A Climate Change Risk Assessment of the Properties in Care of Historic Environment Scotland Introduction

SCREENING FOR NATURAL HAZARDS TO INFORM A CLIMATE CHANGE RISK ASSESSMENT OF THE PROPERTIES IN CARE OF HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT SCOTLAND INTRODUCTION

PURPOSE AND SCOPE ADHBHAR IS LEUDACHD

This document presents the to develop best practice and the impact of climate change CONTRIBUTORS DATA LICENSES results of an initial baseline integrate climate change actions on their areas of responsibility This report was prepared by the Historic Environment © All images Crown Copyright HES or assessment of natural hazard into its operations, in line with and their daily operations, and Scotland Climate Change Team with contributions Historic Environment Scotland, except risk to inform a Climate Change the Public Bodies Duties under build resilience. The Scottish from Emily Tracey (British Geological Survey). map images, where copyright is as follows: Risk Assessment of Historic the Climate Change (Scotland) Climate Change Adaptation Principal authors: David Harkin, Dr Mairi Davies and Environment Scotland’s (HES’s) Act 2009 and Climate Ready Programme specifically tasks Dr Ewan Hyslop (Historic Environment Scotland). Contains Historic Environment Scotland Properties in Care. It uses a Scotland: Scottish Climate HES with quantifying heritage and Ordnance Survey Data © Historic number of existing natural hazard Change Adaptation Programme. assets affected by climate ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Environment Scotland © Crown copyright datasets, which determine the change using GIS and creating This project has benefited from partnership and database rights 2017 Ordnance Survey risk of damage and loss to sites, The Climate Change (Scotland) a climate change risk register working with British Geological Survey and Scottish [100057073] Ordnance Survey Data. as indicators of susceptibility Act 2009 (the Act) places for the Properties in Care. These Environment Protection Agency. Particular thanks to climate change. The report duties on public bodies to formal obligations are reflected are due to Dr Fiona McLay of SEPA for facilitating Materials derived from the British outlines the drivers behind contribute to emission reduction in the actions set out in our own data access. Geological Survey's work included in carrying out the study as well targets, deliver programmes for Corporate Plan (2016), For All this publication are reproduced with the as the basic methodology of adaptation, to increase resilience, Our Futures, and our Climate We are grateful for the invaluable advice and support permission of BGS. Copyright Natural the assessment itself. This study and to act in a sustainable way. Change Action Plan (2012-2017). we received during this project from Adaptation Environment Research Council (NERC). represents the first step in a HES is identified as a ‘Major Scotland, particularly Dr Joseph Hagg, Science All rights reserved. comprehensive and ongoing Player’ under the Act, due to and Skills Manager. The project benefited from exercise to understand, monitor its size and influence. Guidance discussions with our colleagues in the Adaptation © 2017 Scottish Environment Protection and manage environmental risk on these duties published in Learning Exchange Risk Task Group. Agency. Some features of this map are to the HES Estate. This study 2011 makes it clear that public based on digital spatial data licensed from is part of HES’s ongoing work bodies are expected to assess CONTACT INFORMATION the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, For more information please get in touch with us © CEH. Includes material based upon by emailing [email protected] or phoning Ordnance Survey mapping with permission 0131 668 8600. of H.M. Stationery Office, © Crown Copyright. Licence number 100016991.

Front Cover: Brough of Birsay

Broch of Gurness

2 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 3 PREFACE RO-BHRIATHAR

Scotland’s climate is changing at project, on natural hazard risk. to the risks identified within decision-making in order to better results of the assessment are risks to these in more detail and an unprecedented rate. The last This represents the first steps in our PIC boundaries, and do not prioritise ongoing investment then presented, including a explaining site-specific mitigants century has been characterised the development of: (i) a current consider risks that may occur through our conservation and breakdown of the risk posed by and controls. The Threave Castle by a continuous increase in climate risk register for the HES just beyond these boundaries. maintenance programmes, thus the six different natural hazards case study demonstrates a site temperatures, altering patterns Estate, and (ii) a methodology for The impacts on staff and visitor ensuring the long-term survival considered in this study; those that was designed with flooding of precipitation and increased assessing the impacts of climate safety, internal collections, site of the properties in our care. being flooding (fluvial, pluvial, in mind. The Blackness and frequency of unpredictable and change on heritage assets in operations and access are outside This report outlines the policy groundwater and coastal), slope Fort George case studies give extreme weather events. Since the the wider historic environment. the scope of this work. However, context and drivers behind instability and coastal erosion. examples of sites at high risk from early 1960s, annual precipitation In partnership with the British these may form the basis of future our assessment, including the These are supplemented by natural hazards where we have levels have increased by over 20%; Geological Survey (BGS) and phases of the ongoing project. statutory duties placed on us as tables, charts, graphs and images intervened to mitigate against it is now 1°C warmer, the growing the Scottish Environment a public body. The report then to explain the nature of hazards, these risks. Finally, the Kilchurn season has been extended by over Protection Agency (SEPA), we Initial analysis of the results has details the basic methodology illustrate the data analysis and Castle case study provides an a month and sea levels continue have conducted a desk-based, indicated that out of the 352 which has been developed for highlight the unique nature of the example of a site that has an to rise at over 3mm a year (Sniffer Geographic Information Systems 'sites' investigated, 89% are the assessment, likely to be the sites in our care. The report also inherent resilience to changing 2014). This has implications (GIS) analysis of natural hazard exposed to high, or very high first of its kind for a heritage- provides case studies of four sites, environmental conditions of the for the historic environment. risk to the 336 Properties in Care levels of risk (some of our 336 focused organisation. The baseline exploring the specific hazards and landscape in which it is situated. Changing climatic conditions (PICs) of Historic Environment PICs have more than one area can alter and accelerate decay Scotland. By overlaying spatial of ‘guardianship’ or ‘ownership’, processes of historic monuments data pertaining to our own PICs meaning we ran the assessment and archaeological sites. Historic with natural hazard data sets, for 352 ‘sites’). When we then buildings that have survived supplied by the BGS and SEPA, consider the mitigating factors well in the past and in current we have been able to conduct the and controls already in place, climatic conditions may become most thorough baseline analysis such as routine maintenance less able to cope with changing of natural hazard risk carried and ongoing conservation work, weather patterns caused out to date on the HES Estate. the number of sites classified as by climate change (Historic This has allowed us to identify ‘at risk’ is reduced to 53%. With Environment Scotland 2016). the properties we now believe this new information, we can To better understand the impacts to be most at risk from climate now conduct a more in-depth of current climate threats change. At this stage, we have analysis of climate change risk at to the Historic Environment focused on the impacts to the these high-risk sites identified in Scotland (HES) Estate, we have physical fabric and cultural the baseline study. For our own undertaken a Climate Change significance of the properties requirements, this evaluation of Risk Assessment (CCRA) focusing themselves. As such the results climate change risk will provide initially, for the purpose of this of this report are strictly limited improved evidence-based

Dundrennan Abbey

4 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 5 The location of Historic Environment Scotland’s Properties in Care. CONTENTS CLÀR-INNSE

PURPOSE AND SCOPE 2 3. RESULTS 26 PREFACE 4 3.1 Data Limitations 27 CONTENTS 73.2 Fluvial Flooding 28 FIGURES 8 3.3 Pluvial Flooding 29 TABLES 9 3.4 Coastal Flooding and Coastal Erosion 30 DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN THE TEXT 10 3.5 Groundwater Flooding 32 GLOSSARY 11 3.6 Slope Instability 33 3.7 Sites at Risk 34

1. INTRODUCTION 12 1.1 Aims and Objectives 14 4. FUTURE RISK 35 1.2 The Risk Assessment and Partnership Working 14 4.1 Climate Change in Scotland 35 1.3 Why Focus on Natural Hazards? 15 4.2 Impacts on the Historic Environment 37 1.4 Outputs and Use of the CCRA 15

5. NEXT STEPS 42 2. METHODOLOGY 16 6. CONCLUSION 43 2.1 Overview 16 7. REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING 44 2.2 Datasets Sources and Information 17 2.3 Calculating Risk Scores 18 THREAVE CASTLE 45 2.3.1 Generating and Assigning Likelihood Scores 19 BLACKNESS CASTLE 49 2.3.2 Generating and Assigning Impact Scores 22 FORT GEORGE 53 2.3.3 Inherent and Residual Risk Scores 25 KILCHURN CASTLE 57

Appendix A – The Climate Change Risk Register 60

6 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 7 FIGURES TABLES FIGEARAN CLÀRAN

Figure 1: Changes in Scotland’s climate since the 1960s 13 Table 1: The Risk Matrix 18 Figure 2: Arbroath Abbey site plan 16 Table 2: Risk level breakdown descriptions 19 Figure 3: Risk assessment results 26 Table 3: Assigning likelihood scores to hazard datasets 20 Figure 4: Risk assessment results – Fluvial Flooding 28 Table 4: Groundwater Flooding – likelihood breakdown 21 Figure 5: Risk assessment results – Pluvial Flooding 29 Table 5: Slope Instability – likelihood breakdown 22 Figure 6: Risk assessment results – Coastal Flooding 31 Table 6: Impact scale 23 Figure 7: Risk assessment results – Coastal Erosion 31 Table 7: Fixed impact scores for different hazards 24 Figure 8: Risk assessment results – Groundwater Flooding 32 Table 8: Impact modifier 25 Figure 9: Risk assessment results – Slope Instability 33 Table 9: Sites at risk 34 Figure 10: Summary of projected changes in Scotland’s Climate by 2050 35 Table 10: Threave Castle – risk scores 46 Figure 11: Projected change in Scotland’s climate — temperature and precipitation maps 36 Table 11: Threave Castle – projected changes in climate by 2050s 47 Figure 12: Old Caerlaverock Castle illustration 37 Table 12: Blackness Castle – risk scores 50 Figure 13: Rainfall and landslide occurrence rate relationship 39 Table 13: Blackness Castle – projected changes in climate by 2050s 52 Figure 14: Hazard maps – Threave Castle 46 Table 14: Fort George – risk scores 54 Figure 15: Annual rainfall totals, Threave Gardens, 1961 to 2015 47 Table 15: Fort George – change in climate since 1960s 55 Figure 16: Stone decay types, and relationship with temperature and rainfall 48 Table 16: Fort George – projected changes in climate by the 2050s 56 Figure 17: Hazard maps – Blackness Castle 50 Table 17: Kilchurn Castle – risk scores 58 Figure 18: Blackness Castle – shore front wall 51 Figure 19: Annual rainfall totals, Central Scotland, 1961 to 2015 51 Figure 20: Hazard maps – Fort George 54 Figure 21: Construction of Fort George rock armour 55 Figure 22: Fort George – coastal erosion 56 Figure 23: Fort George – coastal erosion 56 Figure 24: Timothy Pont map – Loch Awe 58 Figure 25: Hazard maps – Kilchurn Castle 59

8 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 9 DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN TEXT GLOSSARY SGRÌOBHAN ÀS AN TÀINIG IOMRAIDHEAN SAN TEACSA BRIATHRACHAN

SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT • Historic Environment Scotland, BGS - British Geological Survey. Likelihood - This is the estimated is owned or occupied, under the • Climate Change (Scotland) Schemes of Delegation CCRA - Climate Change Risk probability of a specific event guardianship of, or otherwise Act 2009 (published October 2015) Assessment. occurring, ranked one to five, with under management and control of • Public Bodies Climate Change » Condition Monitoring five representing the greatest the Scottish Ministers. Coastal Erosion - The gradual Duties: Putting them into System for the Properties probability and one the lowest. destruction of susceptible PICAMS - Properties in Care Asset Practice (2011) in Care of Scottish Ministers coastline rock and sediments by Mitigants and Controls - Management System. • Climate Ready Scotland: and their Associated wave action, tidal currents and Measures implemented by HES to Residual Risk - This is the second Scottish Climate Change Collections storms. intervene and reduce the risk(s) risk score generated for each PIC Adaptation Programme (2014) » Asset Management Plan for and associated impact(s). This and details the risk posed after • Climate Change (Duties of the Properties in Care of Coastal Flooding - Inundation of includes presence of site staff, taking into consideration our site Public Bodies: Reporting Scottish Ministers – Interim seawater onto low lying, normally conservation teams and routine operations. Again, it is generated Requirements) (Scotland) Statement dry areas of land. (and planned) maintenance and by multiplying the likelihood of Order 2015 » Baseline Condition of Fluvial Flooding - Inundation site operations. an event occurring by the impact, • Our Place in Time – The the Properties in Care of of normally dry land, caused Natural Hazards - For the purpose however this time the final score Historic Environment Strategy Scottish Ministers by a river exceeding its normal of this project, the term ‘natural is adjusted based on the mitigants for Scotland (2014) » Conservation Principles for capacity. hazards’ refers to flooding and controls in place. the Properties in Care of GIS - Geographic Information (coastal, groundwater, fluvial HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT Scottish Ministers Risk - Risk is defined as exposure Systems. and pluvial), slope instability and SCOTLAND1 to a range of environmental Groundwater Flooding - Flooding coastal erosion. threats / hazards which have the • Historic Scotland Climate OTHER PUBLICATIONS caused by a rise in the water table, Change Action Plan 2012-17. • Adaptation Scotland 2013 Pluvial Flooding - Occurs where potential to cause damage to the generally during periods of above artificial drainage systems are asset and its cultural significance. Historic Scotland, April 2012 Five Steps to Managing Your average rainfall. • For All Our Futures (Historic Climate Risks: A Guide for saturated to levels they cannot Risk Rating - The likelihood HES - Historic Environment Environment Scotland Public Bodies in Scotland cope with. score multiplied by the impact Scotland. Corporate Plan 2016-19) • Committee on Climate Change Property Type - score, gives the risk rating for the • Historic Environment Scotland – UK Climate Change Risk Impact - The ‘impact’ score is Each of the 336 PICs of HES, fall property in question. Sustainability Report 2015-16 Assessment 2017 based on a subjective assessment into one of six ‘monument type’ Risk Register - This is the • Scotland’s Historic • ‘Action on Climate Change’ – of what the impacts of a hazard categories. These are: completed CCRA dataset, Environment Audit, 2016 Joint statement from SEPA, occurring, at any given site, could (A) Roofed Monuments (occupied detailing the risk scores for all 336 • Historic Environment Scotland, Scottish Natural Heritage, be. Ranked in a similar way to or staffed) PICs, for each of the six natural 2016, Short Guide 11: Climate Forestry Commission Scotland likelihood, with one being defined (B) Roofed Monuments hazards investigated. as the lowest impact and five the Change Adaptation for and Historic Scotland. (unoccupied or not staffed) SCCAP – Scottish Climate Change highest. Traditional Buildings (C) Unroofed Monuments Adaptation Programme. Impact Modifier - An assessment (masonry >1.5m) SEPA - Scottish Environment of the mitigants and controls, (D) Unroofed Monuments Protection Agency. in place at any given site that (masonry <1.5m) changes the impact score. This (E) Standing Stones and Carved Slope Instability – (Or ground gives the change from inherent to Stones instability) describes the inherent residual risk. (F) Field Monuments. ‘strength’ of a slope, and its potential to fail, causing ground Inherent Risk - This is the first of PICs - Properties In Care – means movement / landslips. two risk scores generated for each any heritable property which PIC. It is generated by multiplying is of historical, archaeological, SoD - Schemes of Delegation. the ‘likelihood’ of an event architectural or cultural 1 The responsibilities and commitments of Historic Scotland were transferred in 2015 to Historic Environment Scotland under the Historic Environment Scotland Act 2014. occurring by the ‘impact’. significance or interest and which

10 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 11 INTRODUCTION

1. INTRODUCTION RO-RÀDH

Historic Environment Scotland build resilience. The Scottish care of Scottish Ministers are and agricultural needs and key and plan for future impacts, thus The overall driver behind this (HES) is the lead public Climate Change Adaptation conserved and maintained to a transport routes. Case Study strengthening climate change is simple; Scotland’s climate is body for Scotland’s historic Programme specifically tasks high standard. Our Conservation One, Threave Castle (included at resilience throughout the sector. and has been changing. The last environment with a vision that HES with quantifying heritage Principles state that our approach the end of the report), is a good This future preparedness is century has been characterised it is cherished, understood, assets affected by climate to dealing with climate change will example of how people in the past essential for maintaining the by overall warming and altered shared and enjoyed with pride by change using GIS and creating a be pragmatic and informed, and harnessed the natural defence economic and social benefits that precipitation patterns leading everyone, now and in the future. climate change risk register for recognises that in some cases, we capability of an island in choosing the historic environment brings to wetter and warmer winters, the Properties in Care (PICs). will need a flexible approach in their site. However, this has left to Scotland. As published in and drier and warmer summers. We are tasked with leading reducing risks to the assets. They the site vulnerable to fluvial Scotland’s Historic Environment Alongside this we are also the way in ensuring Scotland’s These formal obligations are recognise that understanding flooding, which it now experiences Audit 2016, it is estimated that the experiencing the increased historic environment makes reflected in the actions set out these risks and their impacts is a on an almost annual basis. historic environment contributed frequency of extreme and a strong contribution to the in our Corporate Plan (2016) and key priority. They commit us to in excess of £2.3 billion to unpredictable weather events. cultural, social, environmental our Climate Change Action Plan assessing the vulnerability of our An evaluation of climate change Scotland’s economy in 2015/16. Coupled with rising sea-level, the and economic wellbeing of (2012-2017). The latter contains a assets and considering climate risks to the HES Estate will allow outlook for Scotland’s historic the nation and its people. We list of actions under resilience, in change as one of the criteria us to improve decision-making for When we talk about Scotland’s environment is uncertain (see are working with others to which we commit to developing in our resource management prioritising ongoing conservation historic environment, we mean Figure 1 for a summary of the key understand and manage the a methodology for assessing plans. An Asset Management and maintenance programmes, more than the properties in our changes measured in Scotland’s impacts of climate change on the the impact of climate change on Plan for the Properties in Care thus ensuring the long-term care. The methodology developed climate since the 1960s). Statistics historic environment. We are also heritage assets, and undertaking of Scottish Ministers has been survival of the properties in our as part of this project is intended published by the Met Office in leading the way in the adaptation a climate change risk assessment developed under the Scheme, care. It will also enable more to be equally applicable when their State of the UK Climate of the historic environment across the HES Estate to evaluate in which adaptation to the efficient use of resources, which assessing the risk to Scotland’s 2016 report, tell us that eight of through the dissemination of which sites are most at threat. changing climate is central. can be targeted to particular wider historic environment, the ten warmest years in the UK information and guidance to The latter is planned with the priority sites. This strategic including the risk to Scheduled have occurred since 2002 and enhance resilience against explicit intention of informing With over 300 properties approach will benefit us, as well Monuments, Listed Buildings, seven of the ten wettest years current and future changes maintenance and conservation of national and international as the wider historic environment and Conservation Areas and to recorded in the UK have been in our climate (e.g. Historic regimes across the Estate. importance in our direct care, through the development of assets with no formal designation. since 1998 (Kendon et al, 2017). Environment Scotland, 2016). we have a diverse range of methodologies to assess risks HES reports formally on its historic monuments that can help The Climate Change (Scotland) climate change adaptation us advance and demonstrate Act 2009 (the Act) places activities through its Sustainability our current understanding duties on public bodies to Report, published as an annex of climate change impacts, contribute to emission reduction to its Annual Report and as well as to develop new targets, deliver programmes for Accounts, and through the Public and innovative methods of adaptation, to increase resilience, Sector Climate Change Duties understanding and adapting and to act in a sustainable way. Reporting portal, under The to future climate change risk. HES is identified as a ‘Major Climate Change (Duties of Public Player’ under the Act, due to Bodies: Reporting Requirements) The very nature of the sites we its size and influence. Guidance (Scotland) Order 2015. care for means many are situated 1°C rise in on these duties published in in landscapes that are inherently temperature 2011 makes it clear that public The Schemes of Delegation from susceptible to natural hazard risks. bodies are expected to assess Scottish Ministers to HES require For example, being located close the impact of climate change us to put in place principles, to a river was once a crucial factor Figure 1: Changes in Scotland's on their areas of responsibility standards and procedures to in the defence of a site, along climate since and their daily operations, and ensure that the properties in the with access to water for domestic the 1960s (Sniffer 2014).

