early stage. clarification. However the policy covers a range of marine interests and as such the title is unchanged. Development It is suggested that Development Policy 5 This is not a planning function and 60 Policy 5 is expanded to required details of site is regulated by other agencies other

Operational specific anti-predator strategy (wildlife than design/colour aspects etc. Impacts interactions, appropriate mitigation). Seal Licensing and good practice on predatory control measures are

ISSUE REPRESENTATION PROPOSED RESPONSE/ACTION REPS recognised in Annex B and C. No change. Crown Estates suggest that a Development Policy 5 facilitates 72 decommissioning/restoration method planning conditions in regard to site

statement accompany planning restoration. Further requirements application. unlikely to be enforceable through planning. No change. Development Cumulative impact should also include Wild fish aspects are considered in 74/68 Policy 6 interaction with wild salmonids a proposed amendment to Cumulative Development Policy 3: Other Impact Marine Interests. 74/68 Cumulative water body biomass and This is already addressed through benthic performance in a water body consultation with Marine Scotland where there are several farms be taken Science, SEPA and other agencies. into account. No change. Development The efficacy, enforceability and fairness of Comment noted. No change. 80 Policy 7 second paragraph of Policy DP 7 re Economic economic impact on other economic Benefits activities is questioned. Development Policy supported. Comment noted. 79 Policy 8 On- The efficacy and enforceability of the Comment noted. No change. 80 shore Facilities policy is questioned. Annex A Note that the areas identified here (p 22), Comment noted. No change. 74 in consultation with the OHFT, are not

necessarily the most ‘valuable’ or ‘sensitive’ in terms of wild fishery interests Clarification sought as how other sites All sites relayed by OHFT are 70 identified by OHFT been dealt with. identified in Guidance. Consultation with other fisheries than just Appropriate on case by case basis, 70 OHFT sought. but OHFT recognised body. Comment noted. More up to date economic information on Industry specific data to be provided 70 game fishing sought. by that sector. Comment noted. Carrying capacity of a sea loch or area of Marine Scotland Science is a 74/68 coastline is dependent on a greater range statutory consultee and will advise of indices other then nutrient of the potential impacts of proposed enhancement and benthic impact. Seeks developments singularly and on a that Marine Scotland Science advice be cumulative basis. No change. sought on re-categorisation per new planning applications. Clarification of Surfing and Primes Some revisions accepted. Refer to 70 Beaches sought proposed revised strategy policies. Natural Heritage - CnES to confirm the Where it concludes that a 74/68 process involved in determining whether development proposal unconnected

an Appropriate Assessment is required for with the nature conservation an aquaculture development within management of a Natura 2000 site proximity of SACs for salmon. is likely to have a significant effect on that site, the Comhairle is required to undertake an appropriate assessment of the implications for the conservation interests for which the area has been designated. These sites would be identified following consultation with Scottish Natural Heritage in line with LDP Policy 28. No change.

ISSUE REPRESENTATION PROPOSED RESPONSE/ACTION REPS Renunciation of Renunciation of unused sites as a This is not directly a planning 63 Unused Sites condition of consent for new sites sought. matter. Non Planning The plan does not address regulation of The Guidance would apply to 27 functions existing farm sites, and notes that expansion of existing sites. The

planning permission has been granted presence of AMAs is not specifically historically where Area Management a planning matter and their Agreements (AMAs) are in place. existence or otherwise is not a material consideration. No change. Independent mandatory assessment and The regulation of disease 27 disclosure of lice densities, and infestation monitoring and

synchronised fallowing is sought. management are not planning regulatory functions. The actual production/fallow cycles of sites is addressed in Development Policy 5 Operational Impacts. No change. A statement that the planning authority The Comhairle will determine an 80 will not generally refuse an aquaculture application based on its policy

application on grounds relating to a matter framework, informed and guided by governed by another regulator if that other agencies and consultees, but regulator, on being consulted, considers ultimately a planning decision will that an authorisation could be granted is be by the Comhairle as planning sought. authority. No change. Marine Further details or clarification sought on Guidance currently states "Work on 38, 60, Planning/ how to resolve potential conflicts between this is in progress by Marine 80 Marine terrestrial and marine planning documents Scotland at the time of preparation

Protected i.e. Development Plans and Marine Plans. of the draft Supplementary Areas Guidance and therefore its outputs 77 More reference to marine planning and cannot be reflected in the spatial Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) sought. strategy". This remains the case. Will MPAs be in the 'Sensitive Area' Future revisions of the Guidance 81 category? will take account of any approved marine plans and MPAs affecting Include statement in current Guidance the area. No change. noting that this will be updated to reflect MPAs when know. Seals ‘Known’ seal haul out areas to be classed Outcome of consultation on 38 as sensitive areas. ‘Designated’ seal haul out areas not yet concluded. Reference to be narrated in Annex A (Page 20) ‘Future designations’ Overall fish Seek closed containment on shore It is not a function for planning to 38 farming development only direct this aspect of industry industry development. Terrestrial planning Does not agree with the mass expansion 62 matters will be assessed through of open net fish farming as it is presently the Development Plan. operated - only way forward is to insist on Development Policy 8 On-shore closed containment systems and accept Facilities would consider the no other form of application. implications of any associated onshore developments. No change. Other Possible The Code of Good Practice for Finfish This document is referenced in 80 Material Aquaculture could be considered as a Annex C Additional Advice and Planning material planning consideration and Good Practice. It is not however a Consideration therefore should be referred to in the material consideration for planning. Supplementary Guidance. No change. National Scenic CnES to produce a Management Strategy This not a matter for the 81 Areas for each NSA. Supplementary Guidance. Format/ Include paragraph numbering This may have been useful at the 80 General draft stage, but is not considered

necessary for final Guidance.

ISSUE REPRESENTATION PROPOSED RESPONSE/ACTION REPS Sections and policies are numbered. No change. Identify contacts for constraints or It is not considered appropriate to 72 qualifying features in Spatial Policies include such a dynamic data set

within the Guidance however the statutory consultation processes for applications will address this. No change. Guidance should be reviewed as As part of the Development Plan 72 appropriate the Guidance will be subject to regular monitoring and review.

Note: For Rep 80 Scottish Salmon Producers Organisation also include 46 the Scottish Salmon Company and 78 Marine Harvest. For Rep 74 Outer Hebrides Fisheries Trust also include 68 RAFTS/ASFB and 59 Grimersta Estate.

APPENDIX 3 Modifications proposed to the Outer Hebrides Supplementary Guidance for Marine Fish Farming

Page / Existing Text Proposed Text or Changes (new or Policy Ref amended text in bold) National Insert new paragraph after 2nd paragraph of The multi agency Improved Systems for Context National Context Licensing Aquaculture Development Page 2 (ISLAD) Working Group was established in 2009 following the launch of A Fresh Start - the renewed Strategic Framework for Scottish Aquaculture. Subsequently Delivering Planning Reform for Aquaculture I (Feb 2010) and II (Aug 2011) were published, which set out a shared intention to improve the existing Town and Country planning system as it relates to fish farming. Local Context The Outer Hebrides has an extensive The Outer Hebrides has an extensive Page 3 coastline offering a clean high quality water coastline offering a clean high quality water environment which provides ideal conditions environment which supports a rich marine for growing farmed fish and shellfish. natural heritage and provides ideal conditions for growing farmed fish and shellfish. Approach New paragraph after 1st paragraph Under the Town & Country Planning and Format (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended by the Page 4 Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006) fish farming is defined to mean ‘the breeding, rearing or keeping of fish or shellfish (which includes any kind of sea urchin, crustacean or mollusc)’. As such the term fish farming as referred to in this document would include for both fin and shellfish unless otherwise specified. Pages 6 - 8 Spatial Strategy Policies 1 - 3 Revised Spatial Strategy Policies. (proposed revised text shown in full at the end of Appendix 3). Guidance on Scottish Natural Heritage has published two Scottish Natural Heritage has published two Landscape/ relevant documents. Marine Aquaculture relevant documents. The Siting and Design Seascape and the Landscape: the siting and design of of Aquaculture in the Landscape: Visual Capacity marine aquaculture developments in the and Landscape Considerations 2011 landscape, 2001 provides guidance to provides guidance to developers. SNH also 1st developers. SNH also produced Guidance produced Guidance on Landscape/ Seascape paragraph on Landscape/ Seascape Capacity for Capacity for Aquaculture, 2008 to assist local Page 9 Aquaculture, 2008 to assist local authorities authorities in the production of strategies and in the production of strategies and policies policies for aquaculture. for aquaculture. Guidance on In partnership with stakeholders, SNH is (Reduced text) Landscape/ currently reviewing and updating its 2001 In 2010 SNH commissioned a study of four Seascape Guidance. As part of this review, in 2010 pilot areas in the Outer Hebrides to assess Capacity SNH commissioned a study of four pilot land and seascape character types and their rd areas in the Outer Hebrides to assess land 3 paragraph potential development capacity. The study and seascape character types and their Page 10 categorises a number of coastal (landscape) potential development capacity. The study character types and sets out their capacity for categorises a number of coastal aquaculture activity. The (landscape) character types and sets out ‘Landscape/seascape capacity for their capacity for aquaculture activity. The aquaculture: Outer Hebrides’ pilot study was Landscape/seascape capacity for published in late August 2011. aquaculture: Outer Hebrides pilot study was