12 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 13 INTRODUCTION

1.1 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES Ordnance Survey base mapping its limitations. We have also We decided that this screening climate risk register for the HES and outputs also contribute to us The principle aims of this project was provided under the One appreciated the support of approach was sufficient for this Estate, and (ii) a methodology for achieving KPI 3, as set out in our are to: Scotland Mapping Agreement. Adaptation Scotland through its baseline, desk-based exercise assessing the impacts of climate Corporate Plan 2016-19, For All Adaptation Learning Exchange that forms the current phase change on other heritage assets. Our Futures, “Manage the impact 1. Identify the range of current The project has involved a Risk Task Group; this has enabled of the risk assessment process, of climate change by improving climate threats to the HES desk and GIS-based analysis us to share experience with other and that it would be beneficial The results of this project and the knowledge and understanding”. Estate using a desktop spatial of current natural hazard risk public bodies undertaking similar to focus further effort on the subsequent ongoing detailed site GIS mapping exercise using to the 336 PICs, from threats studies, namely NHS Scotland, investigation of individual specific work will feed directly We also have a published independent natural hazard such as flooding, coastal erosion Scottish Water and Aberdeen City properties, highlighted as being into the ongoing monitoring and commitment, under the SCCAP datasets. and slope instability. We define Council. Adaptation Scotland is a at particular risk by this initial condition assessment programme and the HES Climate Change risk as exposure to a range programme funded by Scottish phase. At the property-level we for our PICs. The resultant data Action Plan, to develop a 2. Compile a baseline national of environmental threats / Government and delivered by will be able to include a wider will be incorporated into the methodology for assessing the risk register for the properties hazards that have the potential the sustainability charity Sniffer, range of climate impacts, more PICs Asset Management System impact of climate change on forming the HES Estate, to be to cause damage to the asset which provides advice and detailed information about the (PICAMS), enabling us to fulfil heritage assets. The methodology used within the HES Properties and its cultural significance. support to help organisations, property and the knowledge and the Asset Management Plan described here is equally in Care Asset Management Understanding the risks to our businesses and communities expertise of those who manage developed under the Scheme applicable to other historic System (PICAMS) to inform properties now provides a strong prepare for, and build resilience the site; this will form the basis of Delegation. This report is environment datasets and we ongoing conservation and foundation for assessing how to climate change impacts. of future phases of the project. therefore published as one of the therefore hope it will become maintenance. climate change will alter the risks group of reports that together a model for future climate to our PICs going into the future. 1.3 WHY FOCUS ON 1.4 OUTPUTS AND USE will evidence our approach to the change risk assessments in the 3. Identify priority sites to allow NATURAL HAZARDS? OF THE CCRA conservation and maintenance wider historic environment. more in-depth appraisal of This desk-based approach Many of our PICs are situated in This completed initial phase of the HES Estate. The project risks and mitigating actions provides a robust dataset from landscapes that are vulnerable to of the project has resulted in at a more local scale. which we can then ‘ground-truth’ natural hazards. They may also be the production of (i) a current the results and match up modelled in ruinous condition and may not The above will assist with the data with real life observations and have been wind and water-tight development of: (i) a current site management practice. It forms for hundreds of years. Although climate risk register for the HES the basis of ongoing facilitated these properties are often by their Estate, and (ii) a methodology for workshops with conservation very nature resilient to threats like assessing the impacts of climate and maintenance colleagues and flooding, climate change is altering change on other heritage assets. on-site discussions, focused on the environmental parameters adapting our operations to the in which they function, meaning 1.2 THE RISK ASSESSMENT AND changing climate. that some sites are exposed PARTNERSHIP WORKING to new hazards or increased This initial phase of the risk As with any data, there are risk from existing hazards. assessment project has been constraints to how we can use conducted in close partnership these natural hazard datasets to In screening for risk from various with the BGS and SEPA, who assess the individual risk to each natural hazards, we aim to both supplied natural hazard of our PICs. Using these datasets identify the sites most at risk datasets for use in this project. requires detailed knowledge from these threats, and therefore The partnership project work and understanding not just of the sites that may be the most with BGS fell within the terms how they were created but of susceptible to climate change, of an existing Memorandum of how the impacts might affect in the coming years. Natural Agreement between HES and historic environment assets, hazards such as flooding, coastal BGS. Under “Action on Climate from building fabric to below- erosion and slope instability Change”, a joint statement ground archaeological deposits. are indicators of vulnerability on our shared responsibilities By working closely with the BGS to the climate. Consequently, around climate change, SEPA and SEPA, we have developed sites currently exposed to these was able to assist by providing a working methodology using hazards will be at increased us with key hazard datasets. the data, whilst understanding risk as the climate changes. Doune Castle

14 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 15 METHODOLOGY

2.2 DATASETS SOURCES Fluvial Flooding Coastal Erosion 2. METHODOLOGY AND INFORMATION This dataset shows the extent of This dataset shows the natural Having identified and obtained river flooding for all catchments susceptibility of the coastline DÒIGH-EÒLAS relevant datasets, we worked >3km2, for return periods of 1 in to erosion, by considering the with BGS to collate these GIS- 10 years, 1 in 100 years and 1 in elevation of the land, rockhead ready spatial datasets so that they 1,000 years. The development elevation, distance from open 2.1 OVERVIEW For each of our PICs, the The spatial site boundary data could be utilised in the project. of the river flood map is coast and wave exposure. The The project has focused on the geographical area for which HES was then overlain with the The large SEPA GIS datasets based on a two-dimensional data is supplied as a network development of a GIS-based has responsibility was evaluated natural hazard datasets. Where provide a level of information (2D) flood modelling method of 50m grid tiles, meaning it approach to combine asset against a range of hazard data a hazard intersected with an beyond that currently available applied across Scotland to all is possible that smaller scale management information with within an ArcGIS project. Our area of our guardianship or through the publicly accessible catchments greater than 3km2. variations in risk at a smaller natural hazard datasets obtained own data on our PICs was in the ownership, we could identify SEPA Flood maps website. site scale may be missed. from the BGS and SEPA. Our form of spatial boundary data in the likelihood of that hazard Pluvial Flooding methodology was informed by shapefile format that showed the occurring at each property. This Six datasets were identified as This dataset shows the flooding More information on the Adaptation Scotland’s publication, extent of the area under our direct was determined by assessing (i) relevant for the project, those extent of pluvial surface water methodologies behind the Five Steps to Managing Your ownership or guardianship. This what the hazard was and (ii) what being; (1) Fluvial Flooding, flooding for return periods of 1 in development of the SEPA Climate Risks: A Guide for Public area is often different from that type of ‘likelihood’ score that (2) Pluvial Flooding, (3) 10 years and 1 in 100 years. This datasets can be found here. Bodies. We used a commonly covered by any legal designations, particular dataset showed us. Coastal Flooding, (4) Coastal dataset combined information accepted formula for calculating such as scheduling or listing. Erosion, obtained from SEPA, on rainfall and sewer model Groundwater Flooding risk, which is used in the guide: Some of our 336 PICs have more We assessed impact by (5) Groundwater Flooding outputs. It incorporated data Groundwater flooding, for the than one area of ‘guardianship’ considering property type, Potential and (6) Slope from a national surface water purpose of this dataset, is defined Risk = Likelihood of an or ‘ownership’, which is reflected staffing and visitor access and Instability, developed by BGS. study, a regional surface water by the BGS ‘as the emergence event X Consequences in the spatial boundary data. assigning this a score. We could Basemapping was provided study with increased resolution of groundwater at the ground of an event (Impact) Due to this we ran the analysis then calculate a risk score for by the Ordnance Survey. Each in selected areas, and a Scottish surface away from perennial for 352 ‘sites’ as opposed to 336 each hazard at every property dataset details the probability Water sewer flooding assessment. river valleys or the rising of As recommended by Adaptation ‘properties’, which is the official by multiplying the likelihood of the hazard it is mapping in groundwater into man-made Scotland, we used the existing number of properties we look and impact scores together. the form of a calculated return Coastal Flooding ground under conditions where HES risk assessment scoring after. In most cases the area period (this is the estimated As informed by SEPA, these the 'normal' range of groundwater guidance and matrix, in order of ownership / guardianship time interval between events flood maps were based on a levels and groundwater flows is that risks identified could extends much further than the of a similar size or intensity), or Coastal Flood Boundary dataset exceeded’. This dataset describes easily be incorporated into upstanding visible remains; qualitative, in the form of a risk developed by the Environment the potential for groundwater the existing risk management see, for example, Figure 2. description, such as ‘the hazard Agency and Department for flooding to occur, based on where protocols for the organisation. is unlikely to occur in this area’. Environment, Food and Rural geological conditions could Affairs. This provided us with enable the flooding to happen, coastal flooding extent of and / or where groundwater still water (i.e. without wave may come close to the ground overtopping) for return periods surface, i.e. where the water of 1 in 10 years, 1 in 100 years, 1 in table is high. The dataset was 1,000 years and 1 in 10,000 years. developed using a GIS rule- based methodology based on permeable superficial deposit (PSD) flooding and clearwater flooding conceptual models. For more information see here. Figure 2: Site map for Arbroath Abbey. The complex of Abbey buildings (centre top) accounts for a relatively small proportion of the total PIC area. The red polygon shows the extent of the area under our guardianship. The separate blue polygon shows the extent of the area under our ownership.

16 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 17 METHODOLOGY

Slope Instability for advice. SEPA’s datasets are indicative, and Risk This dataset estimates the level of potential hazard of a strategic nature. Whilst all reasonable effort Score Risk Level Description Level by assessing particular slope characteristics (such has been made to ensure that they are accurate Very Unacceptable level of risk exposure that requires immediate mitigating action. as geology, gradient, sources of water, drainage, or for their intended purpose, no warranty is given 4 the actions of people). The results were published by SEPA in this regard. Within any modelling High Action at SMT. as five GIS layers, A to E, with each classification technique there is inherent uncertainty. Unacceptable level of risk which requires controls to be put in place to reduce High 3 representing increasing hazard. The level of potential exposure. Action in Directorate / Consider SMT. hazard recorded at each of our PICs does not 2.3 CALCULATING RISK SCORES Acceptable level of risk subject to regular passive monitoring. Action in Directorate. necessarily mean that a damaging event will happen, We have used the HES corporate risk matrix as a Medium 2 but is an indication of how many causative factors framework for scoring impact, likelihood and risk, may be present. For more information see here. Acceptable level of risk subject to regular passive monitoring. Action as shown in Tables 1 and 2. This is to ensure that Low 1 identified risks can be incorporated into operational in Team. Wherever possible, BGS supplies its data at no cost risk registers and escalated as appropriate. Each under the Open Government Licence. However of the PICs are assigned a risk rating, for each of Table 2: Further breakdown of ‘risk ratings'. The level at which action should be discussed / taken is determined by how high the there is some data that is only available under the six hazards investigated, by multiplying the risk score is e.g. where a site records a ‘very high’ level of risk, action should be taken by the Senior Management Team (SMT). a commercial licence. Potential users should likelihood of an event occurring by the associated contact BGS directly for advice should they wish impact. The result is a ‘risk rating’ for each PIC. 2.3.1 GENERATING AND ASSIGNING data was intended to indicate risk. These datasets to obtain the datasets for their own purposes. LIKELIHOOD SCORES easily followed the HES Risk Management Strategy. The following section outlines a simplified The HES Risk Management Strategy suggests that However, some of the data was not intended to be Generalised flood mapping data is available from methodology for assigning risk scores the likelihood score is assigned on the estimated used to indicate the potential impact of a hazard. SEPA’s Flood maps website. Again, access to more suitable for the purpose of this report probability of a specific event occurring, ranked one This is particularly relevant to the BGS datasets detailed datasets will depend on the individual which is to provide a project overview. to five (with five representing the greatest probability slope instability and groundwater flooding and circumstances; SEPA should be contacted directly and one the lowest). We found that this was not the SEPA coastal erosion dataset; this data was entirely possible to do with the datasets obtained intended to be used to indicate susceptibility and for this study. As outlined in section 2.2, depending whether or not a hazard is likely to be present. In on the dataset, this probability can be quantitative these instances, a ‘likelihood’ score was still assigned in the form of a calculated return period (this is the on the basis that the results were to be used for estimated time interval between events of a similar screening purposes only and additional site by size or intensity), or qualitative in the form of a risk site analysis would be undertaken at a future date. description, such as ‘the hazard is unlikely to occur The method we devised for assigning likelihood in this area’. Some of the likelihood scores were scores to each dataset is described below and relatively straightforward to assign, i.e. where the summarised in Table 3 on the following page.

Table 1: The Risk Matrix. Multiplying the ‘likelihood’ 5 5 10 15 20 25 by the ‘impact’ generates a risk score. The following description can be added to the ‘likelihood’ score: (1) do not believe will ever happen; (2) do not expect to happen; (3) may occur occasionally; (4) will probably Bonawe Iron Furnace 4 4 8 12 16 20 occur; (5) likely to occur. See Table 6 for further information on ‘impact’ scores. 3 3 6 9 12 15

Impact 2 2 4 6 8 10

1 1 2 3 4 5

Multiplier 1 2 3 4 5

Likelihood

18 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 19 METHODOLOGY

Groundwater Flooding this study, we felt that if there to be used for screening purposes Available datasets The BGS Groundwater Flooding is potential for groundwater only and we needed to identify dataset is intended to be used flooding to occur at the surface a means of flagging up sites that to indicate susceptibility. It does we wanted a higher risk score had potential for coastal erosion SEPA SEPA SEPA SEPA BGS BGS not provide information on the to be generated, therefore we to occur.3 Likelihood Probability Fluvial Pluvial Coastal Coastal Groundwater Landslides likelihood of the occurrence of an assigned this a 5 likelihood score; Flooding Flooding Flooding Erosion Flooding event of a particular magnitude. groundwater flooding below Five categories of susceptibility However, a ‘likelihood’ score the surface was assigned a 4 to coastal erosion are identified in 1 in 10 1 in 10 1 in 10 1 in 10 5 165-175 C E was still assigned on the basis likelihood score; and sites with the dataset. These categories are chance chance chance chance that the results were to be used limited potential for groundwater presented as a series of numbers for screening purposes only flooding to occur were assigned ranging from 105 to 175; the higher 1 in 100 1 in 100 1 in 100 1 in 100 4 150-160 B D and we needed to identify a a 3 likelihood score. Sites that the number the more susceptible chance chance chance chance means of flagging up sites that were found with no susceptibility the location is to coastal erosion. 1 in 1,000 1 in 1,000 1 in 1,000 had potential for groundwater to groundwater flooding were The numbers are generated using 3 135-145 A C chance chance chance flooding to occur. assigned a likelihood score the SEPA Underlying Physical Three categories of potential for of 0. No likelihood scores Susceptibility Model, which 1 in 10,000 1 in 10,000 groundwater flooding to occur of 1 or 2 were assigned. aggregates four different datasets 2 120-130 B chance chance are identified in the dataset: to produce an overall score.4 A, B and C. See Table 4 for the Coastal Erosion Each number is assigned a colour 1 in definition of each category. The SEPA Coastal Erosion ranging from green to red (traffic 1 100,000 105-115 A Each category indicates limited dataset indicates areas that are light system), green indicating chance potential or potential for likely to be more susceptible least susceptible and red most groundwater flooding to occur. If to coastal erosion. It does not susceptible. See Table 3 for how Table 3: The relationship between the likelihood score and corresponding datasets used as part of this project. there is potential for groundwater indicate the likelihood of a hazard we decided to assign ‘likelihood’ flooding to occur the depth of occurring. However, similar to the scores against the range of flooding is also indicated (i.e. Groundwater Flooding dataset, a susceptibility scores provided in Using ArcGIS’ ArcMap software, a shapefile datasets, likelihood is assigned using a 1 to 5 scale either below ground level or at ‘likelihood’ score was still assigned the dataset. containing our PIC boundary spatial data was with 5 representing the greatest probability (or a the surface). For the purpose of on the basis that the results were overlain with each of the six natural hazard datasets, 1 in 10 return period) and 1 the lowest probability in turn. A query run in ArcMap then assessed (or a 1 in 100,000 return period; see Table 3). where the footprint of our PICs intersected with However, the same return periods are not included one or more of the six natural hazard datasets. in every dataset. For example, the Pluvial Flooding The results of this exercise also told us what dataset did not include information for floods with ‘likelihood’ of natural hazard was recorded, if at all. a 1 in 1,000 return period. This could, therefore, Category Definition result in a site being assigned a zero likelihood Fluvial, Pluvial and Coastal Flooding score even though it may still be at risk. See Table A Limited potential for groundwater flooding to occur Three of the SEPA datasets contain probability data 3 for the Fluvial, Pluvial and Coastal Flooding in the form of ‘return periods’2: Fluvial Flooding, data available to us at the time of this study, and Pluvial Flooding, Coastal Flooding. For these the corresponding likelihood score assigned. B Potential for groundwater flooding of property situated below ground level

C Potential for groundwater flooding to occur at surface

Table 4: Potential for groundwater flooding categories and definitions as defined in the BGS SGF dataset.

2A measure of the rarity of an event - the longer the return period, the rarer the event. It is the average length of time (usually in years) separating flood events of a similar magnitude. The return period is also the inverse of the 3The Groundwater Flooding dataset is suitable for use for regional or national planning purposes where used alongside a range of other probability that the event will be exceeded in any one year. For example, a 10-year flood has a 1/10 = 0.1 or 10% relevant information to inform land-use planning decisions. In the case of this study, the data is being used alongside other flood risk chance of being exceeded in any one year and a 50-year flood has a 1/50 = 0.2 or 2% chance of being exceeded datasets and as part of an initial screening process to identify sites that may have potential for groundwater flooding to occur. in any one year. (SEPA, 2015). 4SEPA Natural Susceptibility to Coastal Erosion: methodology and mapping summary.

20 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 21 METHODOLOGY

Slope Instability scores, the available data give and safety (of staff/visitors), site IMPACT LEVEL ONE The BGS Slope Instability, or a reasonable indication of access, business operations or Roofed Monuments (A&B) Unroofed Monuments (C&D) Standing Stones, Carved Stones Monument Type Landslide dataset (version 7) is possible future impacts based organisational reputation etc. (Occupied and Unoccupied) (High and Low Masonry) & Field Monuments (E&F) intended to be used to identify on the current understanding Once this methodology has and assess potential hazard in a of natural hazards. By using this been established and refined it Impact Description Historic fabric is stable Historic fabric is stable No alteration given area. The severity of the data, even if not intended to be is intended that we will apply General Site hazard is indicated with an A-E used to calculate risk, a baseline it to wider aspects of our Negligible impact to property/site; No ground disturbance; Site remains in optimal condition. classification - A representing understanding of threats can be operations (which is beyond Description the lowest hazard level and E ascertained. Then, as additional the scope of this initial phase). the highest, (Table 5 shows the data is available and further The impact score is ranked in a IMPACT LEVEL TWO breakdown of this scale). The data studies and individual site-by-site similar way to likelihood, with Roofed Monuments (A&B) Unroofed Monuments (C&D) Standing Stones, Carved Stones does not indicate if a landslide analyses are undertaken, data can one being defined as the lowest Monument Type is likely to occur, but rather how be improved upon and threats impact and five the highest. (Occupied and Unoccupied) (High and Low Masonry) & Field Monuments (E&F) vulnerable an area might be to modified to more accurately Gradual attrition of Minor decay to exposed features Minor decay to exposed features experiencing hazard events and reflect the risk. Due to the desk-based nature of Impact Description material fabric whether the hazard is present or the project, at this stage, impact General Site Minor damage to site, Recoverable and no loss of historic fabric; Localised anticipated. However, a ‘likelihood’ 2.3.2 GENERATING AND scores were assigned based on Description ground disturbance; Site remains in satisfactory condition. score was still assigned on the ASSIGNING IMPACT SCORES the type of property and type basis that the results were to In order to apply consistent risk of hazard in question. As set out be used for screening purposes scores to all our PICs, an impact in the Scheme of Delegation, IMPACT LEVEL THREE only, and we needed to identify scoring system was created. Baseline Condition Survey, the Roofed Monuments (A&B) Unroofed Monuments (C&D) Standing Stones, Carved Stones Monument Type a means of flagging up sites that For the purpose of this risk HES PICs are broken down into (Occupied and Unoccupied) (High and Low Masonry) & Field Monuments (E&F) had potential for a landslide to assessment, the scores are based six categories, which also form occur, or may already be affected. entirely on the physical impact the breakdown for this risk Damage to structural elements Damage to structural elements Continued attrition; Surface Impact Description (masonry, roof, etc.) (masonry, roof, etc.) modification/loss. See Table 3 for how we decided to to the monument fabric, and its assessment. Those categories are assign ‘likelihood’ scores. surrounding grounds. Details of labeled A to F and detailed in the General Site Minor damage to (or loss) of historic fabric; Short to long term consequences; Ground disturbance; the scores are outlined in Table 'Monument Type' field of Table 6. Description Potential for exposure of archaeological deposits; Significant localised problems. Despite the inherent difficulties 6. The system does not consider, with assigning likelihood for example, impact on health IMPACT LEVEL FOUR

Roofed Monuments (A&B) Unroofed Monuments (C&D) Standing Stones, Carved Stones Monument Type (Occupied and Unoccupied) (High and Low Masonry) & Field Monuments (E&F)

Rapid attrition of material; Cracks in masonry with signs of Cracks in masonry with signs of Impact Description Monument unstable; Loss movement; Potential for collapse movement; Potential for collapse of surface features

Scale Definition Damage to site with significant loss of historic fabric; Long-term consequences; General Site Significant ground disturbance; Damage/loss of archaeological deposits; Description Slope instability problems are not thought to occur, but consideration to potential Site in unsatisfactory condition with major localised problems. A problems of adjacent areas impacting on the site should always be considered Slope instability problems are not likely to occur, but consideration to potential IMPACT B LEVEL FIVE problems of adjacent areas impacting on the site should always be considered Roofed Monuments (A&B) Unroofed Monuments (C&D) Standing Stones, Carved Stones Monument Type Slope instability problems may be present or anticipated—site investigation (Occupied and Unoccupied) (High and Low Masonry) & Field Monuments (E&F) C should consider specifically the slope stability of the site Partial to total collapse Partial to total collapse Major deterioration of fabric Slope instability problems are probably present or have occurred in the Impact Description D past—land use should consider specifically the stability of the site General Site Irrecoverable loss of historic fabric; Major long-term consequences; Site in unsatisfactory condition. Slope instability problems almost certainly present and may Description E be active—significant constraint on land use

Table 5: Scale of hazard as defined in the BGS GeoSure Landslides dataset. Table 6: A new scale of impact developed for the purpose of this project.