Page / Existing Text Proposed Text or Changes (new or Policy Ref amended text in bold) published in late August 2011, following preparation of this draft Supplementary Guidance. The study will be considered further in terms of informing both spatial and development policies following initial consultation on this draft Supplementary Guidance. DP 1 Siting The colour of cages, barges and top-nets Details of the colour of cage structures, nets, and Design should be submitted. top-nets, barge and other surface equipment Page 10 should be submitted, together with a statement detailing how the proposed colour scheme is appropriate to minimise landscape and visual impacts arising from the proposed development. DP 3 Other (Context text) National policy requires that a range of other Marine marine interests are taken into account in National policy requires that a range of Interests determining the appropriateness of new fish other marine interests are taken into Page 10 & 11 farming development in the marine area. account in determining the appropriateness These include recreation; tourism; navigation of new fish farming development in the and commercial fisheries as well as MOD marine area. These include recreation; activities. tourism; navigation and commercial fisheries as well as MOD activities. The marine environment around the Outer Hebrides is a significant recreational resource The marine environment around the Outer and is important to the visitor experience of Hebrides is a significant recreational the environment. resource and is important to the visitor experience of the environment. The commercial sea fishing industry, in particular shellfish, accounts for around 90% ‘Sensitive and High Value’ fresh water fish of total Outer Hebrides landings. Standard sites, should be identified through pre- (deep sea, fin and white fish) landings application discussions with the Outer account for the remaining 10%. Much of the Hebrides Fisheries Trust. shell fishing is carried out by small inshore The commercial sea fishing industry, in boats and resources can be negatively particular shellfish, accounts for around impacted upon by marine fish farming. 90% of total Outer Hebrides landings. Developers are advised to make contact with Standard (deep sea, fin and white fish) the Western Isles Fisherman’s Association at landings account for the remaining 10%. pre-planning stage to ascertain whether or not Much of the shell fishing is carried out by the proposal is likely to conflict with this small inshore boats and resources can be important resource. negatively impacted upon by marine fish Wild salmon and sea trout fisheries farming. Developers are advised to make contribute to the environmental diversity, contact with the Western Isles Fisherman’s social and economic development of the Association at pre-planning stage to Outer Hebrides. Marine Scotland Science’s ascertain whether or not the proposal is (MSS) advice is that there is no evidence likely to conflict with this important resource. of an impact of lice from salmon farms on wild salmon in Scotland, but acknowledge that the relatively acute declines in salmon catches on the Scottish west coast give cause for concern. MSS advise that there is evidence of an effect of sea lice from salmon farms on sea trout but the extent to which there is an effect at population level is not clear. In order to address any potential conflict, ‘Sensitive and High Value’ fresh water fish sites should be identified through pre-application discussions with the Outer Hebrides Fisheries Trust and the Western Isles District Salmon Fisheries Board. DP 3 Other (Policy text) Development Policy 3: Other Marine Interests Marine

Page / Existing Text Proposed Text or Changes (new or Policy Ref amended text in bold) Interests Development Policy 3: Other Marine Developers should provide evidence that Page 10 & 11 Interests potential impacts of new or extended fish farm sites on commercial fisheries, wild fisheries, Developers should evidence that potential MOD activities, navigational routes, impacts of proposals for new of extended anchorages, and recreational and leisure fish farm sites on commercial fisheries; activities have been identified. Where there MOD activities; navigational routes, are likely to be conflicts, details of impacts anchorages; and recreational and leisure and the mitigating measures proposed should activities have been identified and where be submitted. there are likely to be conflicts, provide details of impacts and the mitigating Areas identified for energy exploitation, measures proposed. including oil, gas and renewable energy developments should be avoided unless the Developers should identify areas of developer can demonstrate that the energy sensitive or high value game fisheries and resource will not be sterilised by the proposed where there are likely to be conflicts provide development. a detailed assessment of likely impacts and the mitigating measures proposed. Proposals for new or extended fish farm development will be permitted where it has Areas identified for energy exploitation, been satisfactorily demonstrated that the including oil, gas and renewable energy proposal would not have a significant developments should be avoided unless the adverse effect on wild fish populations, developer can demonstrate that the energy either individually or cumulatively with resource will not be sterilised by the other fin fish developments. Applications proposed development. for new fin fish farms or extensions to existing farms to increase cage surface area by 50% or more should include the

following information: • Location and where available catch data of salmon producing rivers which are judged to be potentially adversely impacted on in the loch system; • A statement as to whether the area is known to support sea trout fisheries. The Comhairle will seek the advice of Marine Scotland Science and the Western Isles District Salmon Fisheries Board in respect of the information provided with regard to wild fish in informing its determination of an application. Annex A (insert before Lochs classed as Category 1) Page 16 Areas that are not categorised through the Locational Guidelines may be suitable for development and those in Category 3 are defined because of their inshore nature. Marine Scotland Science may undertake modelling in response to applications in previously undeveloped areas. Annex A 3. Under the EU Birds Directive, the 3. Under the EU Birds Directive, the following Page 18 following sites designated Special sites designated Special Protection Area Protection Area (SPA) (to provide suitable (SPA) (to provide suitable habitat for certain habitat for certain bird species); bird species); . St Kilda . St Kilda . Flannan Isles . Flannan Isles . Monach Islands . Monach Islands . Berneray and Mingulay. . Berneray and Mingulay . North Rona & Sula Sgeir.

Page / Existing Text Proposed Text or Changes (new or Policy Ref amended text in bold) Annex A 4. Under the EU Habitats Directive, the 4. Under the EU Habitats Directive, the Page 19 following sites designated and one possible following sites designated and one possible Special Area of Conservation (SAC): Special Area of Conservation (SAC): . Monach Islands . St Kilda . Berneray & Mingulay . Monach Islands . St Kilda . Loch nam Madadh . Loch Roag lagoons . Berneray & Mingulay . Loch nam Madadh . Sound of Barra pSAC . Loch Langavat . Loch Roag Lagoons, (interaction with) . Sound of Barra pSAC. . Loch Langavat

(interaction with) . North Harris . Obain Loch Euphoirt . North Rona Annex A National Natural Heritage Designations National Natural Heritage Designations Page 19 (Map 3c & d) (Map 3c & d) Parts of the Outer Hebrides marine and Parts of the Outer Hebrides marine and coastal environments are also subject to coastal environments are also subject to national natural heritage designation, national natural heritage designation, primarily primarily Sites of Special Scientific Interest Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). (SSSI) and National Nature Reserves The following national natural heritage (NNR). The following national natural designations are of relevance to the spatial heritage designations are of relevance to strategy for marine fish farming where not this spatial strategy for marine fish farming. covered by higher level designations. Annex A Site of Special Scientific Interest Site of Special Scientific Interest Page 19 . Flannan Islands . Gress Saltings . Loch na Cartach (North Tolsta) . Tong Saltings . Gress Saltings . Shiant Isles . Tong Saltings . Small Seal Islands . Shiant Isles . Howmore Estuary . Luskentyre Banks & Saltings . Tob Valasay SSSI . Northton Bay . Small Seal Islands . Howmore Estuary. Annex A (Remove this text) Page 19 National Nature Reserve . The Monach Islands (home to one of the most important colonies of grey seals in the world). . North Rona & Sula Sgeir . Loch Druidibeg. Annex A (insert new 4th paragraph) Future Designation The Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 allows for additional protection for seals at Page 20 designated haul-outs - the locations on land where seals come ashore to rest. A