22 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 23 METHODOLOGY

For example, if a landslide were to occur, or a section interiors and have a decreased ability to ‘dry out’ 2.3.3 INHERENT AND RESIDUAL RISK SCORES its visitor access (some of our properties are open all of coast eroded, these would be irreversible events. after flood waters have receded. An unroofed (i) Inherent Risk year, some seasonal and some permanently closed). As such, they both inflict the maximum impact on monument, as another example, whilst in many cases This is the first of two risk scores generated for each This is a notional adjustment related primarily to any given property. A flood, however, would have having largely intact foundations / walls, is less likely PIC. It is generated by multiplying the ‘likelihood’ the on-site presence of staff to reflect an expected a different impact depending on what the type to contain such vulnerable collections, therefore the of an event occurring by the ‘impact’. It provides reduction in risk. For example, at a site that is staffed of property was. For example, a flood at a roofed impact of a flood is likely to be lower here as well. us with a means of assessing inherent risk at PICs. all year round, it could be anticipated that staff will monument that is occupied would arguably have a Table 7 details the assigned relationship between the This reflects the primary vulnerability of a site be alerted to an imminent flood, therefore there is greater impact than a flood at a field monument. This six different hazards investigated, and their impact to the natural hazards considered, before taking greater potential for proactive action in response to is due to the fact that a roofed monument is more on the six categories of property. into account the mitigating factors and controls this hazard. The amount deducted from the impact likely to house special collections, have decorative associated with site management. score is shown in Table 8.

(ii) Mitigants and Controls (iii) Residual Risk Property Category To reflect our site operations and maintenance This is the second risk score generated for each HAZARD A B C D E F regime (presence of site staff, conservation teams, PIC and details the risk present after taking into etc.), the impact score is modified to reflect this consideration the mitigants and controls. Again, it is Landslide 5 5 5 5 5 5 which, as a result, changes the risk score. This gives generated by multiplying the likelihood of an event us the change from Inherent Risk to Residual Risk. occurring by the impact. However, this time the final Coastal Erosion 5 5 5 5 5 5 score is adjusted based on the mitigants and controls Pluvial Flooding 4 4 3 3 2 2 To modify the impact score, it is reduced depending in place. on the level of staffing in place at any given site, and Fluvial Flooding 4 4 3 3 2 2

Coastal Flooding 4 4 3 3 2 2 Property Opening times Impact Modifier (plus staffing) (Change in Impact Score) Groundwater Flooding 4 4 3 3 2 2 Closed No Change Impact Score (2 to 5) Seasonal -0.25 Table 7: The relationship between the different ‘types’ of monument we care for, and the fixed impact score for the different hazards. Seasonal (Staffed) -0.5

All Year -0.75

Caerlaverock Castle All Year (Staffed) -1

Table 8: The amount deducted from the inherent impact score to give us the residual impact score.

24 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 25 RESULTS

3.1 DATA LIMITATIONS We have been able to address site. Case Study Two, Blackness 3. RESULTS As with any modelled data, there these limitations to the best of Castle, is a good example of this are inherent uncertainties that can our ability by working closely with and is included at the end of the TORAIDHEAN influence the results. The SEPA SEPA and BGS. This close working report. The opposite is also true datasets, which were created to partnership has allowed us to here; there are examples of sites support flood risk management acknowledge, and understand, the where the entire site boundary For this initial phase of the project efficient and pragmatic way. exposure to hazards. We define planning at a community level, are limitations of these datasets but falls within the footprint of one or we have assessed the risk from Initial results from the desk-top risk as exposure to a range of not intended for property level still use them in an effective and more of the hazards investigated. six natural hazards at 352 ‘sites’. natural risk assessment show that environmental threats / hazards, assessment. As such, the results sensible manner. Within the remit of this initial The results of this initial desk- of the 352 'sites', 89% are exposed which have the potential to are indicative of the risk that phase of the risk assessment based assessment has allowed to at least one hazard in a way that cause damage to the asset may be experienced at our sites. In general, the nature of the data project, risk scores are not altered us to identify, to the best of our is considered unacceptable i.e. and its cultural significance. Likewise, the BGS slope instability and the fact that we are assessing to reflect what percentage of the knowledge, what sites we believe damaging to the site or monument These sites on the Residual dataset has specific limitations only presence or absence of site is at risk from one or more of to be the most at risk from the fabric (Inherent Risk: very high or list will now undergo a priority in that it is concerned only with a hazard within the property the hazards studied. natural hazards assessed, and high – see Figure 3). Taking into assessment to identify mitigation potential ground stability related boundary, means that there are ultimately climate change. These account the mitigants and controls requirements. In some cases work to natural geological conditions. cases where a site records high results will now inform the next in place, the number of sites has recently been carried out or It does not cover man-made levels of risk, but in fact that phase of our risk assessment, classified as ‘at risk’ is reduced to is currently underway to reduce hazards, such as contaminated hazard may only be a feature which will include more detailed 53% (see Figure 3, residual risk). the residual risk, as part of our land or mining. at a small, localised area of the desk based assessments of risk at 28 sites are classified as very continual annual maintenance the high-priority sites, as well as high and 160 sites as high risk. and repair works, e.g. rock site visits and gathering in staff containment at Edinburgh observations from the ground. The high and very high risk Castle; coastal protection Using this data to inform our next categories indicate unacceptable works at Blackness Castle. steps will allow us to allocate risk that requires actions in time and resources in a more order to control or reduce

INHERENT RESIDUAL RISK RISK

18.18% Very High 7.96% Very High 71.02% High 45.45% High 10.80% Acceptable 46.59% Acceptable

Figure 3: Initial results of the Risk Assessment. The ‘inherent risk’ score does not take into account any mitigants and controls already in place at our PICs. An assessment of staff and visitor presence at our PICs alters the risk score to produce the ‘residual risk’. See section 2.3 for more information. Elgin Cathedral

26 A Climate Change Risk Assessment RESULTS

3.2 FLUVIAL FLOODING 3.3 PLUVIAL FLOODING of rainwater into natural flow assessment (Inherent Risk) show The Fluvial Flooding SEPA dataset The Pluvial Flooding SEPA pathways. Where pluvial flooding that out of 352 'sites' analysed, shows the extent of river flooding dataset shows the flooding has been recorded at our sites, approximately 5% are exposed for all catchments >3km2, for extent of pluvial surface water it is usually in small, localised to Pluvial Flooding in a way that return periods of 1 in 10 years, 1 flooding for return periods areas. These will now require is deemed unacceptable. The in 100 years and 1 in 1,000 years. of 1 in 10 years and 1 in 100 further investigation to identify remaining 95% are not thought to Of our 336 PICs, 45% are located years. Pluvial flooding affects a if they present an immediate be at immediate risk. within 100 metres of a river or a relatively small proportion of our risk. Depending on the nature of stream course. When we consider sites, with routine maintenance the site, risk of pluvial flooding Taking into account the mitigants other areas liable to flood, such and drainage schemes already may already be effectively and controls in place, the number as culverts, standing bodies of providing effective dispersal of managed by routine maintenance of sites classified as ‘at risk’ is water, marsh land and agricultural rainwater. The rural setting of e.g. regular clearance of cast reduced to approximately 4% – drainage systems, the number of many of our properties and the iron rainwater goods and two sites recording a ‘Very High’ properties within 100 metres of resulting irregular topography is ground drainage systems. risk and 12 recording a ‘High’ risk, these increases to 86%. also a key factor in the dispersal Initial results from the risk this is the Residual Risk score. Inverlochy Castle, built around 1280 on the banks of the River Lochy, which once fed a The proximity of many of our large moat that surrounded the castle. sites to these areas liable to 0.57% Very High fluvial flooding is not surprising. show an inbuilt resilience to this be at immediate risk, however as - See our Case Study on Threave the continued impacts of climate 3.45% High When many of our properties 95.98% Acceptable were constructed and used, Castle for example, at the end of change are realised, it is expected being close to a water source was the report. that this figure will change, with essential for provision of water an increase in the number of ‘at for the domestic, agricultural Initial results from the risk risk’ sites. Taking into account and transport needs of our assessment (Inherent Risk) show the mitigants and controls INHERENT RESIDUAL ancestors. The legacy of this is that out of 352 'sites' analysed, in place, the number of sites RISK RISK that many of our properties are approximately 17% are exposed classified as ‘at risk’ is reduced to now susceptible to the impacts to fluvial flooding in a way that approximately 16% – seven sites of fluvial flooding. However many is deemed unacceptable (i.e. recording a ‘Very High’ risk and 48 Very High and High risk). The recording a ‘High’ risk, this is the Figure 5: Breakdown remaining 83% are not thought to Residual Risk score. of risk, due to Pluvial Flooding, at the 352 ‘sites’ assessed.

1.44% Very High Figure 4: 4.02% High Breakdown of 94.54% Acceptable risk, due to fluvial flooding, at the 352 ‘sites’ assessed.

INHERENT RESIDUAL RISK RISK

4.6% Very High 2.01% Very High 12.64% High 13.79% High 82.76% Acceptable 84.20% Acceptable Brough of Birsay

28 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 29 RESULTS

3.4.1 COASTAL FLOODING The Coastal Flooding SEPA dataset shows the Coastal Flooding extent of still water (i.e. without wave overtopping) for return periods of 1 in 10 years, 1 in 100 years, 1 in 1,000 years and INHERENT RESIDUAL 1 in 10,000 years. Initial results RISK RISK from the risk assessment (Inherent Risk) show that out of 352 'sites' analysed, approximately 10% are exposed to Coastal Flooding in a way that is deemed unacceptable. The remaining 90% are not thought to be at immediate risk. 3.74% Very High 2.01% Very High Taking into account the mitigants 6.03% High 6.90% High and controls in place, the number 90.23% Acceptable 91.09% Acceptable of sites classified as ‘at risk’ is Tantallon Castle, reduced to approximately 9% – near North Berwick, perched seven sites recording a ‘Very High’ on a steep rocky risk and 24 recording a ‘High’ risk, cliff overlooking this is the Residual Risk score. Figure 6: Breakdown of risk, due to Coastal Flooding, at the 352 ‘sites’ assessed. the Firth of Forth.

3.4 COASTAL FLOODING AND from this project has been the pressure, from coastal erosion COASTAL EROSION Dynamic Coast website – an in particular, in the face of rising Of our 336 PICs, 8% are within interactive tool to inform strategic sea-levels and a possible increase 3.4.2 COASTAL EROSION 10 metres of the coastline, and planning at local authority level. in the number of, and intensity of, The Coastal Erosion SEPA dataset 14% within 50 metres. Although a Tools like this will help us make winter storms. shows the natural susceptibility relatively small proportion of our more informed decisions, with of the coastline to erosion, by overall Estate, this still represents respect to adapting to future Our coastal sites present one of considering the elevation of the a number of significant sites that coastal change. our greatest challenges moving land, rockhead elevation (the may be at risk of coastal flooding forward, as the unrelenting depth to the bedrock geology), INHERENT RESIDUAL and / or erosion. It is worth The coastal setting of many of increase in sea-levels in particular, distance from open coast and RISK RISK noting that given the national our sites is a legacy of the needs continue to cause issues arising wave exposure. Initial results from scale of the coastal erosion of the people that constructed from coastal flooding and erosion. the risk assessment (Inherent dataset, there are instances and used them. Similar to the Many of our sites have had sea- Risk) show that out of 352 'sites' where it has not identified sites benefits of being close to a river, defences in place for many analysed, approximately 10% are where there is known coastal there were significant advantages years now, including (but not exposed to Coastal Erosion in a erosion. Part of the solution to for the defence and domestic limited to) Skara Brae, Blackness way that is deemed unacceptable. this omission is our involvement needs of the people using these Castle, Castle Sween and Fort The remaining 90% are not 4.54% Very High 2.84% Very High in the ongoing National Coastal sites by being close to the sea. George. In many cases, these thought to be at immediate risk. 4.83% High 3.98% High Change Assessment for Scotland Our Fort George Case Study, defences are doing the job they Taking into account the mitigants 90.63% Acceptable 93.18% Acceptable (NCCA), which has established included at the end of the report, were intended to, however, they and controls in place, the number historical coastal change in order is a good example of picking a require ongoing monitoring of sites classified as ‘at risk’ is to estimate past erosion and strategically advantageous stretch and maintenance and will come reduced to approximately 7% – 10 accretion rates. This has provided of coastline for constructing a under increasing pressures as sites recording a ‘Very High’ risk a basis for a fifty year projection military base. Fort George is also a climate change intensifies. and 14 recording a ‘High’ risk, this of coastal change. A key output good example of a site now under is the Residual Risk score. Figure 7: Breakdown of risk, due to Coastal Erosion, at the 352 ‘sites’ assessed.

30 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 31 Lincluden Collegiate Church

RESULTS

3.5 GROUNDWATER FLOODING as a fort more than 2,000 years This BGS dataset, based on ago. But the site is internationally geological and hydrogeological renowned as a royal power centre information, identifies areas of the Gaelic kings of Dál Riata, where geological conditions could from about AD 500 to AD 800. enable groundwater flooding to occur and where groundwater Initial results from the risk may come close to the ground assessment (Inherent Risk) show surface. Groundwater flooding has that out of 352 'sites' analysed, the potential to alter the historic approximately 95% are exposed fabric and appearance of our to Slope Instability in a way that properties, by changing ground is deemed unacceptable. The conditions and altering the type remaining 5% are not thought to of vegetation that can grow on be at immediate risk. While this the surface. It has the potential statistic may appear alarming, to cause flooding in sites that go Lincluden Collegiate Church Dunadd Fort it is a result of the way in which below ground level, which is a the impact score for slope concern at many of our properties Initial results from the risk score. Recent research by BGS 3.6 SLOPE INSTABILITY landmarks are those perched atop instability is obtained. This type that contain cellars / vaults, assessment (Inherent Risk) show (2015) indicates that the actual This BGS dataset identifies where rocky outcrops, such as Stirling of hazard is irreversible, and as well as those with surviving that out of 352 'sites' analysed, impact of groundwater flooding slope instability occurs when and Edinburgh Castles, which both automatically scores the highest archaeological deposits. Certain approximately 59% are exposed is often mitigated by artificial particular slope characteristics make use of the natural defence level of impact, which is why such stone types, like sandstone, which to Groundwater Flooding in a way or natural drainage systems, (such as geology, gradient, capabilities provided by the a high percentage of our sites is used prolifically throughout that is deemed unacceptable. The as well as building design. As sources of water, drainage, or the steep-sided volcanic crags. There are initially recorded as being at our Estate, are susceptible to remaining 41% are not thought a result, the true percentage actions of people) could combine is a symbolic element as well in ‘High’ or ‘Very High’ risk. Taking enhanced rates of decay as to be at immediate risk. Taking of properties 'at risk' is likely to make the slope unstable. being located on high, visible and into account the mitigants and they can absorb groundwater into account the mitigants and to be lower than this screening As with the other hazards defensible points of land. This is controls in place, the number into their porous structure, as controls in place, the number exercise suggests. Future phases investigated in this assessment, clear at sites like Dunadd Fort, of sites classified as ‘at risk’ is observed at Lincluden Collegiate of sites classified as ‘at risk’ is of the risk assessment project, many of the sites at risk of slope which rises from Moine Mhor (the reduced to approximately 19% - Church (see image above). reduced to approximately 41% – which include ground-truthing instability are so because of the ‘great moss’), an expanse of peat seven sites recording a ‘Very High’ Section 4.2 has additional 14 sites recording a ‘Very High’ the results of this report, will fundamental characteristics of bog that carpets the southern risk and 60 recording a ‘High’ risk, information on these impacts. risk and 131 recording a ‘High’ help us refine our understanding the site, which are the very reason end of Kilmartin Glen in the west this is the Residual Risk score. risk, this is the Residual Risk of risk across the Estate. they were occupied historically. of Scotland. Excavations in the Some of our most recognisable 1980s found the mound was used

Figure 8: Figure 9: Breakdown Breakdown of of risk, due to risk, due to Slope Groundwater Instability, at the Flooding, at the 352 'sites' assessed. 352 ‘sites’ assessed.

INHERENT RESIDUAL INHERENT RESIDUAL RISK RISK RISK RISK

16% Very High 4% Very High 3.73% Very High 2.01% Very High 42.86% High 37.43% High 91.38% High 17.24% High 41.14% Acceptable 58.57% Acceptable 4.89% Acceptable 80.75% Acceptable

32 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 33 RESULTS FUTURE RISK

3.7 SITES AT RISK Property Name Type Hazards Based on the initial results of this 4. FUTURE RISK desk-based analysis of current Biggar Gasworks A FF, GF natural hazard risk across the HES Bonawe Iron Furnace B FF, GF, PF, CF RIOSG TEACHDAIL Estate, the following 28 sites all Brough of Birsay D CE record ‘Very High’ levels of risk in one, or more, of the six hazards Cambuskenneth Abbey B FF, GF, CF The results of our risk assessment, projections data is the United variations in anticipated to date, are based on the current Kingdom Climate Projections climate change. When looking investigated. A further 160 sites Castle Sween C CE record ‘High’ levels of risk (see risk to our PICs, not future risk 2009 (UKCP09) climate specifically at changes in Dundonald Castle C LA the Risk Register Appendix for influenced by a changing climate. modelling tool. This data provides precipitation, the North West the complete results of the risk Eileach-an-Naoimh C CE However, all of the risks are likely probabilistic projections for a coast of Scotland and the to increase as a result of climate range of atmospheric variables Northern Isles are expected assessment). Of the 28 sites, Elcho Castle A GF seven record a ‘Very High' risk for change due to their inherent links including temperature and to see a lower reduction in fluvial flooding, seven for coastal Fort George A CE to precipitation and sea level rise. precipitation. The data can be summer rainfall, in comparison flooding, two for pluvial flooding, Hackness Battery & Martello Tower A CF The results gathered as part of viewed over varying temporal to the rest of the country. In this assessment therefore form time scales and under three contrast to this, these same 14 for groundwater flooding, 10 Inchcolm Abbey B CE, LA, GF, CF for coastal erosion, and seven for the baseline data from which we proposed future emissions areas are expected to see a slope instability. Inchcolm Island B CE, LA, GF, CF can consider how climate change scenarios (low, medium and high). larger increase in rain falling Innerpeffray Chapel B GF will impact our PICs in the future. The data is given at a resolution of during the winter months, (see 25km as well as for whole regions. Figure 11 for further information). Kisimul Castle A CF 4.1 CLIMATE CHANGE The projected climate change When looking at the anticipated Mavisbank Policies F LA IN SCOTLAND data included in Figure 10 is based changes in temperature, in both We know that the climate is on a high emissions scenario the summer and winter analysis, Ness of Burgi D CE changing, and we know that this (worst case outcome) and with a Southern Scotland will, broadly Newark Castle A CE, GF, CF is already having a notable impact 50% probability (central estimate), speaking, see higher increases Quoyness Chambered Cairn B CE on the historic environment. meaning that under different in temperature in comparison to To begin to understand how circumstances there are higher Northern Scotland, as shown in Seton Collegiate Church B GF, FF changing climatic conditions and lower figures obtainable. It the UKCP09 maps in Figure 11. Spynie Palace C LA will impact the historic shows the anticipated changes St. Blane's Church C LA environment in the future we in Scotland’s climate by the These regional differences first of all need to know what 2050s (UKCP09, 2017). will play an important role in St. Serf's Church, Dunning B GF ‘change’ is going to happen. future consideration of climate Stanley Mills A LA, FF, GF Within the Scotland-wide change risk across our Estate Tealing Dovecot B GF, FF, PF In the United Kingdom the projections for future climate of Properties in Care, and the primary source of future climate change lie strong regional wider historic environment. Torphichen Preceptory B GF Tullibardine Chapel B GF Whithorn Priory Crosses (& Museum) A FF Wideford Hill Chambered Cairn E LA

Table 9: Top 28 ‘at risk’ sites. ‘Type’ refers to the six monument categories (see section 2.3). Hazards key: FF – fluvial flooding;PF – pluvial flooding;GF – groundwater flooding; CF – coastal flooding;CE – coastal erosion and LA – slope instability.

Figure 10: Projected changes in the climate of Scotland by the 2050s, under a high emissions scenario (UKCP09, 2017).

34 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 35 FUTURE RISK

Figure 11: 4.2 IMPACTS ON THE HISTORIC harbour inland by approximately (Rennie and Hansom, 2011). As Anticipated change ENVIRONMENT 200m from the present day reported in The Committee on A - SUMMER B - WINTER by the 2050s in (A) Summer shoreline. This is a familiar story Climate Change UK Climate TEMPERATURE TEMPERATURE temperature; Rising Sea Levels around Scotland, where a complex Change Risk Assessment 2017, (B) Winter temperature; Sea-levels around Scotland have glacial and geological history, as since 1900, sea-levels around (C) Summer historically been variable. Our well as local human influences, has the UK have risen by 15 to 20 precipitation; coastline today bears the evidence resulted in apparent falls and rises centimetres, with climate change (D) Winter precipitation. of rising and falling sea-levels, in sea-level. projections indicating that by Projected average with many of our PICs showing 2100 there could be a further rise temperature increase (°C) evidence of these changes. Old After the retreat of the last of between 50 and 100 cm. This is given for Caerlaverock Castle in Dumfries Scottish ice sheet around 20,000 has clear, severe implications for temperature and Galloway is a good example year ago, the land surface of our sites located on the coast. maps. Projected percentage of this. The original castle, Scotland began to ‘rebound’, as 8% of our sites are located within change in annual constructed in the early 13th a result of the immense weight of just 10 meters of the shoreline, precipitation is given for Century had its own harbour and the ice sheets being removed. This and 14% within 50 metres. Many of precipitation maps stood at the head of a small tidal effectively ‘cancelled out’ rising these sites have been classified as (UKCP09, 2017). inlet, (see Figure 12 for an artist’s sea-levels. The rates at which sea being at ‘Very High’ risk of coastal impression of this). An apparent levels are rising now, as a result erosion and flooding in this risk drop in sea level since this time of anthropogenic climate change, assessment. has left what remains of the has overtaken this process

<0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 <0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 Change in mean temperature (deg C) Change in mean temperature (deg C)

C - SUMMER D - WINTER PRECIPITATION PRECIPITATION

Figure 12: An artist’s illustration of the early 13th Century Caerlaverock Castle, situated at the head of <-70 -50 -30 -10 0 10 30 50 <-70 -50 -30 -10 0 10 30 50 a small tidal inlet, complete with its own harbour. Change in precipitation (%) Change in precipitation (%)

36 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 37 FUTURE RISK

Water is also a key controlling 200 80 factor in other natural hazards UK Rainfall and Landslides 2012 aside from flooding. Landslips Number of Landslides and other slope instability issues, 160 Average Number of Landslides Average Monthly Rainfall for example, are to an extent More rain = More landslides? 60

controlled by the presence of es water. See, for example the 120 m) ndslid (m

relationship between rainfall and La ll 40 fa of

the occurrence of landslides, as in demonstrated in Figure 13. This Ra 60 example, recorded by the BGS, Number details how in 2012 above average 20 levels of rainfall correlated with 40 an increase in the number of landslides recorded. 0 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

Figure 13: Relationship between rainfall and the occurrence rates of landslides, 2012 (BGS, 2016).

Increasing frequency and of flooding and the associated Ness of Burgi, an Iron Age ruin in Shetland. Repeated extreme wetting and work, and the repeated process of freeze-thaw decay will have Situated on a narrow promontory, the site intensity of rainfall risk is seen as the greatest direct is dominated by a so-called ‘blockhouse drying can also lead to ground of drying out can also facilitate left stonework vulnerable to As discussed in Section 4.1, climate change related threat in fort’ – a rare type of monument of which instability issues, through the the diffusion of salts into the other methods of decay that our Scotland is expected to see the United Kingdom. Out of the there are only three confirmed examples, destabilisation of soils. This porous structure of masonry. changing climate will favour. all in Shetland. This site is flagged as being continually wetter winters 336 PICs of HES, 45% are within at ‘Very High’ risk of coastal erosion. could have a range of negative When the stone dries out these and drier summers, with more 100 metres of a stream or river effects, including the movement salts can crystallise, and exert A fluctuating water table or frequent intense spells of rain. course. When we consider other of building foundations and an internal pressure that causes wetting and / or drying of This changing frequency, and areas liable to flood, such as Within our portfolio of PICs, 55 the disturbance of known and the stone to decay. The source archaeological deposits under intensity, of rainfall will have agricultural drains, marsh land and are identified as being at ‘High’ unknown buried archaeological of these salts could be natural, the topsoil can lead to chemical direct impacts on all aspects standing bodies of water such as or ‘Very High’ risk of fluvial remains. This is more prevalent for example an airborne aerosol changes, compaction, settlement of the historic environment. ponds and lochs, the number of flooding. Within these identified in certain types of soils, such as in a marine environment, or from or erosion that may have adverse sites within 100 metres of these properties, there are many that those that are clay rich. human sources, for example the effects on the long-term survival Water is the most destructive areas increases to 86%. However, provide examples of resilience use of de-icing salts on paths of these remains, including agent of decay. On a large scale, it should be noted that not all to this flooding threat. The very On a smaller scale, but over a (Smith et al, 2011). This process is palaeoenvironmental material heavy and intense rainfall can these sites have been identified as existence of some of these sites is longer period of time, water similar in freeze-thaw weathering, (Daly 2013; High et al 2016; directly lead to flooding in a being at direct risk from flooding testament to their ability to cope is a major controlling factor whereby water freezing and Historic England 2016; Martens short time frame, which has the in this risk assessment. with hazards such as flooding. in chemical, biological and expanding within the porous et al, 2016). potential to cause catastrophic This theme is explored further in physical decay processes that network of stone, or in fissures damage to all elements of the the Kilchurn Castle Case Study at are particularly prolific in the and cracks, overtime causes the historic environment within reach the end of the report. deterioration of stone work. stone to decay. However, with of these potential flood zones. As In short, if stone is exposed to winter temperatures continuing reported by The Committee on increased amounts of moisture, to rise we expect to see freeze- Climate Change (2017) in the UK then the speed at which it thaw weathering becoming less Climate Change Risk Assessment naturally deteriorates will prevalent, although it is possible 2017, increased occurrence rates accelerate. Saturation of stone that previous damage as a result

38 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 39 FUTURE RISK

Increasing temperatures elements of their original As a result, warmer and drier Increasing annual temperatures historic interiors, with vulnerable summers with longer dry spells in Scotland will have a variety components such as textiles will increase the likelihood of of direct impacts on the historic and wood at risk from pests wildfires occurring in our natural environment. This includes including the Clothes Moth and landscapes. Landscapes that are the potential to change the Carpet Beetle. The warming of prone to fire, including woodland appearance of our historic Scotland’s climate will result in and moorland will, in many landscapes and gardens, more favourable conditions that cases, have known and unknown the creation of new and will potentially allow pests to archaeological deposits below the more favourable habitats for have increasingly longer periods surface. A fire has the potential to damaging pest species and of indoor activity, as well as the remove ground cover, and leave increasing the likelihood of ability to disperse into new areas the archaeological deposits at wildfires in our landscapes. more effectively (Brimblecombe increased risk of erosion. Damage and Lankester, 2013). as a result of heat could also Rising temperatures across modify archaeological deposits Scotland will enable the spread Although winter rainfall levels are and alter material crucial in dating of pests into areas where they projected to increase markedly, of the deposits. The occurrence previously would not have summer levels are expected of wildfires also has the potential been able to survive. This is a to drop considerably, with a to alter the visual appearance of particular cause for concern at projected decrease of 13% these landscapes. our properties that still contain across Scotland by the 2050s.

The walled garden at Edzell Castle – original constructed in 1604. The garden today is based on a newer design, constructed in the 1930s, and forms part of the Scheduled Area of the monument.

Changes in Vegetation Patterns vulnerable to water penetration. In our managed historic gardens Increasing annual temperatures They also provide ideal locations and landscapes, changing weather and seasonal variations in for encouraging plant growth. patterns will have the combined the amount of rainfall across Plants and small tree roots effect of changing the distribution Scotland will, combined, create have the ability to break down of plant species. This will result conditions that are favourable mortar and force open cracks in species that once thrived in to increasing levels of biogenic in masonry, allowing for more particular areas no longer being growth. This could take the effective water penetration. able to do so. However, some form of a longer growing This can lead to serious issues exotic plants deliberately planted season, vegetation growth on with unstable masonry and in the past in gardens may thrive historic buildings and changing the accelerated decay of in future climates. Likewise, distributions of plant species. vulnerable stonework. Where other species will move into new stonework becomes saturated, regions. This will change the The growing season in it is increasingly susceptible to character of historic landscapes Scotland has been extended by becoming discoloured as well and it also has the potential to approximately 30 days since the as facilitating algal growth on introduce aggressive species that early 1960s (Sniffer 2014). The the surface. Combined, this could cause damage to other plant impact of this on the historic increase in biological colonisation types, as well as to the fabric of environment is wide ranging, of our vulnerable monuments historic buildings and collections. depending on what aspect is could lead to enhanced rates of being considered. For example, biodeterioration, through both A small fire-damaged patch of grassland at Machrie Moor Standing Stones, Isle of Arran, May 2016. This rich archaeological landscape many of our unroofed monuments chemical and physical processes. includes stone circles, standing stones, burial cairns and cists, as well as hut circles and an extensive field system, all dating to between 3500 and 1500 BC. have open wallheads that are

40 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 41 NEXT STEPS CONCLUSION

5. NEXT STEPS 6. CONCLUSION ATH-CHEUMAN CO-DHÙNADH

Now that a baseline assessment management practice, is likely to the areas beyond our immediate This assessment has brought existing maintenance works change is altering the severity of risk from natural hazards for add an additional ‘risk modifier’ boundaries will also benefit together, for the first time, programmes, as well as acting and occurrence rates of these our Estate has been undertaken, to the assessment that will further future planning for sites in terms datasets pertaining to the risk as an additional consideration hazards beyond conditions we attention will be focused increase our understanding of of visitor access and awareness posed to Historic Environment when prioritising the allocation recognise today. As such, we on the properties that have climate change risk at our PICs. of changes to the surrounding Scotland’s Properties in Care from of funds for future works. cannot rule out sites, which been identified as ‘at risk’. By landscapes, which can influence various natural hazards. To date, are not identified in this risk conducting site visits, speaking to Further work will also focus on the cultural significance of the it represents the most in depth The development of a new assessment, as being at risk and staff and others who manage and re-running the initial environmental heritage asset. We will continue study of risk from natural hazards methodology for calculating the experiencing one or more of the use these sites, and by carrying screening risk assessment, with an to work closely with our Partners to the 336 Properties in Care risk to culturally and historically hazards highlighted in this report. out more in-depth environmental extended geographical buffer zone to review our methodology for of the Scottish Ministers. It is a significant monuments forms a studies of these properties, beyond the perimeter of our sites. calculating risk scores as our baseline assessment and provides key output of the project and can This study represents a first we will be able to generate a This will highlight additional factors understanding of the current data the foundations for future studies. be adopted by others looking to step in assessing environmental more refined assessment of such as risks to key infrastructure expands and new data becomes It also informs us, to the best conduct their own assessments in and climate change risks to our risk tailored to individual sites. and services such as access routes available. This will allow us to of our current understanding, the broader historic environment. Properties in Care. Further work The next stage will also include and utilities, which, if disrupted, refine our results and enhance our on what sites will be most will refine this, through more more advanced assessments of could have a significant impact overall understanding of climate susceptible to the impacts of It is important to note that detailed site specific analysis, projected climate change data on site management (e.g. access change risk across our Estate. climate change. The results of although many properties record and consideration of additional for sites. Enhanced information for emergency services, provision this initial risk assessment can low levels of risk in many of the datasets including the integration from sites, including site specific of power etc.). Consideration of now be incorporated into our natural hazards assessed, climate of climate change projections.

Kisimul Castle

42 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 43 REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING

7. REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING TEISTEANASAN IS LEUGHADH A BHARRACHD

BGS (2010). Susceptibility to groundwater flooding Martens, V V, Bergersen, O, Vorenhout, M, Sandvik, explanatory notes for users. British Geological Survey Data P U & Holleson, J (2016). Research and Monitoring on Products Explanatory Notes for Users [Online] Available Conservation State and Preservation Conditions in at: http://www.bgs.ac.uk/products/hydrogeology/ Unsaturated Archaeological Deposits of a Medieval groundwaterFlooding.html [Accessed 25 August 2017]. Farm Mound in Troms and a Late Stone Age Midden in Finnmark, Northern Norway. Conservation and BGS (2015). Estimating numbers of properties Management of Archaeological Sites 18(1-3), 8-29. susceptible to groundwater flooding in England [online] Available at: http://nora.nerc. Peltier, L. C. (1950). The geographic cycle in periglacial ac.uk/510064 [Accessed 01 September 2017] regions as it is related to climatic geomorphology. Annals of the association of American Geographers, 40(3), 214-236. BGS (2016). Rainfall and Landslide Data for the UK. [Online] Available at http://www. Rennie, A. F., & Hansom, J. D. (2011). Sea level trend bgs.ac.uk/research/engineeringGeology/ reversal: Land uplift outpaced by sea level rise on shallowGeohazardsAndRisks/landslides/ Scotland's coast. Geomorphology, 125(1), 193-202. landslidesAndRainfall.html [Accessed 09 March 2016]. SEPA. (2014). Coastal Flooding. Scottish Environment Brimblecombe, P., & Lankester, P. (2013). Long-term Protection Agency Methodology and Mapping Summary. changes in climate and insect damage in historic CASE STUDY houses. Studies in Conservation, 58(1), 13-22. SEPA. (2014). Natural Susceptibility to Coastal Erosion. Scottish Environment Protection Agency Committee on Climate Change (2017). UK Climate Change Methodology and Mapping Summary. THREAVE CASTLE Risk Assessment 2017: Synthesis report [Online] Available at: https://www.theccc.org.uk/uk-climate-change-risk- SEPA. (2014). River Flooding. Scottish Environment Designed with Flooding in Mind assessment-2017/synthesis-report/ [Accessed 22 Mar. 2017]. Protection Agency Methodology and Mapping Summary. HISTORY household staff and a harbour. Daly, C (2013). Climate Change and the SEPA. (2014). Surface Water Flooding. Scottish Environment Conservation of Archaeological Sites: A Review of Protection Agency Methodology and Mapping Summary. Built in 1369, Threave Castle was Located on a small island in the Impacts Theory. Conservation and Management a tower house almost 30m tall – River Dee flood plain in Dumfries SEPA. (2015). Strategic Flood Risk Assessment: of Archaeological Sites 13(4), 293-310. one of the first of its type built in and Galloway, The River Dee SEPA technical guidance to support development Scotland – surrounded by a large acted as a means of defence, planning. Scottish Environment Protection Agency High, K, Milner, N, Panter, I, & Penkman, K E H complex of other buildings. The covering all approaches, as well as Land Use Planning Guidance Report, LUPS-GU23. (2015), Apatite for destruction: investigating tower house was five storeys high, providing the main transportation bone degradation due to high acidity at Star Carr. Smith, B. J., McCabe, S., McAllister, D., Adamson, C., Viles, had storage and service space on route to and from the island. Journal of Archaeological Science 59, 159-168 H. A., & Curran, J. M. (2011). A commentary on climate its lower floors, housed a private Today, the castle structure still Historic England (2016). Preserving archaeological change, stone decay dynamics and the ‘greening ‘of natural suite of rooms above, out of reach stands tall, despite centuries remains: Decision-taking for sites under stone buildings: new perspectives on ‘deep wetting’. of potential floodwaters (and exposed to varying natural development. Swindon. Historic England. Environmental Earth Sciences, 63(7-8), 1691-1700. attackers), had walls 3m thick, hazards, including flooding, which with only small windows facing as recently as 2016 severely Historic Environment Scotland, (2016). Short Guide 11: Sniffer (2014). Scotland’s Climate Trends Handbook, Sniffer the island and had formidable affected the area. The same Climate Change Adaptation for Traditional Buildings. Project CC13, http://www.environment.scotland.gov.uk/ climate_trends_handbook/ [Accessed 20 January 2017]. battlements – an overhanging floods rendered the island’s ticket Kendon, M., McCarthy, M., Jevrejeva, S. and Legg, T. (2017): timber hoarding let the garrison office unusable, necessitating State of the UK Climate 2016, Met Office, Exeter, UK. UKCP09, (2015). Maps & key findings – Crown copyright. keep attackers at bay. The other the closure of the site, with new [Online] Available at http://ukclimateprojections. buildings can no longer be seen ticket facilities now located in Lee, K.A., and D. Diaz Doce. (2014). User Guide for metoffice.gov.uk/21708 [Accessed 13 January 2017]. above ground, but substantial temporary accommodation. the British Geological Survey GeoSure dataset. British remains were found during The castle itself, although Geological Survey Internal Report, OR/14/012. archaeological excavations in the saturated by flood waters, 1970s. They included an outer hall, remained largely unaffected. additional living quarters for the

44 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 45 CASE STUDIES

RISK ASSESSMENT PRESENT CLIMATE TRENDS Threave Castle is at high risk from fluvial, groundwater and pluvial flooding (amber). The site has a history Weather station data from the Met Office includes data from their Threave Gardens weather of flooding, but 2016's flood was one of the worst recorded in living memory, with the River Dee recording station, which is approximately 1.5 miles from Threave Castle. This data comprises of monthly its highest ever level. The site river levels can also be influenced by a hydroelectric dam further upstream so rainfall totals, dating back to 1961. Using this data we can build up an accurate picture of changing the environmental conditions are influenced by additional factors and are different to those when the site weather patterns in and around Threave. As seen in Figure 15, annual rainfall totals have been was built. increasing steadily since the early 1960s, with approximately an additional 200mm of rain falling annually in recent years in comparison to the 1960s. Seven of the wettest ten years recorded since 1961 have occurred since 2000, with 2015 being the wettest year ever recorded. Site Information Hazard Ratings

Unroofed Ground- Monument Seasonal Houses Fluvial Coastal Pluvial Coastal Slope Staffed Water (High Access Collections Flooding Flooding Flooding Erosion Instability Flooding Masonry) Figure 15: Rainfall Annual Rainfall Totals 1961–2015 (mm) totals recorded at Table 10: Threave Castle residual risk score. 1800.00 Threave Gardens, 1961 to 2015. 1600.00 1400.00

m) 1200.00

l (m 1000.00 ta

To 800.00 ll fa

in 600.00 Ra HAZARD MAPS 400.00 Included below is the fluvial flooding hazard map (right) and OS Map (left) for Threave. 200.00 The blue polygon (on both maps) is the area under our direct care. This is a rare example 0.00 whereby the entire site is shown to be ‘at risk’ from the hazard in question. 61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05 07 09 11 13 15 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 Year

Table 11: By the FUTURE CLIMATE TRENDS Avg Max Avg Min Rainfall Time Scale 2050s, winters at As climate change intensifies, Temp (°C) Temp (°C) (%) Threave could be properties like Threave Castle will 16% wetter than be exposed to changing weather Annual + 2.6°C + 2.5°C -1% currently, with summers being patterns. Like the rest of Scotland, approximately 13% Threave will see increasingly Summer +3.4°C +2.7°C -13% drier. Data from warmer and wetter winters and UKCP09. Winter +2.3°C +2.6°C +16% warmer and drier summers. The UKCP09 climate change Projections tool quantifies what this change may be. The high emissions scenario for Threave is detailed here in Table 11.