Page / Existing Text Proposed Text or Changes (new or Policy Ref amended text in bold) consultation on possible sites, including a number in the Outer Hebrides was undertaken in 2011 and the responses are now being considered by Scottish Government. This site selection process sought to focus on those haul-out sites that offered an optimum balance between maximising protection for the largest number of seals while minimising possible impacts on other sustainable activities around the coast.

Annex A Due to their inherent value in marketing the Due to their inherent value in marketing the Prime islands, the beaches which may be a islands, the beaches which may be a Beaches constraint to marine fish farming activities constraint to marine fish farming activities are Page 23 are mapped at Map 5c and are considered mapped at Map 5c and are considered to to include: include:

• Traigh na Berie, Uig • Traigh na Berie, Uig • Northton/ Scarista/ Horgabost/ Seilibost/ • Traigh Mhor, Isle of Lewis Luskentyre, Isle of Harris • Northton/ Scarista/ Horgabost/ Seilibost/ • Vatersay Bay, Isle of Vatersay. Luskentyre, Isle of Harris • Vatersay Bay, Isle of Vatersay. Background Plot ‘Isolated Coast’ (as identified in the Maps Development Plan) in appropriate Spatial Strategy Background Map Map 3a Map following sites: (North) International Environmental Designations North Harris SAC Map 3b Map following sites: (South) International Environmental Designations Obain Loch Euphoirt SAC Sound of Barra pSAC Map 3d Remove: (South) National Environmental Designations Loch Druidibeg Map 5a (re-title map): Freshwater and Coastal Game Fishing Freshwater and Coastal Game Fisheries 1 & 2 Map 5a Freshwater and Coastal Game Fishing Extend identified areas to include Lochs Resort and Cravadale. Map 5c Prime Beaches Map Traigh Mhor, Isle of Lewis (new addition) Map Horgabost/ Seilibost /Luskentyre, Isle of Harris (omitted from map, but noted on pg 23) Apply 1 km buffer to all sites. Annex B • Under The Water Environment • Under The Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Other Regulations 2005 (CAR) - SEPA sets Regulations (CAR) - SEPA sets Regulatory 2011 limits upon the scale and rate of limits upon the scale and rate of Controls discharges from fish farm sites. It discharges from fish farm sites. It Pertaining to requires that effluent is to be requires that effluent is to be assimilated Fish Farming assimilated and broken down by natural and broken down by natural processes, (Page 49) processes, without irreversible or lasting without irreversible or lasting benthic benthic impact or accumulation of impact or accumulation of pollutants. It is pollutants. recommended that applicants contact SEPA early in the development

process to ensure that their proposals can meet the requirements of CAR.

Page / Existing Text Proposed Text or Changes (new or Policy Ref amended text in bold) Annex D Addition to ‘Further Sources of Information’ SEPA LUPS GU17 Marine Development and Marine Aquaculture Planning Guidance and Page 51 SEPA Fish Farm Manual Strategy Map Amend Spatial Strategy Map to accord with the revised Spatial Strategy policies in relation to: • Designated Sites • Prime Beaches • Freshwater and Coastal Fisheries

Proposed Revised Spatial Strategy Policy section Spatial Strategy Policy 1: Areas for Potential Growth

The areas for potential growth are shown in the Spatial Strategy Map. These are the Comhairle’s preferred areas for the location of new marine fish farming proposals or extensions to existing fish farms. Proposals within these areas will be assessed against Development policies 1 – 8.