1 in 10 Year Flood Extent 1 in 100 Year Flood Extent 1 in 1,000 Year Flood Extent

Figure 14: Site map and boundary (left) and fluvial flooding map (right). All images © NERC.

46 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 47 CASE STUDIES

CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS Using a system of general climate The way in which the changing descriptions and weathering climate will influence the observations, first produced by occurrence rates, and severity Peltier (1950), and by adding in of natural hazards, is only one the Met Office data for Threave aspect of the overall impact of Gardens, we can provide a basic climate change on our PICs. description of the changing stone decay types. This provides With a more in-depth assessment a starting point for assessing of climate change risk at our PICs, how the monuments themselves we will also need to consider will respond to climate change. the impacts to the fabric of Figure 16 shows how, using this the building itself, i.e. how system, there has been a gradual vulnerable is the stone masonry shift from moderate chemical to increased levels of rainfall; and frost action weathering can the monument adequately towards strong chemical shed increased amounts of weathering since the early 1960s. rainfall and can it effectively dry out in between wet spells? This consideration of altering stone decay types and process may form an additional risk multiplier in CASE STUDY future phases of our CCRA. BLACKNESS CASTLE Adaptation in Action

HISTORY Situated on the exposed banks -20.0 Blackness Castle stands by of the Firth of Forth, like many of C)

(º the Firth of Forth, at the port our Properties in Care, Blackness -15.0 moderate strong that served the royal burgh of Castle is exposed to many natural mechanical ature mechanical weathering Linlithgow in medieval times. hazards, including coastal flooding -10.0 weathering Though built in the 15th century and coastal erosion. Blackness

-5.0 temper slight as a lordly residence for the Castle is a good example of a site mechanical weathering Crichtons, one of Scotland’s more where interventions have already 0.0 Mean powerful families, it soon took on been carried out to mitigate moderate other roles. Blackness went on against the risk of a particular chemical weathering 5.0 with frost action to become a royal castle in 1453, hazard(s). The castle itself is then a garrison fortress, a state somewhat protected by its own 10.0 prison and an ammunition depot impressive curtain wall, however in the later 19th century. The castle the south-east corner of the site 15.0 was decommissioned after WWI is at ‘High’ risk of coastal erosion Figure 16: A 20.0 and has subsequently become and coastal flooding. To mitigate strong moderate descriptive chemical chemical measure of the a popular visitor attraction. against these hazards a small weathering weathering very slight 25.0 weathering relationship retaining wall was constructed to Annual rainfall (mm) between annual protect the site, (see Figure 18). rainfall and 30.0 temperature and 2000.0 1500.0 1000.0 500.00.0 stone decay types (Figure adapted 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s from Peltier, 1950).

48 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 49 CASE STUDIES

RISK ASSESSMENT This study shows that Blackness Castle is at high risk from fluvial, groundwater, pluvial and coastal flooding, as well as coastal erosion (amber). The site is at medium risk (yellow) from slope instability.

Site Information Hazard Ratings

Roofed Ground- Seasonal Houses Fluvial Coastal Pluvial Coastal Slope Monument Staffed Water Access Collections Flooding Flooding Flooding Erosion Instability (Occupied) Flooding

Table 12: Blackness Castle residual risk scores.

HAZARD MAPS Included here (Figure 17) are a selection of the hazard maps generated for Blackness Castle. The castle itself occupies a relatively small proportion of the area we manage. The castle is also protected by a large curtain wall which surrounds the castle buildings. However, within the site boundary there are areas very susceptible to natural hazard risk – primarily the lower right corner of the site, where a small stream enters the Firth of Forth.

Figure 18: A newly constructed shore front wall at Blackness Castle. This helps protect the grounds behind from damaging wave action and coastal flooding.

PRESENT CLIMATE TRENDS Weather station data from the Met Office was obtained which included data for a selection of sites through the Central Belt of Scotland. Comprised of monthly rainfall totals dating back to 1961. Using this data it is possible to build up an accurate picture of changing weather patterns in the Scottish Central Belt, where Blackness Castle is located. As seen on the graph (Figure 19), annual rainfall totals have been increasing steadily since the early 1960s, with approximately an additional 200mm rain falling annually.

1 in 10 Year 1 in 100 Year 1 in 1,000 Year Flood Extent Flood Extent Flood Extent

Annual Rainfall Totals 1961–2015 (mm) Figure 19: Annual 1200.00 rainfall totals recorded in the 1000.00 Central Belt of Scotland,

m) 800.00 1961 to 2015. l (m ta 600.00 To ll fa

in 400.00 Ra

200.00

0.00 Figure 17: Top row – left; site plan, right; fluvial flooding. Bottom row 61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05 07 09 11 13 15 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 Erosion susceptibility – left; coastal erosion, right; coastal 1 in 10 Year 1 in 100 Year 1 in 1,000 Year 1 in 10,000 Year Least Susceptible Most Susceptible Flood Extent Flood Extent Flood Extent Flood Extent flooding. All images © NERC. Year

50 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 51 CASE STUDIES

FUTURE CLIMATE TRENDS Avg Max Avg Min Time Scale Rainfall (%) As is the general trend across Temp (°C) Temp (°C) Scotland, changes in climate will result in warmer and wetter Annual + 2.6°C + 2.2°C 0 winters for Blackness Castle, as well as hotter and drier summers. Summer +3.6°C +2.9°C -13% The UKCP09 climate change Winter +2.3°C +2.2°C +10% projections tool allows us to investigate what this change may be. Under a high emissions Table 13: Projected changes to the climate at Blackness. Data taken from UKCP09. scenario, by the 2050s, winters at Blackness could be 10% wetter than they are currently, with summers being approximately 13% drier, as detailed in Table 13.

CASE STUDY FORT GEORGE

Blackness Castle Adaptation in Action

HISTORY The fort became a recruiting Fort George is the finest base and training camp for the example of 18th century military rapidly expanding British Army, engineering in the British Isles. and is currently the home of the Strategically located on a Black Watch 3rd Battalion, The promontory jutting into the Moray Royal Regiment of Scotland. Firth, the army base was designed to evade capture. Fort George Due to the site’s low-lying was built on a monumental scale, (0 to 5m above sea level) coastal making use of sophisticated exposure, there are concerns defence standards of the period, regarding erosion of the coastal with heavy guns covering every defences. Due to this, rock angle. It was built in the wake armour has been installed on the of the Battle of Culloden (1746) exposed, north-facing side, in a as an impregnable base for project carried out in partnership King George II’s army. It took with the Army (see Figure 21). 21 years to complete, by which time the Jacobite threat had been largely extinguished.

52 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 53 CASE STUDIES

RISK ASSESSMENT Currently, Fort George is at very high risk from coastal erosion (red), at high risk from groundwater flooding and coastal flooding (amber), and at medium risk of slope instability (yellow).

Site Information Hazard Ratings

Roofed Ground- All Year Houses Fluvial Coastal Pluvial Coastal Slope Monument Staffed Water Access Collections Flooding Flooding Flooding Erosion Instability (Occupied) Flooding

Table 14: Fort George residual risk scores.

HAZARD MAPS Included here are a selection of the hazard maps for Fort George. Its low-lying form leaves it very susceptible Figure 18: A newly to issues arising from coastal erosion and flooding. The problems experienced currently will be exacerbated constructed by the anticipated changes in our climate – primarily sea-level rise – which will cause further coastal erosion shore front wall at Blackness Castle. and undermining of the sea-defences and potential damage to the fortification itself. Sea levels could This helps protect rise by as much as 0.5m, in the region by 2070 (UCKP09), which has clear implications for the site. the grounds behind from damaging wave action and coastal flooding.

PRESENT CLIMATE TRENDS Table 15: Changes Climate Variable Observed Change in the climate of Since the early 1960s, there Northern Scotland,

Erosion susceptibility has been a measurable change since the early Limited potential Potential for sub- Potential for flooding for flooding surface flooding at surface 1960s (Scotland’s Least Susceptible Most Susceptible in the climate of Northern Average Temperature Increase of 1.2°C Climate Trends Scotland, a summary of which (°C) 1961 - 2011 Handbook). is included here in Table 15. Air Frost (days) Decrease of 21.7 days 1961 - 2011

Average Precipitation Increase of 25.8% (%) 1961 - 2011

Days of Rain >1mm Increase of 8.1 days 1961 - 2011

Days of Heavy Rain Figure 20: Top row – left; groundwater Increase of 7.1 days flooding, right; coastal erosion. Bottom >10mm 1961 - 2011 1 in 10 Year 1 in 100 Year 1 in 1,000 Year 1 in 10,000 Year row; coastal flooding. All images © NERC. Flood Extent Flood Extent Flood Extent Flood Extent

54 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 55 CASE STUDIES

FUTURE CLIMATE TRENDS Avg Max Avg Min Rainfall Time Scale Looking at future change in the Temp (°C) Temp (°C) (%) climate around Fort George, the UKCP09 projections tool Annual +2.3°C +1.9°C 0% indicates that winters could be up to 15% wetter and summers 13% Summer +3.2°C +2.7°C -13% drier than currently, as detailed Winter +2.2°C +1.9°C +15% in Table 16. These changes in precipitation levels, as well as projected increases in average Table 16: Climate Change projections for Fort George (UKCP09). temperatures across all seasons, reflect the expected national changes across Scotland.

CASE STUDY KILCHURN CASTLE Evidence of Historic Environmental Change

OBSERVING CHANGE HISTORY included the construction of a from the mainland by Loch Awe – AT FORT GEORGE Kilchurn Castle was initially new barracks on the north side it was an island. A series of maps As with many of our PICs, constructed under the orders of of the castle’s courtyard, capable created by Timothy Pont between it is possible to observe the Sir Colin Campbell, 1st Lord of of housing up to 200 men. The 1583 and 1614 show Kilchurn (or direct impacts resulting from Glenorchy, in the mid-15th century, barracks block remains relatively Castel Cheulchurn, as it is noted environmental changes. At Fort and comprised a five-storey complete today, and is the oldest on the map, see Figure 24) as an George, there is evidence that the tower house and small courtyard, surviving barracks on the British island. The castle was occupied in vulnerable low lying vegetation enclosed by a curtain wall. Various mainland. The garrison stronghold turbulent times, and its defensive that surrounds the fort is eroding phases of subsequent expansion saw little use, other than as an location on an island allowed the at an alarming rate, with over a carried out by subsequent outpost for government soldiers Glenorchy Campbells to retain a meter of vegetation and ground Lords let Kilchurn retain its during the Jacobite risings of powerful presence in the region. lost during a single winter period. importance as a powerhouse 1715 and 1745. The castle was Images taken in 2013 (Figures of the Glenorchy Campbell’s struck by lightning during a A drainage project on Loch Awe 22 and 23), help visualise what for the next 150 years. The 6th particularly violent storm at in 1817 cleared the main outflow of this looks like on the ground. Lord of Glenorchy relocated some point in the 1760s, causing the loch, lowering the water level the Campbells to Perthshire damage that was never repaired, and connecting the isolated rocky before his death in 1583. and the castle was eventually knoll to the mainland. Today, abandoned later that century. the low-lying ground around the In 1689 Sir John Campbell of castle is predominantly marshy, Figure 22: Part of Fort George sea wall Figure 23: Damage to vegetation layer at showing ‘clean’ lower part where turf and Fort George as a result of winter storms Glenorchy, 1st Earl of Breadalbane, When Kilchurn Castle was initially reflecting its previous history. soil layer has been completely eroded, (photo taken Feb 2013). In recent years it began converting the castle constructed, the rocky knoll on leaving the masonry vulnerable to the sea. is not unusual for a metre of turf to be lost into a garrison stronghold. This which it is perched was cut off each year.

56 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 57 CASE STUDIES

HAZARD MAPS Included below (Figure 25) is the fluvial flooding risk map. Despite projected flooding to the formerly submerged areas, during all flood extents (1:10. 1:100 and 1:1,000) the castle ruins are predicted to remain out of reach of floodwaters, probably resulting from the initial construction of the structure on what was an island.

Figure 25: Kilchurn Castle fluvial flooding risk map. Image © NERC.

Figure 24: Timothy Pont map of Loch Awe showing Kilchurn Castle (Castel Cheulchurn) located on a small island (middle right at the head of Loch Awe). Reproduced with the permission of the National Library of Scotland.

RISK ASSESSMENT Kilchurn Castle is at high risk from fluvial flooding, groundwater flooding and slope instability issues (amber), and thought to be at little to no risk from pluvial flooding and coastal erosion and flooding.

Site Information Hazard Ratings

Unroofed Ground- Monument Seasonal Houses Fluvial Coastal Pluvial Coastal Slope StaffedView: [Mid-Argyll; from Dunoon to Inverary and Loch Awe] - PontWater 14 - Maps by Timothy Pont (High http://maps.nls.uk/view/00002307Access Collections Flooding Flooding Flooding Erosion Instability Flooding Masonry)

Table 17: Kilchurn Castle residual risk scores.

HISTORIC CHANGE: A part of this CCRA. The fact that FUTURE ANALOGUE Kilchurn Castle was once located Kilchurn Castle is one example, on an island, means it currently of many historic sites, where has capacity to withstand evidence exists for historic hazards such as flooding. changes in environmental Despite this, it does not mean conditions occurring within the that Kilchurn Castle is fully lifetime of the monument. Such protected from the impacts of case studies are allowing us to climate change. For example, the develop a better understanding lack of a roof and the presence of changing environmental of exposed masonry is likely to conditions at PICs, many of which make the structure susceptible to exhibit a built-in resilience to damage from increased rainfall. Kilchurn Castle the natural hazards assessed as

58 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 59 CLIMATE CHANGE RISK REGISTER APPENDIX A USERS GUIDE

THE CLIMATE CHANGE PROPERTY NAME RESIDUAL RISK The official name of the property in question. This is the second risk score generated RISK REGISTER for each PIC and details the risk posed CATEGORY after taking into consideration our site AIPEANDAIG A (CLÀR-RIOSG NA CLÌOMAID) The ‘type’ of property in question. operations (mitigants and controls).

A – Roofed monument (occupied) LIKELIHOOD B – Roofed monument (unoccupied) The estimated probability of a specific event C – Unroofed monument (low masonry) occurring, ranked one to five (with five representing D – Unroofed monument (high masonry) the greatest probability and one the lowest). E – Standing stones and carved stones F – Field monuments IMPACT This score is based on a subjective assessment COLLECTION of what the impacts of a hazard occurring, at States whether the property contains any collections: any given site, could be. Ranked in a similar Y – Yes way to likelihood, with one being defined as the N – No lowest impact and five the highest (see section 2.3.2 for for the Impact score breakdown). HAZARD Identifies the type of hazard being RISK RATING recorded on that particular row. The likelihood score multiplied by the Impact score, gives us the risk rating for the property in question. FF – Fluvial Flooding PF – Pluvial Flooding MITIGANTS AND CONTROLS CF – Coastal Flooding An assessment of whether the site is staffed GF – Groundwater Flooding and when the site is opened. This determines CE – Coastal Erosion the change from inherent risk to residual risk. LA – Slope Instability Staffed: INHERENT RISK Y – Yes This is the first of two risk scores generated for N – No each PIC. It is the unaltered risk score that does not take into account any mitigants and controls that Access: may be in existence already at one of our PICs. A – All year S – Seasonal C - Closed

Sites with duplicate risk scores are those sites with multiple areas of guardian or ownership, see section 2.1 for more information.

60 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 61 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) Aberdour Castle A Y FF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Achnabreck Cup & Ring E N LA 1 5 5 N A 1 4.25 4.25 Aberdour Castle A Y GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Mark Rocks Aberdour Castle A Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Achnabreck Cup & Ring E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Mark Rocks Aberdour Castle A Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Achnabreck Cup & Ring E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Aberdour Castle A Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Mark Rocks Aberdour Castle A Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Achnabreck Cup & Ring E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Aberlemno Churchyard E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Mark Rocks Cross Slab Achnabreck Cup & Ring E N GF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Aberlemno Churchyard E N GF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 Mark Rocks Cross Slab Achnabreck Cup & Ring E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Aberlemno Churchyard E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Mark Rocks Cross Slab Affleck Castle A N GF 3 4 12 N C 3 5 15 Aberlemno Churchyard E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Affleck Castle A N LA 2 5 10 N C 2 5 10 Cross Slab Affleck Castle A N FF 0 4 0 N C 0 5 0 Aberlemno Churchyard E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Cross Slab Affleck Castle A N PF 0 4 0 N C 0 5 0 Aberlemno Churchyard E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Affleck Castle A N CE 0 5 0 N C 0 5 0 Cross Slab Affleck Castle A N CF 0 4 0 N C 0 5 0 Aberlemno Sculptured E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Antonine Wall – F Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Stones Bantaskin Aberlemno Sculptured E N GF 3 2 6 N A 3 1.25 3.75 Antonine Wall – F Y GF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 Stones Bantaskin Aberlemno Sculptured E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Antonine Wall – F Y CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Stones Bantaskin Aberlemno Sculptured E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Antonine Wall – F Y PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Stones Bantaskin Aberlemno Sculptured E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Antonine Wall – F Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Stones Bantaskin Aberlemno Sculptured E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Antonine Wall – F Y FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Stones Bantaskin Aberlemno Stones – E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Antonine Wall – Bar Hill F Y LA 3 5 15 N A 3 4.25 12.75 plan locations Antonine Wall – Bar Hill F Y PF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 Aberlemno Stones – E N GF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 Antonine Wall – Bar Hill F Y GF 3 2 6 N A 3 1.25 3.75 plan locations Antonine Wall – Bar Hill F Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Aberlemno Stones – E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 plan locations Antonine Wall – Bar Hill F Y CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Aberlemno Stones – E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Antonine Wall – Bar Hill F Y FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 plan locations Antonine Wall – D Y GF 4 3 12 N A 4 2.25 9 Aberlemno Stones – E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Bearsden Bath-house plan locations Antonine Wall – D Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Aberlemno Stones – E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Bearsden Bath-house plan locations Antonine Wall – D Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Abernethy Round Tower B N GF 4 4 16 Y A 4 3 12 Bearsden Bath-house Abernethy Round Tower B N LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Antonine Wall – D Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Bearsden Bath-house Abernethy Round Tower B N PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Antonine Wall – D Y CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Abernethy Round Tower B N CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Bearsden Bath-house Abernethy Round Tower B N CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Antonine Wall – D Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Abernethy Round Tower B N FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Bearsden Bath-house

62 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 63 INTRODUCTION

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) Antonine Wall – F Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Antonine Wall – F Y LA 3 5 15 N A 3 4.25 12.75 Castlecary Fort Rough Castle Antonine Wall – F Y GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Antonine Wall – F Y PF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Castlecary Fort Rough Castle Antonine Wall – F Y PF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Antonine Wall – F Y GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Castlecary Fort Rough Castle Antonine Wall – F Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Antonine Wall – F Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Castlecary Fort Rough Castle Antonine Wall – F Y CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Antonine Wall – F Y CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Castlecary Fort Rough Castle Antonine Wall – F Y FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Antonine Wall – F Y FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Castlecary Fort Rough Castle Antonine Wall – Croy Hill F Y LA 3 5 15 N A 3 4.25 12.75 Antonine Wall – F Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Antonine Wall – Croy Hill F Y GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Seabegs Wood Antonine Wall – Croy Hill F Y PF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Antonine Wall – F Y GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Seabegs Wood Antonine Wall – Croy Hill F Y FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Antonine Wall – F Y PF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 Antonine Wall – Croy Hill F Y CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Seabegs Wood Antonine Wall – Croy Hill F Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Antonine Wall – F Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Antonine Wall – Dullatur F Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Seabegs Wood Antonine Wall – Dullatur F Y GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Antonine Wall – F Y FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Seabegs Wood Antonine Wall – Dullatur F Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Antonine Wall – F Y CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Antonine Wall – Dullatur F Y CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Seabegs Wood Antonine Wall – Dullatur F Y FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Antonine Wall – Tollpark F Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Antonine Wall – Dullatur F Y PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Antonine Wall – Tollpark F Y GF 3 2 6 N A 3 1.25 3.75 Antonine Wall – Garnhall F Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Antonine Wall – Tollpark F Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Antonine Wall – Garnhall F Y GF 3 2 6 N A 3 1.25 3.75 Antonine Wall – Tollpark F Y FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Antonine Wall – Garnhall F Y CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Antonine Wall – Tollpark F Y PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Antonine Wall – Garnhall F Y FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Antonine Wall – Tollpark F Y CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Antonine Wall – Garnhall F Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Antonine Wall – F Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Antonine Wall – Garnhall F Y PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Watling Lodge Antonine Wall – F Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Antonine Wall – F Y GF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 Kirkintilloch Watling Lodge Antonine Wall – F Y GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Antonine Wall – F Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Kirkintilloch Watling Lodge Antonine Wall – F Y PF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Antonine Wall – F Y PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Kirkintilloch Watling Lodge Antonine Wall – F Y FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Antonine Wall – F Y FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Kirkintilloch Watling Lodge Antonine Wall – F Y CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Antonine Wall – F Y CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Kirkintilloch Watling Lodge Antonine Wall – F Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Kirkintilloch

64 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 65 INTRODUCTION

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) Antonine Wall – F Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Ardestie Souterrain F N LA 2 5 10 N S 2 4.75 9.5 Watling Lodge West Ardestie Souterrain F N GF 3 2 6 N S 3 1.75 5.25 Antonine Wall – F Y GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Ardestie Souterrain F N PF 0 2 0 N S 0 1.75 0 Watling Lodge West Ardestie Souterrain F N CF 0 2 0 N S 0 1.75 0 Antonine Wall – F Y FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Watling Lodge West Ardestie Souterrain F N FF 0 2 0 N S 0 1.75 0 Antonine Wall – F Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Ardestie Souterrain F N CE 0 5 0 N S 0 4.75 0 Watling Lodge West Ardunie Roman Signal F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Antonine Wall – F Y CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Station Watling Lodge West Ardunie Roman Signal F N GF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 Antonine Wall – F Y PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Station Watling Lodge West Ardunie Roman Signal F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Arbroath Abbey C Y GF 4 3 12 Y A 4 2 8 Station Arbroath Abbey C Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Ardunie Roman Signal F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Station Arbroath Abbey C Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Ardunie Roman Signal F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Arbroath Abbey C Y GF 3 3 9 Y A 3 2 6 Station Arbroath Abbey C Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Ardunie Roman Signal F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Arbroath Abbey C Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Station Arbroath Abbey C Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Argyll’s Lodging A Y LA 1 5 5 Y A 1 4 4 Arbroath Abbey C Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Argyll’s Lodging A Y FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Arbroath Abbey C Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Argyll’s Lodging A Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Arbroath Abbey C Y FF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Argyll’s Lodging A Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Arbroath Abbey C Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Argyll’s Lodging A Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Arbroath Abbey C Y FF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Argyll’s Lodging A Y GF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Arbroath Abbey C Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Arnol Blackhouse No. 39 C Y LA 3 5 15 Y A 3 4 12 Abbot’s House Arnol Blackhouse No. 39 C Y GF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Arbroath Abbey C Y GF 3 3 9 Y A 3 2 6 Arnol Blackhouse No. 39 C Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Abbot’s House Arnol Blackhouse No. 39 C Y FF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Arbroath Abbey C Y FF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Abbot’s House Arnol Blackhouse No. 39 C Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Arbroath Abbey C Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Arnol Blackhouse No. 39 C Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Abbot’s House Arnol Blackhouse No. 42 B Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Arbroath Abbey C Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Arnol Blackhouse No. 42 B Y GF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Abbot’s House Arnol Blackhouse No. 42 B Y FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Arbroath Abbey C Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Arnol Blackhouse No. 42 B Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Abbot’s House Arnol Blackhouse No. 42 B Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Ardchattan Priory C Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Arnol Blackhouse No. 42 B Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Ardchattan Priory C Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Auchagallon Stone Circle E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Ardchattan Priory C Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Auchagallon Stone Circle E N GF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 Ardchattan Priory C Y GF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Auchagallon Stone Circle E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Ardchattan Priory C Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Auchagallon Stone Circle E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Ardchattan Priory C Y CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Auchagallon Stone Circle E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Ardclach Bell Tower B N GF 3 4 12 Y A 3 3 9 Auchagallon Stone Circle E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Ardclach Bell Tower B N LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Ardclach Bell Tower B N CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Ardclach Bell Tower B N PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Ardclach Bell Tower B N FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Ardclach Bell Tower B N CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0

66 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 67 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) Auchindown Castle C N LA 3 5 15 N A 3 4.25 12.75 Barsalloch Fort F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Auchindown Castle C N GF 3 3 9 N A 3 2.25 6.75 Barsalloch Fort F N CE 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Auchindown Castle C N FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Barsalloch Fort F N GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Auchindown Castle C N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Barsalloch Fort F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Auchindown Castle C N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Barsalloch Fort F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Auchindown Castle C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Barsalloch Fort F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Ballygowan Cup & E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Beauly Priory B Y GF 5 4 20 N A 5 3.25 16.25 Ring Mark Rock Beauly Priory B Y GF 5 4 20 N A 5 3.25 16.25 Ballygowan Cup & E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Beauly Priory B Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Ring Mark Rock Beauly Priory B Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Ballygowan Cup & E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Ring Mark Rock Beauly Priory B Y CE 1 5 5 N A 1 4.25 4.25 Ballygowan Cup & E N GF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Beauly Priory B Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Ring Mark Rock Beauly Priory B Y FF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Ballygowan Cup & E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Beauly Priory B Y PF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Ring Mark Rock Beauly Priory B Y CF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Ballygowan Cup & E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Beauly Priory B Y PF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Ring Mark Rock Beauly Priory B Y CF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Baluachraig Cup & E N LA 3 5 15 N A 3 4.25 12.75 Ring Mark Rocks Beauly Priory B Y FF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Baluachraig Cup & E N GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Big Balcraig and Clachan E N LA 2 5 10 N C 2 5 10 Ring Mark Rocks Cup & Ring Mark Rocks Baluachraig Cup & E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Big Balcraig and Clachan E N CE 0 5 0 N C 0 5 0 Ring Mark Rocks Cup & Ring Mark Rocks Baluachraig Cup & E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Big Balcraig and Clachan E N FF 0 2 0 N C 0 2 0 Ring Mark Rocks Cup & Ring Mark Rocks Baluachraig Cup & E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Big Balcraig and Clachan E N CF 0 2 0 N C 0 2 0 Ring Mark Rocks Cup & Ring Mark Rocks Baluachraig Cup & E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Big Balcraig and Clachan E N PF 0 2 0 N C 0 2 0 Ring Mark Rocks Cup & Ring Mark Rocks Balvaird Castle B Y GF 5 4 20 N A 5 3.25 16.25 Big Balcraig and Clachan E N GF 0 2 0 N C 0 2 0 Cup & Ring Mark Rocks Balvaird Castle B Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Biggar Gasworks A Y FF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 Balvaird Castle B Y PF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Biggar Gasworks A Y GF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 Balvaird Castle B Y CF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Biggar Gasworks A Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Balvaird Castle B Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Biggar Gasworks A Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Balvaird Castle B Y FF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Biggar Gasworks A Y CF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Balvenie Castle C Y LA 2 5 10 N S 2 4.75 9.5 Biggar Gasworks A Y PF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Balvenie Castle C Y GF 3 3 9 N S 3 2.75 8.25 Bishop’s House, Elgin B N GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Balvenie Castle C Y CF 0 3 0 N S 0 2.75 0 Bishop’s House, Elgin B N LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Balvenie Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 N S 0 2.75 0 Bishop’s House, Elgin B N CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Balvenie Castle C Y CE 0 5 0 N S 0 4.75 0 Bishop’s House, Elgin B N FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Balvenie Castle C Y FF 0 3 0 N S 0 2.75 0 Bishop’s House, Elgin B N PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Barochan Cross E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Bishop’s House, Elgin B N CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Barochan Cross E N GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Barochan Cross E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Barochan Cross E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Barochan Cross E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Barochan Cross E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0

68 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 69 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) Bishop’s Palace, Kirkwall C Y GF 4 3 12 Y S 4 2.5 10 Bonawe Iron Furnace B Y FF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 Bishop’s Palace, Kirkwall C Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Bonawe Iron Furnace B Y GF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 Bishop’s Palace, Kirkwall C Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Bonawe Iron Furnace B Y PF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 Bishop’s Palace, Kirkwall C Y PF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Bonawe Iron Furnace B Y CF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 Bishop’s Palace, Kirkwall C Y FF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Bonawe Iron Furnace B Y LA 3 5 15 Y S 3 4.5 13.5 Bishop’s Palace, Kirkwall C Y CF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Bonawe Iron Furnace B Y CE 1 5 5 Y S 1 4.5 4.5 Blackfriars Chapel, C N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Bothwell Castle C Y GF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 St Andrews Bothwell Castle C Y FF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Blackfriars Chapel, C N GF 3 3 9 N A 3 2.25 6.75 Bothwell Castle C Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 St Andrews Bothwell Castle C Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Blackfriars Chapel, C N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 St Andrews Bothwell Castle C Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Blackfriars Chapel, C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Bothwell Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 St Andrews Brandsbutt Stone E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Blackfriars Chapel, C N FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Brandsbutt Stone E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 St Andrews Brandsbutt Stone E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Blackfriars Chapel, C N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Brandsbutt Stone E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 St Andrews Brandsbutt Stone E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Blackhammer D N LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Chambered Cairn Brandsbutt Stone E N GF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Blackhammer D N CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Brechin Round Tower B GF 3 4 12 N A 3 3.25 9.75 Chambered Cairn Brechin Round Tower B LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Blackhammer D N PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Brechin Round Tower B CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Chambered Cairn Brechin Round Tower B PF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Blackhammer D N CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Chambered Cairn Brechin Round Tower B FF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Blackhammer D N FF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Brechin Round Tower B CF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Chambered Cairn Bridge of Oich D N GF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Blackhammer D N GF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Bridge of Oich D N FF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Chambered Cairn Bridge of Oich D N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Blackhill Roman Camp, F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Bridge of Oich D N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Ardoch Bridge of Oich D N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Blackhill Roman Camp, F N GF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 Ardoch Bridge of Oich D N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Blackhill Roman Camp, F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Broch of Gurness C Y CF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Ardoch Broch of Gurness C Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Blackhill Roman Camp, F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Broch of Gurness C Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Ardoch Broch of Gurness C Y GF 3 3 9 Y S 3 2.5 7.5 Blackhill Roman Camp, F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Broch of Gurness C Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Ardoch Broch of Gurness C Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Blackhill Roman Camp, F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Ardoch Broch of Gurness C Y PF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Blackness Castle A Y CE 4 5 20 Y A 4 4 16 Broch of Gurness C Y GF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Blackness Castle A Y GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Broch of Gurness C Y PF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Blackness Castle A Y CF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Broch of Gurness C Y FF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Blackness Castle A Y FF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Broch of Gurness C Y FF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Blackness Castle A Y PF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Broch of Gurness C Y CF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Blackness Castle A Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8

70 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 71 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) Brough of Birsay D Y CE 4 5 20 Y S 4 4.5 18 Cairn Holy 2 E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Brough of Birsay D Y CF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Cairn Holy 2 E N GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Brough of Birsay D Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Cairn Holy 2 E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Brough of Birsay D Y GF 3 3 9 Y S 3 2.5 7.5 Cairn Holy 2 E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Brough of Birsay D Y PF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Cairn Holy 2 E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Brough of Birsay D Y FF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Cairn Holy 2 E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Broughty Castle A Y CE 4 5 20 Y A 4 4 16 Cairn of Memsie F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Broughty Castle A Y CF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Cairn of Memsie F N GF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 Broughty Castle A Y GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Cairn of Memsie F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Broughty Castle A Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Cairn of Memsie F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Broughty Castle A Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Cairn of Memsie F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Broughty Castle A Y FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Cairn of Memsie F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Burghead Well F N LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Cairn O’Get F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Burghead Well F N CE 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Cairn O’Get F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Burghead Well F N GF 3 2 6 Y A 3 1 3 Cairn O’Get F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Burghead Well F N FF 0 2 0 Y A 0 1 0 Cairn O’Get F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Burghead Well F N CF 0 2 0 Y A 0 1 0 Cairn O’Get F N GF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Burghead Well F N PF 0 2 0 Y A 0 1 0 Cairn O’Get F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Burleigh Castle C N GF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Cairnbaan Cup & E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Burleigh Castle C N LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Ring Mark Rocks Burleigh Castle C N FF 3 3 9 Y S 3 2.5 7.5 Cairnbaan Cup & E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Ring Mark Rocks Burleigh Castle C N CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Cairnbaan Cup & E N GF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Burleigh Castle C N CF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Ring Mark Rocks Burleigh Castle C N PF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Cairnbaan Cup & E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Cadzow Castle C Y LA 3 5 15 N A 3 4.25 12.75 Ring Mark Rocks Cadzow Castle C Y GF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Cairnbaan Cup & E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Ring Mark Rocks Cadzow Castle C Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Cairnbaan Cup & E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Cadzow Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Ring Mark Rocks Cadzow Castle C Y CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Cairnpapple Hill F N LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Cadzow Castle C Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Cairnpapple Hill F N GF 3 2 6 Y S 3 1.5 4.5 Caerlaverock Castle C Y GF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Cairnpapple Hill F N CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Caerlaverock Castle C Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Cairnpapple Hill F N FF 0 2 0 Y S 0 1.5 0 Caerlaverock Castle C Y CF 2 3 6 Y A 2 2 4 Cairnpapple Hill F N PF 0 2 0 Y S 0 1.5 0 Caerlaverock Castle C Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Cairnpapple Hill F N CF 0 2 0 Y S 0 1.5 0 Caerlaverock Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Calanais Standing E N LA 1 5 5 Y A 1 4 4 Caerlaverock Castle C Y FF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Stones Cairn Holy 1 E N LA 2 5 10 N A 0 4.25 0 Calanais Standing E N CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Cairn Holy 1 E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Stones Cairn Holy 1 E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Calanais Standing E N CF 0 2 0 Y A 0 1 0 Stones Cairn Holy 1 E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Calanais Standing E N GF 0 2 0 Y A 0 1 0 Cairn Holy 1 E N GF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Stones Cairn Holy 1 E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Calanais Standing E N FF 0 2 0 Y A 0 1 0 Stones Calanais Standing E N PF 0 2 0 Y A 0 1 0 Stones

72 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 73 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) Cambuskenneth Abbey B Y FF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 Castle Campbell B Y FF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Cambuskenneth Abbey B Y GF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 Castle Campbell B Y GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Cambuskenneth Abbey B Y CF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 Castle Campbell B Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Cambuskenneth Abbey B Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Castle Campbell B Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Cambuskenneth Abbey B Y CE 1 5 5 Y S 1 4.5 4.5 Castle Campbell B Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Cambuskenneth Abbey B Y PF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Castle Campbell B Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Cardoness Castle C Y PF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Castle of Old Wick C Y LA 3 5 15 N A 3 4.25 12.75 Cardoness Castle C Y GF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Castle of Old Wick C Y CF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Cardoness Castle C Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Castle of Old Wick C Y GF 3 3 9 N A 3 2.25 6.75 Cardoness Castle C Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Castle of Old Wick C Y CE 1 5 5 N A 1 4.25 4.25 Cardoness Castle C Y FF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Castle of Old Wick C Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Cardoness Castle C Y CF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Castle of Old Wick C Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Carlungie Souterrain F N LA 2 5 10 N S 2 4.75 9.5 Castle of Park B N GF 3 4 12 N C 3 4 12 Carlungie Souterrain F N GF 4 2 8 N S 4 1.75 7 Castle of Park B N LA 2 5 10 N C 2 5 10 Carlungie Souterrain F N CE 0 5 0 N S 0 4.75 0 Castle of Park B N CE 0 5 0 N C 0 5 0 Carlungie Souterrain F N CF 0 2 0 N S 0 1.75 0 Castle of Park B N CF 0 4 0 N C 0 4 0 Carlungie Souterrain F N PF 0 2 0 N S 0 1.75 0 Castle of Park B N PF 0 4 0 N C 0 4 0 Carlungie Souterrain F N FF 0 2 0 N S 0 1.75 0 Castle of Park B N FF 0 4 0 N C 0 4 0 Carn Ban Long Cairn F N LA 2 5 10 N C 2 5 10 Castle Semple C Y GF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Carn Ban Long Cairn F N GF 4 2 8 N C 4 2 8 Collegiate Church Carn Ban Long Cairn F N CE 0 5 0 N C 0 5 0 Castle Semple C Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Collegiate Church Carn Ban Long Cairn F N FF 0 2 0 N C 0 2 0 Castle Semple C Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Carn Ban Long Cairn F N PF 0 2 0 N C 0 2 0 Collegiate Church Carn Ban Long Cairn F N CF 0 2 0 N C 0 2 0 Castle Semple C Y CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Carn Liath C N GF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Collegiate Church Carn Liath C N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Castle Semple C Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Collegiate Church Carn Liath C N CE 1 5 5 N A 1 4.25 4.25 Castle Semple C Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Carn Liath C N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Collegiate Church Carn Liath C N FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Castle Sween C Y CE 4 5 20 N A 4 4.25 17 Carn Liath C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Castle Sween C Y CF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Carnasserie Castle C Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Castle Sween C Y GF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Carnasserie Castle C Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Castle Sween C Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Carnasserie Castle C Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Castle Sween C Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Carnasserie Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Castle Sween C Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Carnasserie Castle C Y GF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Castlelaw Fort F N LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Carnasserie Castle C Y CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Castlelaw Fort F N GF 3 2 6 Y A 3 1 3 Carsluith Castle C N GF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Castlelaw Fort F N CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Carsluith Castle C N LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Castlelaw Fort F N CF 0 2 0 Y A 0 1 0 Carsluith Castle C N CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Castlelaw Fort F N PF 0 2 0 Y A 0 1 0 Carsluith Castle C N PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Castlelaw Fort F N FF 0 2 0 Y A 0 1 0 Carsluith Castle C N FF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Carsluith Castle C N CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0

74 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 75 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) Caterthuns, Brown F N LA 2 5 10 N S 2 4.75 9.5 Click Mill, Dounby B Y GF 5 4 20 N A 5 3.25 16.25 Caterthuns, Brown F N GF 3 2 6 N S 3 1.75 5.25 Click Mill, Dounby B Y FF 5 4 20 N A 5 3.25 16.25 Caterthuns, Brown F N CE 0 5 0 N S 0 4.75 0 Click Mill, Dounby B Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Caterthuns, Brown F N CF 0 2 0 N S 0 1.75 0 Click Mill, Dounby B Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Caterthuns, Brown F N PF 0 2 0 N S 0 1.75 0 Click Mill, Dounby B Y CF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Caterthuns, Brown F N FF 0 2 0 N S 0 1.75 0 Click Mill, Dounby B Y PF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Caterthuns, White F N LA 2 5 10 N S 2 4.75 9.5 Clickimin Broch C Y GF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Caterthuns, White F N GF 3 2 6 N S 3 1.75 5.25 Clickimin Broch C Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Caterthuns, White F N CE 0 5 0 N S 0 4.75 0 Clickimin Broch C Y CE 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Caterthuns, White F N FF 0 2 0 N S 0 1.75 0 Clickimin Broch C Y CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Caterthuns, White F N PF 0 2 0 N S 0 1.75 0 Clickimin Broch C Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Caterthuns, White F N CF 0 2 0 N S 0 1.75 0 Clickimin Broch C Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Chapel Finian D N GF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Cnoc Freiceadain F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Chapel Finian D N LA 2 5 0 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Long Cairn Chapel Finian D N CE 1 5 5 N A 1 4.25 4.25 Cnoc Freiceadain F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Long Cairn Chapel Finian D N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Cnoc Freiceadain F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Chapel Finian D N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Long Cairn Chapel Finian D N FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Cnoc Freiceadain F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Chesters Hill Fort F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Long Cairn Chesters Hill Fort F N GF 3 2 6 N A 3 1.25 3.75 Cnoc Freiceadain F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Long Cairn Chesters Hill Fort F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Cnoc Freiceadain F N GF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Chesters Hill Fort F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Long Cairn Chesters Hill Fort F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Cobbie Row’s Castle C N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Chesters Hill Fort F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Cobbie Row’s Castle C N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Clackmannan Tower B Y GF 3 4 12 N A 3 3.25 9.75 Cobbie Row’s Castle C N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Clackmannan Tower B Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Cobbie Row’s Castle C N FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Clackmannan Tower B Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Cobbie Row’s Castle C N GF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Clackmannan Tower B Y PF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Cobbie Row’s Castle C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Clackmannan Tower B Y FF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Corgarff Castle A Y GF 3 4 12 Y S 3 3.5 10.5 Clackmannan Tower B Y CF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Corgarff Castle A Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Clava Cairns F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Corgarff Castle A Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Clava Cairns F N GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Corgarff Castle A Y FF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Clava Cairns F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Corgarff Castle A Y PF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Clava Cairns F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Corgarff Castle A Y CF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Clava Cairns F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Corrimony Chambered F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Clava Cairns F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Cairn Claypotts Castle B Y GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Corrimony Chambered F N GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Claypotts Castle B Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Cairn Claypotts Castle B Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Corrimony Chambered F N FF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Cairn Claypotts Castle B Y FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Corrimony Chambered F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Claypotts Castle B Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Cairn Claypotts Castle B Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Corrimony Chambered F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Cairn Corrimony Chambered F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Cairn