In addition proposals for new marine fish farms or extensions to existing fish farms within the areas of potential constraint listed in the table below will also require to demonstrate that identified constraints have been addressed and where an adverse or significant detrimental impact will arise, provide details of the measures that are proposed to mitigate against the impact arising from the proposed development. Developers will be expected to provide information that will allow a full planning assessment of the potential impacts. The areas of potential constraint are:

National Scenic Areas (NSA) South Lewis, Harris & North Uist South Uist Machair Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) Gress Saltings Maps 3c and 3d Tong Saltings Shiant Isles Small Seal Islands Howmore Estuary Tob Valasay SSSI Grade B & C Listed Buildings The marine waters which comprise in whole Map 4c or in part the setting of coastal Grade B and C Listed Buildings Scheduled Ancient Monuments (SAMs) The setting of coastal SAMS Map 4a 1Locational Guidelines - (Category 2 lochs) Loch Grimshader, Lewis Maps 1b ad 1c Loch Erisort/Leurbost, Lewis Loch Odhairn, Lewis Loch Seaforth, Harris Loch Uiskevagh, Benbecula Loch a Laip, Benbecula Loch Carnan, South Uist Loch Skiport, South Uist Loch Boisdale, South Uist Freshwater & Coastal Fisheries 2 Howmore to Kildonan, South Uist, Broadbay, Map 5a Isle of Lewis Recognised Surfing Beaches Hosta, North Uist; Scarista, Harris; Map 5c Mangersta, and Cliff, Uig; Dalbeg, Dalmore, Europie; Port of Ness, Isle of Lewis

1 Locational Guidelines are produced & periodically updated by MSS and should be monitored at http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/marine/science/Publications/publicationslatest/farmedfish/locationalfishfarms

Marine Renewables Development Areas post EIA Scoping in the consent (not mapped) process (not mapped) Harbour Order Areas & Key Navigational See Map 6b Routes Subsea Power Cable See Map 6c

Spatial Strategy Policy 2: Sensitive Areas

Areas sensitive to fish farming are shown on the Spatial Strategy Map and listed in the table below.

In sensitive areas fish farm development may be acceptable, subject to locational and environmental considerations. However, in recognition of the strength of protection afforded to them, unless adverse impacts can be adequately mitigated, sensitive areas are likely to be generally unsuitable for fish farm development.

World Heritage Site St KIlda Special Areas of Conservation St Kilda (SACs)/potential SAC Monach Islands Maps 3a and 3b Loch nam Madadh

Berneray & Mingulay Sound of Barra pSAC Loch Roag Lagoons, (interaction with) Loch Langavat (interaction with) North Harris Obain Loch Euphoirt North Rona Sound of Barra pSAC Special Protection Areas (SPAs) Flannan Isles Maps 3a and 3b St Kilda Islands Monach Islands Mingulay and Berneray North Rona & Sula Sgeir Proposals that may interact with Ramsar Loch an Duin, North Uist Wetland Sites South Uist machair and lochs Map 3b North Uist machair and islands Grade A Listed Buildings The marine waters which comprise the Map 4b setting of Grade A Listed Buildings 2Locational Guidelines - (Category 1 lochs) Loch Meanervagh, Benbecula Map 1a Loch Sheilavaig, South Uist Designated Shellfish Waters (Sensitive to Loch Roag, Lewis finfish farming only - see Annex A Section 6) Inner Loch Leurbost, Lewis Map 6a Outer Loch Leurbost, Lewis Loch Eynort, South Uist Freshwater & Coastal Fisheries 1 Loch Hamnaway, Lewis Map 5a Loch Tealasavay, Lewis Loch Resort, Lewis /Harris

2 Locational Guidelines are produced & periodically updated by Marine Science Scotland and should be monitored at http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/marine/science/Publications/publicationslatest/farmedfish/locationalfishfarms

Loch Cravadale, Harris Prime beaches Traigh Mhor, Lewis Map 5c Traigh na Berie, Uig Northton/Scarista/Horgabost/Seilibost/ Luskentyre, Isle of Harris Vatersay Bay, Isle of Vatersay