76 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 77 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) Corstorphine Dovecot B N GF 5 4 20 N A 5 3.25 16.25 Crosskirk, Peebles C Y GF 4 3 12 N A 4 2.25 9 Corstorphine Dovecot B N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Crosskirk, Peebles C Y GF 4 3 12 N A 4 2.25 9 Corstorphine Dovecot B N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Crosskirk, Peebles C Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Corstorphine Dovecot B N CF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Crosskirk, Peebles C Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Corstorphine Dovecot B N FF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Crosskirk, Peebles C Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Corstorphine Dovecot B N PF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Crosskirk, Peebles C Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Coulter Motte F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Crosskirk, Peebles C Y CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Coulter Motte F N GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Crosskirk, Peebles C Y CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Coulter Motte F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Crosskirk, Peebles C Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Coulter Motte F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Crosskirk, Peebles C Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Coulter Motte F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Crosskirk, Peebles C Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Coulter Motte F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Crosskirk, Peebles C Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Craigmillar Castle C Y PF 4 3 12 Y A 4 2 8 Crossraguel Abbey C Y GF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Craigmillar Castle C Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Crossraguel Abbey C Y GF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Craigmillar Castle C Y GF 3 3 9 Y A 3 2 6 Crossraguel Abbey C Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Craigmillar Castle C Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Crossraguel Abbey C Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Craigmillar Castle C Y FF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Crossraguel Abbey C Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Craigmillar Castle C Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Crossraguel Abbey C Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Craignethan Castle C Y LA 3 5 15 Y S 3 4.5 13.5 Crossraguel Abbey C Y FF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Craignethan Castle C Y FF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Crossraguel Abbey C Y CF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Craignethan Castle C Y GF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Crossraguel Abbey C Y PF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Craignethan Castle C Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Crossraguel Abbey C Y CF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Craignethan Castle C Y CF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Crossraguel Abbey C Y FF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Craignethan Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Crossraguel Abbey C Y PF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Crichton Castle C Y GF 4 3 12 Y S 4 2.5 10 Cullerie Stone Circle E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Crichton Castle C Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Cullerie Stone Circle E N GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Crichton Castle C Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Cullerie Stone Circle E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Crichton Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Cullerie Stone Circle E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Crichton Castle C Y CF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Cullerie Stone Circle E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Crichton Castle C Y FF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Cullerie Stone Circle E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Crookston Castle C Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Culross Abbey C Y LA 2 5 10 N S 2 4.75 9.5 Crookston Castle C Y GF 3 3 9 Y A 3 2 6 Culross Abbey C Y GF 3 3 9 N S 3 2.75 8.25 Crookston Castle C Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Culross Abbey C Y CE 0 5 0 N S 0 4.75 0 Crookston Castle C Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Culross Abbey C Y CF 0 3 0 N S 0 2.75 0 Crookston Castle C Y FF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Culross Abbey C Y PF 0 3 0 N S 0 2.75 0 Crookston Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Culross Abbey C Y FF 0 3 0 N S 0 2.75 0 Culsh Earth House F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Culsh Earth House F N GF 3 2 6 N A 3 1.25 3.75 Culsh Earth House F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Culsh Earth House F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Culsh Earth House F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Culsh Earth House F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0

78 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 79 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) Cuween Hill B N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Deskford Church C N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Chambered Cairn Deskford Church C N GF 3 3 9 N A 3 2.25 6.75 Cuween Hill B N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Deskford Church C N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Chambered Cairn Deskford Church C N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Cuween Hill B N FF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Chambered Cairn Deskford Church C N FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Cuween Hill B N PF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Deskford Church C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Chambered Cairn Dirleton Castle C Y GF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Cuween Hill B N CF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Dirleton Castle C Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Chambered Cairn Dirleton Castle C Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Cuween Hill B N GF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Dirleton Castle C Y FF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Chambered Cairn Dirleton Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Dallas Dhu Distillery A Y FF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Dirleton Castle C Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Dallas Dhu Distillery A Y GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Dogton Stone E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Dallas Dhu Distillery A Y PF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Dogton Stone E N GF 3 2 6 N A 3 1.25 3.75 Dallas Dhu Distillery A Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Dogton Stone E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Dallas Dhu Distillery A Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Dogton Stone E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Dallas Dhu Distillery A Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Dogton Stone E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Deer Abbey D Y GF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Dogton Stone E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Deer Abbey D Y FF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Doon Hill F N LA 1 5 5 N A 1 4.25 4.25 Deer Abbey D Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Doon Hill F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Deer Abbey D Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Doon Hill F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Deer Abbey D Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Doon Hill F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Deer Abbey D Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Doon Hill F N GF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Dere Street Roman Road F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 (North) Doon Hill F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Dere Street Roman Road F N GF 3 2 6 N A 3 1.25 3.75 Doune Castle & B Y LA 4 5 20 Y A 4 4 16 (North) Roman Camp Dere Street Roman Road F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Doune Castle & B Y GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 (North) Roman Camp Dere Street Roman Road F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Doune Castle & B Y FF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 (North) Roman Camp Dere Street Roman Road F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Doune Castle & B Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 (North) Roman Camp Dere Street Roman Road F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Doune Castle & B Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 (North) Roman Camp Dere Street Roman Road F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Doune Castle & B Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 (South) Roman Camp Dere Street Roman Road F N GF 3 2 6 N A 3 1.25 3.75 Druchtag Motte F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 (South) Druchtag Motte F N GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Dere Street Roman Road F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Druchtag Motte F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 (South) Druchtag Motte F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Dere Street Roman Road F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Druchtag Motte F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 (South) Druchtag Motte F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Dere Street Roman Road F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 (South) Dere Street Roman Road F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 (South)

80 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 81 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) Drumcoltran Tower B N GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Dumbarton Castle A Y GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Drumcoltran Tower B N LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Dumbarton Castle A Y CF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Drumcoltran Tower B N CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Dumbarton Castle A Y PF 4 4 16 Y A 4 3 12 Drumcoltran Tower B N PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Dumbarton Castle A Y LA 3 5 15 Y A 3 4 12 Drumcoltran Tower B N FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Dumbarton Castle A Y CE 3 5 15 Y A 3 4 12 Drumcoltran Tower B N CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Dumbarton Castle A Y FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Drumtroddan Cup & E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Dun Beag C N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Ring Mark Rocks Dun Beag C N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Drumtroddan Cup & E N GF 3 2 6 N A 3 1.25 3.75 Dun Beag C N GF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Ring Mark Rocks Dun Beag C N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Drumtroddan Cup & E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Ring Mark Rocks Dun Beag C N FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Drumtroddan Cup & E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Dun Beag C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Ring Mark Rocks Dun Carloway C N LA 1 5 5 Y A 1 4 4 Drumtroddan Cup & E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Dun Carloway C N CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Ring Mark Rocks Dun Carloway C N PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Drumtroddan Cup & E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Dun Carloway C N GF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Ring Mark Rocks Dun Carloway C N CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Drumtroddan Standing E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Stones Dun Carloway C N FF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Drumtroddan Standing E N GF 3 2 6 N A 3 1.25 3.75 Dun Dornaigil C N GF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Stones Dun Dornaigil C N FF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Drumtroddan Standing E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Dun Dornaigil C N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Stones Dun Dornaigil C N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Drumtroddan Standing E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Dun Dornaigil C N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Stones Dun Dornaigil C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Drumtroddan Standing E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Stones Dun Telve C N LA 3 5 15 N A 3 4.25 12.75 Drumtroddan Standing E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Dun Telve C N GF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Stones Dun Telve C N FF 3 3 9 N A 3 2.25 6.75 Dryburgh Abbey C Y FF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Dun Telve C N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Dryburgh Abbey C Y GF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Dun Telve C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Dryburgh Abbey C Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Dun Telve C N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Dryburgh Abbey C Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Dun Troddan C N GF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Dryburgh Abbey C Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Dun Troddan C N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Dryburgh Abbey C Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Dun Troddan C N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Duff House A Y LA 4 5 20 Y A 4 4 16 Dun Troddan C N FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Duff House A Y GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Dun Troddan C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Duff House A Y CF 4 4 16 Y A 4 3 12 Dun Troddan C N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Duff House A Y FF 4 4 16 Y A 4 3 12 Dunadd Hill Fort F Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Duff House A Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Dunadd Hill Fort F Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Duff House A Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Dunadd Hill Fort F Y GF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Duffus Castle C Y GF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Dunadd Hill Fort F Y PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Duffus Castle C Y CF 4 3 12 Y A 4 2 8 Dunadd Hill Fort F Y CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Duffus Castle C Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Dunadd Hill Fort F Y FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Duffus Castle C Y CE 1 5 5 Y A 1 4 4 Duffus Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Duffus Castle C Y FF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0

82 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 83 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) Dunblane Cathedral A Y GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Dunfermline Abbey, C Y GF 4 3 12 N A 4 2.25 9 Dunblane Cathedral A Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Nether Yett Dunblane Cathedral A Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Dunfermline Abbey, C Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Nether Yett Dunblane Cathedral A Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Dunfermline Abbey, C Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Dunblane Cathedral A Y FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Nether Yett Dunblane Cathedral A Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Dunfermline Abbey, C Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Dunchraigaig Cairn F N GF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 Nether Yett Dunchraigaig Cairn F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Dunfermline Abbey, C Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Nether Yett Duncrhaigaig Cairn F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Dunfermline Abbey, C Y CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Duncrhaigaig Cairn F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Nether Yett Duncrhaigaig Cairn F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Dunglass Collegiate B Y GF 3 4 12 Y A 3 3 9 Duncrhaigaig Cairn F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Church Dundonald Castle C N LA 4 5 20 Y S 4 4.5 18 Dunglass Collegiate B Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Dundonald Castle C N GF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Church Dundonald Castle C N FF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Dunglass Collegiate B Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Church Dundonald Castle C N CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Dunglass Collegiate B Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Dundonald Castle C N CF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Church Dundonald Castle C N PF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Dunglass Collegiate B Y FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Dundrennan Abbey C Y GF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Church Dundrennan Abbey C Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Dunglass Collegiate B Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Dundrennan Abbey C Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Church Dundrennan Abbey C Y PF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Dunkeld Cathedral C Y LA 4 5 20 Y A 4 4 16 Dundrennan Abbey C Y CF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Dunkeld Cathedral C Y FF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Dundrennan Abbey C Y FF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Dunkeld Cathedral C Y GF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Dunfallandy Stone E N LA 3 5 15 N A 3 4.25 12.75 Dunkeld Cathedral C Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Dunfallandy Stone E N GF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 Dunkeld Cathedral C Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Dunfallandy Stone E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Dunkeld Cathedral C Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Dunfallandy Stone E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Dunstaffnage Castle B Y CF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 & Chapel Dunfallandy Stone E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Dunstaffnage Castle B Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Dunfallandy Stone E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 & Chapel Dunfermline Abbey A Y GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Dunstaffnage Castle B Y CE 1 5 5 Y A 1 4 4 Palace and Nave & Chapel Dunfermline Abbey A Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Dunstaffnage Castle B Y FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Palace and Nave & Chapel Dunfermline Abbey A Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Dunstaffnage Castle B Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Palace and Nave & Chapel Dunfermline Abbey A Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Dunstaffnage Castle B Y GF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Palace and Nave & Chapel Dunfermline Abbey A Y FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Palace and Nave Dunfermline Abbey A Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Palace and Nave

84 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 85 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) Dunstaffnage Castle B Y LA 1 5 5 Y A 1 4 4 Earl’s Palace, Birsay C GF 4 3 12 N A 4 2.25 9 Chapel Earl’s Palace, Birsay C LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Dunstaffnage Castle B Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Earl’s Palace, Birsay C CE 1 5 5 N A 1 4.25 4.25 Chapel Earl’s Palace, Birsay C FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Dunstaffnage Castle B Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Chapel Earl’s Palace, Birsay C PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Dunstaffnage Castle B Y GF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Earl’s Palace, Birsay C CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Chapel Earl’s Palace, Kirkwall C GF 4 3 12 Y S 4 2.5 10 Dunstaffnage Castle B Y FF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Earl’s Palace, Kirkwall C LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Chapel Earl’s Palace, Kirkwall C CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Dunstaffnage Castle B Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Earl’s Palace, Kirkwall C FF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Chapel Earl’s Palace, Kirkwall C CF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Dupplin Cross E N LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Earl’s Palace, Kirkwall C PF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Dupplin Cross E N GF 5 2 10 Y S 5 1.5 7.5 Eassie Cross Slab E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Dupplin Cross E N CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Eassie Cross Slab E N GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Dupplin Cross E N PF 0 2 0 Y S 0 1.5 0 Eassie Cross Slab E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Dupplin Cross E N CF 0 2 0 Y S 0 1.5 0 Eassie Cross Slab E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Dupplin Cross E N FF 0 2 0 Y S 0 1.5 0 Eassie Cross Slab E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Dwarfie Stane E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Eassie Cross Slab E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Dwarfie Stane E N GF 3 2 6 N A 3 1.25 3.75 Easter Aquhorthies E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Dwarfie Stane E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Stone Circle Dwarfie Stane E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Easter Aquhorthies E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Dwarfie Stane E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Stone Circle Dwarfie Stane E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Easter Aquhorthies E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Dyce Symbol Stones E Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Stone Circle Dyce Symbol Stones E Y GF 3 2 6 N A 3 1.25 3.75 Easter Aquhorthies E N GF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Stone Circle Dyce Symbol Stones E Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Easter Aquhorthies E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Dyce Symbol Stones E Y FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Stone Circle Dyce Symbol Stones E Y PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Easter Aquhorthies E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Dyce Symbol Stones E Y CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Stone Circle Eagle Rock E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Edinburgh Castle A Y LA 4 5 20 Y A 4 4 16 Eagle Rock E N CF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Edinburgh Castle A Y GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Eagle Rock E N GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Edinburgh Castle A Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Eagle Rock E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Edinburgh Castle A Y FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Eagle Rock E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Edinburgh Castle A Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Eagle Rock E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Edinburgh Castle A Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Earl’s Bu, Orphir C N GF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Edin’s Hall Broch F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Earl’s Bu, Orphir C N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Edin’s Hall Broch F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Earl’s Bu, Orphir C N CE 1 5 5 N A 1 4.25 4.25 Edin’s Hall Broch F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Earl’s Bu, Orphir C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Edin’s Hall Broch F N GF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Earl’s Bu, Orphir C N FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Edin’s Hall Broch F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Earl’s Bu, Orphir C N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Edin’s Hall Broch F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0

86 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 87 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) Edrom Norman Arch E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Elgin Pans Port B N GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Edrom Norman Arch E N GF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 & Precinct Wall Edrom Norman Arch E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Elgin Pans Port B N FF 4 4 16 Y A 4 3 12 & Precinct Wall Edrom Norman Arch E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Elgin Pans Port B N LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Edrom Norman Arch E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 & Precinct Wall Edrom Norman Arch E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Elgin Pans Port B N CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Edzell Castle C Y GF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 & Precinct Wall Edzell Castle C Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Elgin Pans Port B N CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 & Precinct Wall Edzell Castle C Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Elgin Pans Port B N PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Edzell Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 & Precinct Wall Edzell Castle C Y CF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Eynhallow Church C Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Edzell Castle C Y FF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Eynhallow Church C Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Eileach-an-Naoimh C Y CE 4 5 20 N A 4 4.25 17 Eynhallow Church C Y CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Eileach-an-Naoimh C Y CF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Eynhallow Church C Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Eileach-an-Naoimh C Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Eynhallow Church C Y GF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Eileach-an-Naoimh C Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Eynhallow Church C Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Eileach-an-Naoimh C Y GF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Fort Charlotte A Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 4 Eileach-an-Naoimh C Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Fort Charlotte A Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 4 Eilean Mor C N CE 3 5 15 N A 3 4.25 12.75 Fort Charlotte A Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 3 Eilean Mor C N LA 1 5 5 N A 1 4.25 4.25 Fort Charlotte A Y FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 3 Eilean Mor C N FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Fort Charlotte A Y GF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 3 Eilean Mor C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Fort Charlotte A Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 3 Eilean Mor C N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Fort George A Y CE 5 5 25 Y A 5 4 20 Eilean Mor C N GF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Fort George A Y CF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Elcho Castle A Y GF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 Fort George A Y GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Elcho Castle A Y CF 3 4 12 Y S 3 3.5 10.5 Fort George A Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Elcho Castle A Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Fort George A Y FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Elcho Castle A Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Fort George A Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Elcho Castle A Y FF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Fortrose Cathedral B Y GF 4 4 16 N A 4 3.25 13 Elcho Castle A Y PF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Fortrose Cathedral B Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Elgin Cathedral B Y GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Fortrose Cathedral B Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Elgin Cathedral B Y FF 4 4 16 Y A 4 3 12 Fortrose Cathedral B Y FF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Elgin Cathedral B Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Fortrose Cathedral B Y CF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Elgin Cathedral B Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Fortrose Cathedral B Y PF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Elgin Cathedral B Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Foulden Tithe Barn B Y GF 4 4 16 N A 4 3.25 13 Elgin Cathedral B Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Foulden Tithe Barn B Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Foulden Tithe Barn B Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Foulden Tithe Barn B Y CF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Foulden Tithe Barn B Y FF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Foulden Tithe Barn B Y PF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0

88 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 89 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) Fowlis Wester Cross Slab E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Hackness Battery A Y CF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 Fowlis Wester Cross Slab E N GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 & Martello Tower Fowlis Wester Cross Slab E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Hackness Battery A Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 & Martello Tower Fowlis Wester Cross Slab E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Hackness Battery A Y CE 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Fowlis Wester Cross Slab E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 & Martello Tower Fowlis Wester Cross Slab E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Hackness Battery A Y GF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Glasgow Cathedral A Y GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 & Martello Tower Glasgow Cathedral A Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Hackness Battery A Y FF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 & Martello Tower Glasgow Cathedral A Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Hackness Battery A Y PF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Glasgow Cathedral A Y FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 & Martello Tower Glasgow Cathedral A Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Hailes Castle C Y LA 3 5 15 Y A 3 4 12 Glasgow Cathedral A Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Hailes Castle C Y FF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Glenbuchat Castle C Y LA 3 5 15 N A 3 4.25 12.75 Hailes Castle C Y GF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Glenbuchat Castle C Y GF 3 3 9 N A 3 2.25 6.75 Hailes Castle C Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Glenbuchat Castle C Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Hailes Castle C Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Glenbuchat Castle C Y CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Hailes Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Glenbuchat Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Hermitage Castle D Y FF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Glenbuchat Castle C Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 & Chapel Glenluce Abbey C Y FF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Hermitage Castle D Y GF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Glenluce Abbey C Y GF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 & Chapel Glenluce Abbey C Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Hermitage Castle D Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 & Chapel Glenluce Abbey C Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Hermitage Castle D Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Glenluce Abbey C Y CF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 & Chapel Glenluce Abbey C Y PF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Hermitage Castle D Y PF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Grain Earth House F N LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 & Chapel Grain Earth House F N CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Hermitage Castle D Y CF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Grain Earth House F N PF 0 2 0 Y A 0 1 0 & Chapel Grain Earth House F N GF 0 2 0 Y A 0 1 0 Hill O’Many Stanes F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Grain Earth House F N CF 0 2 0 Y A 0 1 0 Hill O’Many Stanes F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Grain Earth House F N FF 0 2 0 Y A 0 1 0 Hill O’Many Stanes F N GF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Greenknowne Tower C N GF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Hill O’Many Stanes F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Greenknowne Tower C N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Hill O’Many Stanes F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Greenknowne Tower C N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Hill O’Many Stanes F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Greenknowne Tower C N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Hilton of Cadboll F N LA 3 5 15 N A 3 4.25 12.75 Greenknowne Tower C N FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Hilton of Cadboll F N CE 3 5 15 N A 3 4.25 12.75 Greenknowne Tower C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Hilton of Cadboll F N GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Grey Cairns of Camster B N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Hilton of Cadboll F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Grey Cairns of Camster B N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Hilton of Cadboll F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Grey Cairns of Camster B N CF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Hilton of Cadboll F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Grey Cairns of Camster B N GF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Grey Cairns of Camster B N PF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Grey Cairns of Camster B N FF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0

90 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 91 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) Holm of Papa Westray B N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Inchcolm Island B N CE 5 5 25 Y S 5 4.5 22.5 Chambered Cairn Inchcolm Island B N LA 4 5 20 Y S 4 4.5 18 Holm of Papa Westray B N CE 1 5 5 N A 1 4.25 4.25 Inchcolm Island B N GF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 Chambered Cairn Inchcolm Island B N CF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 Holm of Papa Westray B N CF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Chambered Cairn Inchcolm Island B N FF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Holm of Papa Westray B N FF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Inchcolm Island B N PF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Chambered Cairn Inchkenneth Chapel C Y GF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Holm of Papa Westray B N PF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Inchkenneth Chapel C Y CF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Chambered Cairn Inchkenneth Chapel C Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Holm of Papa Westray B N GF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Inchkenneth Chapel C Y CE 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Chambered Cairn Inchkenneth Chapel C Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Holyrood Park B Y LA 4 5 20 Y A 4 4 16 Inchkenneth Chapel C Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Holyrood Park B Y FF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Inchmahome Priory C Y GF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Holyrood Park B Y PF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Inchmahome Priory C Y FF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Holyrood Park B Y GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Inchmahome Priory C Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Holyrood Park B Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Inchmahome Priory C Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Holyrood Park B Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Inchmahome Priory C Y PF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Huntingtower Castle A Y GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Inchmahome Priory C Y CF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Huntingtower Castle A Y FF 3 4 12 Y A 3 3 9 Innerpeffray Chapel B Y GF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 Huntingtower Castle A Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Innerpeffray Chapel B Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Huntingtower Castle A Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Innerpeffray Chapel B Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Huntingtower Castle A Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Innerpeffray Chapel B Y CF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Huntingtower Castle A Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Innerpeffray Chapel B Y PF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Huntly Castle C Y LA 4 5 20 Y A 4 4 16 Innerpeffray Chapel B Y FF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Huntly Castle C Y LA 3 5 15 Y A 3 4 12 Inverlochy Castle C Y LA 3 5 15 N A 3 4.25 12.75 Huntly Castle C Y GF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Inverlochy Castle C Y GF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Huntly Castle C Y FF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Inverlochy Castle C Y PF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Huntly Castle C Y GF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Inverlochy Castle C Y CF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Huntly Castle C Y FF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Inverlochy Castle C Y CE 1 5 5 N A 1 4.25 4.25 Huntly Castle C Y PF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Inverlochy Castle C Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Huntly Castle C Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Iona Abbey A Y GF 4 4 16 Y A 4 3 12 Huntly Castle C Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Iona Abbey A Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Huntly Castle C Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Iona Abbey A Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Huntly Castle C Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Iona Abbey A Y FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Huntly Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Iona Abbey A Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Inchcolm Abbey B Y CE 5 5 25 Y S 5 4.5 22.5 Iona Abbey A Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Inchcolm Abbey B Y LA 4 5 20 Y S 4 4.5 18 Iona Nunnery C N GF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Inchcolm Abbey B Y GF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 Iona Nunnery C N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Inchcolm Abbey B Y CF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 Iona Nunnery C N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Inchcolm Abbey B Y PF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Iona Nunnery C N FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Inchcolm Abbey B Y FF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Iona Nunnery C N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Iona Nunnery C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0

92 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 93 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) Jarlshof D Y CE 4 5 20 Y A 4 4 16 Kildalton Cross E Y LA 1 5 5 N A 1 4.25 4.25 Jarlshof D Y LA 3 5 15 Y A 3 4 12 Kildalton Cross E Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Jarlshof D Y GF 4 3 12 Y A 4 2 8 Kildalton Cross E Y GF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Jarlshof D Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Kildalton Cross E Y FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Jarlshof D Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Kildalton Cross E Y PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Jarlshof D Y FF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Kildalton Cross E Y CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Jedburgh Abbey C Y PF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Kildrummy Castle C Y GF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Jedburgh Abbey C Y GF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Kildrummy Castle C Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Jedburgh Abbey C Y FF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Kildrummy Castle C Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Jedburgh Abbey C Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Kildrummy Castle C Y FF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Jedburgh Abbey C Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Kildrummy Castle C Y CF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Jedburgh Abbey C Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Kildrummy Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Keills Chapel & Cross B Y GF 4 4 16 N A 4 3.25 13 Kilmartin Crosses B N GF 3 4 12 N A 3 3.25 9.75 Keills Chapel & Cross B Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Kilmartin Crosses B N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Keills Chapel & Cross B Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Kilmartin Crosses B N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Keills Chapel & Cross B Y FF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Kilmartin Crosses B N CF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Keills Chapel & Cross B Y PF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Kilmartin Crosses B N PF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Keills Chapel & Cross B Y CF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Kilmartin Crosses B N FF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Kelso Abbey C Y GF 4 3 12 N A 4 2.25 9 Kilmartin Glebe Cairn F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Kelso Abbey C Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Kilmartin Glebe Cairn F N GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Kelso Abbey C Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Kilmartin Glebe Cairn F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Kelso Abbey C Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Kilmartin Glebe Cairn F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Kelso Abbey C Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Kilmartin Glebe Cairn F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Kelso Abbey C Y CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Kilmartin Glebe Cairn F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Kilberry Sculptured B Y GF 5 4 20 N A 5 3.25 16.25 Kilmartin Sculptured E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Stones Stones Kilberry Sculptured B Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Kilmartin Sculptured E N GF 3 2 6 N A 3 1.25 3.75 Stones Stones Kilberry Sculptured B Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Kilmartin Sculptured E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Stones Stones Kilberry Sculptured B Y FF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Kilmartin Sculptured E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Stones Stones Kilberry Sculptured B Y PF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Kilmartin Sculptured E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Stones Stones Kilberry Sculptured B Y CF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Kilmartin Sculptured E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Stones Stones Kilchurn Castle C Y LA 3 5 15 Y S 3 4.5 13.5 Kilmichael Glassary Cup E N LA 1 5 5 N A 1 4.25 4.25 Kilchurn Castle C Y FF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 & Ring Mark Rocks Kilchurn Castle C Y GF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Kilmichael Glassary Cup E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 & Ring Mark Rocks Kilchurn Castle C Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Kilmichael Glassary Cup E N GF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Kilchurn Castle C Y CF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 & Ring Mark Rocks Kilchurn Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Kilmichael Glassary Cup E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 & Ring Mark Rocks Kilmichael Glassary Cup E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 & Ring Mark Rocks Kilmichael Glassary Cup E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 & Ring Mark Rocks

94 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 95 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) Kilmodan Sculptured B Y GF 5 4 20 N A 5 3.25 16.25 Kinnaird Head A Y CE 4 5 20 Y A 4 4 16 Stones Castle Lighthouse Kilmodan Sculptured B Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Kinnaird Head A Y GF 4 4 16 Y A 4 3 12 Stones Castle Lighthouse Kilmodan Sculptured B Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Kinnaird Head A Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Stones Castle Lighthouse Kilmodan Sculptured B Y PF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Kinnaird Head A Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Stones Castle Lighthouse Kilmodan Sculptured B Y FF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Kinnaird Head A Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Stones Castle Lighthouse Kilmodan Sculptured B Y CF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Kinnaird Head A Y FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Stones Castle Lighthouse Kilmory Knap Chapel B Y GF 5 4 20 N A 5 3.25 16.25 Kinnaird Head A Y CE 4 5 20 Y A 4 4 16 Kilmory Knap Chapel B Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Wine Tower Kilmory Knap Chapel B Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Kinnaird Head A Y GF 4 4 16 Y A 4 3 12 Wine Tower Kilmory Knap Chapel B Y PF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Kinnaird Head A Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Kilmory Knap Chapel B Y FF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Wine Tower Kilmory Knap Chapel B Y CF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Kinnaird Head A Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Kilpatrick Dun F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Wine Tower Kilpatrick Dun F N GF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 Kinnaird Head A Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Wine Tower Kilpatrick Dun F CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Kinnaird Head A Y FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Kilpatrick Dun F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Wine Tower Kilpatrick Dun F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Kinneil House B Y GF 5 4 20 N A 5 3.25 16.25 Kilpatrick Dun F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Kinneil House B Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Kilwinning Abbey C Y GF 4 3 12 N A 4 2.25 9 Kinneil House B Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Kilwinning Abbey C Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Kinneil House B Y CF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Kilwinning Abbey C Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Kinneil House B Y PF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Kilwinning Abbey C Y CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Kinneil House B Y FF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Kilwinning Abbey C Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Kinneil Old Church Cross E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Kilwinning Abbey C Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Kinneil Old Church Cross E N GF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 King’s Knot F Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Kinneil Old Church Cross E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 King’s Knot F Y GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Kinneil Old Church Cross E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 King’s Knot F Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Kinneil Old Church Cross E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 King’s Knot F Y CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Kinneil Old Church Cross E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 King’s Knot F Y PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Kirkconnel Stones E N GF 5 2 10 N C 5 2 10 King’s Knot F Y FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Kirkconnel Stones E N LA 2 5 10 N C 2 5 10 Kinkell Church B Y GF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Kirkconnel Stones E N FF 4 2 8 N C 4 2 8 Kinkell Church B Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Kirkconnel Stones E N CE 0 5 0 N C 0 5 0 Kinkell Church B Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Kirkconnel Stones E N CF 0 2 0 N C 0 2 0 Kinkell Church B Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Kirkconnel Stones E N PF 0 2 0 N C 0 2 0 Kinkell Church B Y CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Kinkell Church B Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0

96 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 97 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) Kirkhill Roman Signal F N LA 2 5 10 N C 2 5 10 Knowe of Unstan B N GF 4 4 16 N A 4 3.25 13 station Chambered Cairn Kirkhill Roman Signal F N GF 3 2 6 N C 3 2 6 Knowe of Unstan B N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 station Chambered Cairn Kirkhill Roman Signal F N CE 0 5 0 N C 0 5 0 Knowe of Unstan B N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 station Chambered Cairn Kirkhill Roman Signal F N PF 0 2 0 N C 0 2 0 Knowe of Unstan B N FF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 station Chambered Cairn Kirkhill Roman Signal F N CF 0 2 0 N C 0 2 0 Knowe of Unstan B N PF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 station Chambered Cairn Kirkhill Roman Signal F N FF 0 2 0 N C 0 2 0 Knowe of Unstan B N CF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 station Chambered Cairn Kirkmadrine Stones B Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Knowe of Yarso D N LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Kirkmadrine Stones B Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Chambered Cairn Kirkmadrine Stones B Y PF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Knowe of Yarso D N CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Chambered Cairn Kirkmadrine Stones B Y FF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Knowe of Yarso D N CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Kirkmadrine Stones B Y CF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Chambered Cairn Kirkmadrine Stones B Y GF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Knowe of Yarso D N PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Kisimul Castle A Y CF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 Chambered Cairn Kisimul Castle A Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Knowe of Yarso D N GF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Chambered Cairn Kisimul Castle A Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Knowe of Yarso D N FF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Kisimul Castle A Y GF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Chambered Cairn Kisimul Castle A Y FF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Laggangarn Standing E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Kisimul Castle A Y PF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Stones Knap of Howar D N LA 3 5 15 N A 3 4.25 12.75 Laggangarn Standing E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Knap of Howar D N CF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Stones Knap of Howar D N CE 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Laggangarn Standing E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Stones Knap of Howar D N GF 3 3 9 N A 3 2.25 6.75 Laggangarn Standing E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Knap of Howar D N FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Stones Knap of Howar D N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Laggangarn Standing E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Knock Castle C N LA 2 5 10 N C 2 5 10 Stones Knock Castle C N GF 3 3 9 N C 3 3 9 Laggangarn Standing E N GF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Knock Castle C N CE 0 5 0 N C 0 5 0 Stones Knock Castle C N CF 0 3 0 N C 0 3 0 Lauderdale Aisle A N LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 4 Knock Castle C N PF 0 3 0 N C 0 3 0 Lauderdale Aisle A N CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 4 Knock Castle C N FF 0 3 0 N C 0 3 0 Lauderdale Aisle A N GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 3 Knocknagael Boar Stone E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Lauderdale Aisle A N FF 3 4 12 Y A 3 3 3 Knocknagael Boar Stone E N GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Lauderdale Aisle A N PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 3 Knocknagael Boar Stone E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Lauderdale Aisle A N CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 3 Knocknagael Boar Stone E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Knocknagael Boar Stone E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Knocknagael Boar Stone E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0

98 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 99 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) Lincluden Collegiate C Y GF 4 5 20 Y A 4 4 16 Loanhead of Daviot E N LA 1 5 5 N A 1 4.25 4.25 Church Stone Circle Lincluden Collegiate C Y FF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Loanhead of Daviot E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Church Stone Circle Lincluden Collegiate C Y GF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Loanhead of Daviot E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Church Stone Circle Lincluden Collegiate C Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Loanhead of Daviot E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Church Stone Circle Lincluden Collegiate C Y LA 2 3 6 Y A 2 2 4 Loanhead of Daviot E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Church Stone Circle Lincluden Collegiate C Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Loanhead of Daviot E N GF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Church Stone Circle Lincluden Collegiate C Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Loch Doon Castle C N LA 1 5 5 N A 1 4.25 4.25 Church Loch Doon Castle C N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Lincluden Collegiate C Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Loch Doon Castle C N FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Church Loch Doon Castle C N GF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Lincluden Collegiate C Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Church Loch Doon Castle C N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Lincluden Collegiate C Y GF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Loch Doon Castle C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Church Lochleven Castle C Y GF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Lincluden Collegiate C Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Lochleven Castle C Y FF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Church Lochleven Castle C Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Lincluden Collegiate C Y FF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Lochleven Castle C Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Church Lochleven Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Lindsay Burial Aisle B Y GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Lochleven Castle C Y CF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Lindsay Burial Aisle B Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Lochmaben Castle C N FF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Lindsay Burial Aisle B Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Lochmaben Castle C N GF 4 3 12 N A 4 2.25 9 Lindsay Burial Aisle B Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Lochmaben Castle C N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Lindsay Burial Aisle B Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Lochmaben Castle C N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Lindsay Burial Aisle B Y FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Lochmaben Castle C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Links of Notland F Y LA 3 5 15 N A 3 4.25 12.75 Lochmaben Castle C N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Links of Notland F Y CE 3 5 15 N A 3 4.25 12.75 Lochranza Castle C Y CE 3 5 15 Y S 3 4.5 13.5 Links of Notland F Y GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Lochranza Castle C Y FF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Links of Notland F Y CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Lochranza Castle C Y CF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Links of Notland F Y FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Lochranza Castle C Y GF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Links of Notland F Y PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Lochranza Castle C Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Linlithgow Palace, C Y LA 3 5 15 Y A 3 4 12 Peel & Park Lochranza Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Linlithgow Palace, C Y GF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Machrie Moor E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Peel & Park Stone Circles Linlithgow Palace, C Y PF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Machrie Moor E N GF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 Peel & Park Stone Circles Linlithgow Palace, C Y FF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Machrie Moor E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Peel & Park Stone Circles Linlithgow Palace, C Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Machrie Moor E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Peel & Park Stone Circles Linlithgow Palace, C Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Machrie Moor E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Peel & Park Stone Circles Machrie Moor E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Stone Circles

100 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 101 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Name Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) MacLean’s Cross, Iona E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Mavisbank Policies F N LA 5 5 25 N C 5 5 25 MacLean’s Cross, Iona E N GF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 Mavisbank Policies F N FF 5 2 10 N C 5 2 10 MacLean’s Cross, Iona E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Mavisbank Policies F N PF 5 2 10 N C 5 2 10 MacLean’s Cross, Iona E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Mavisbank Policies F N GF 5 2 10 N C 5 2 10 MacLean’s Cross, Iona E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Mavisbank Policies F N CE 0 5 0 N C 0 5 0 MacLean’s Cross, Iona E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Mavisbank Policies F N CF 0 2 0 N C 0 2 0 Maclellan’s Castle C Y GF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Maybole Collegiate C Y GF 5 3 15 N S 5 2.75 13.75 Maclellan’s Castle C Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Church Maclellan’s Castle C Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Maybole Collegiate C Y LA 2 5 10 N S 2 4.75 9.5 Church Maclellan’s Castle C Y CF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Maybole Collegiate C Y CE 0 5 0 N S 0 4.75 0 Maclellan’s Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Church Maclellan’s Castle C Y FF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Maybole Collegiate C Y PF 0 3 0 N S 0 2.75 0 Maes Howe B N GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Church Chambered Cairn Maybole Collegiate C Y FF 0 3 0 N S 0 2.75 0 Maes Howe B N LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Church Chambered Cairn Maybole Collegiate C Y CF 0 3 0 N S 0 2.75 0 Maes Howe B N CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Church Chambered Cairn Meigle Stones A Y GF 4 4 16 Y S 4 3.5 14 Maes Howe B N CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 (& Museum) Chambered Cairn Meigle Stones A Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Maes Howe B N FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 (& Museum) Chambered Cairn Meigle Stones A Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Maes Howe B N PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 (& Museum) Chambered Cairn Meigle Stones A Y PF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Maiden Stone E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 (& Museum) Maiden Stone E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Meigle Stones A Y FF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 (& Museum) Maiden Stone E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Meigle Stones A Y CF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Maiden Stone E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 (& Museum) Maiden Stone E N GF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Melrose Abbey C Y GF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Maiden Stone E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 and Precinct Maison Dieu Chapel, C LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Melrose Abbey C Y FF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Brechin and Precinct Maison Dieu Chapel, C GF 3 3 9 N A 3 2.25 6.75 Melrose Abbey C Y PF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Brechin and Precinct Maison Dieu Chapel, C CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Melrose Abbey C Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Brechin and Precinct Maison Dieu Chapel, C PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Melrose Abbey C Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Brechin and Precinct Maison Dieu Chapel, C CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Melrose Abbey C Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Brechin and Precinct Maison Dieu Chapel, C FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Merkland Cross E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Brechin Merkland Cross E N GF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 Mars Wark C N LA 1 5 5 N A 1 4.25 4.25 Merkland Cross E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Mars Wark C N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Merkland Cross E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Mars Wark C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Merkland Cross E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Mars Wark C N FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Merkland Cross E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Mars Wark C N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Mars Wark C N GF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0

102 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 103 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) Mid Howe Broch C Y CF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Muir O’Fauld Roman F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Mid Howe Broch C Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Signal Station Mid Howe Broch C Y CE 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Muir O’Fauld Roman F N GF 3 2 6 N A 3 1.25 3.75 Signal Station Mid Howe Broch C Y GF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Muir O’Fauld Roman F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Mid Howe Broch C Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Signal Station Mid Howe Broch C Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Muir O’Fauld Roman F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Mid Howe B N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Signal Station Chambered Cairn Muir O’Fauld Roman F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Mid Howe B N CE 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Signal Station Chambered Cairn Muir O’Fauld Roman F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Mid Howe B N CF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Signal Station Chambered Cairn Muness Castle C Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Mid Howe B N PF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Muness Castle C Y GF 3 3 9 Y A 3 2 6 Chambered Cairn Muness Castle C Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Mid Howe B N FF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Chambered Cairn Muness Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Mid Howe B N GF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Muness Castle C Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Chambered Cairn Muness Castle C Y FF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Monreith Cross E N LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Muthill Old Church C N GF 4 3 12 N A 4 2.25 9 Monreith Cross E N CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 & Tower Monreith Cross E N FF 0 2 0 Y A 0 1 0 Muthill Old Church C N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 & Tower Monreith Cross E N GF 0 2 0 Y A 0 1 0 Muthill Old Church C N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Monreith Cross E N CF 0 2 0 Y A 0 1 0 & Tower Monreith Cross E N PF 0 2 0 Y A 0 1 0 Muthill Old Church C N FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Morton Castle C N GF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 & Tower Morton Castle C N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Muthill Old Church C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 & Tower Morton Castle C N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Muthill Old Church C N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Morton Castle C N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 & Tower Morton Castle C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Ness of Burgi D Y CE 4 5 20 N A 4 4.25 17 Morton Castle C N FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Ness of Burgi D Y CF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Moss Farm Road E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Ness of Burgi D Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Stone Circle Ness of Burgi D Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Moss Farm Road E N GF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 Stone Circle Ness of Burgi D Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Moss Farm Road E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Ness of Burgi D Y GF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Stone Circle Nether Largie Mid Cairn F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Moss Farm Road E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Nether Largie Mid Cairn F N GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Stone Circle Nether Largie Mid Cairn F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Moss Farm Road E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Stone Circle Nether Largie Mid Cairn F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Moss Farm Road E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Nether Largie Mid Cairn F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Stone Circle Nether Largie Mid Cairn F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Mousa Broch C Y LA 3 5 15 N A 3 4.25 12.75 Mousa Broch C Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Mousa Broch C Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Mousa Broch C Y GF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Mousa Broch C Y CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Mousa Broch C Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0

104 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 105 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) Nether Largie F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Old Brig O’Dee C N LA 3 5 15 N A 3 4.25 12.75 North Cairn Old Brig O’Dee C N FF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Nether Largie F N GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Old Brig O’Dee C N GF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 North Cairn Old Brig O’Dee C N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Nether Largie F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 North Cairn Old Brig O’Dee C N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Nether Largie F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Old Brig O’Dee C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 North Cairn Orchardton Tower C Y LA 1 5 5 Y A 1 4 4 Nether Largie F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Orchardton Tower C Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 North Cairn Orchardton Tower C Y FF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Nether Largie F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Orchardton Tower C Y GF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 North Cairn Orchardton Tower C Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Nether Largie F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 South Cairn Orchardton Tower C Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Nether Largie F N GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Ormiston Cross E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 South Cairn Ormiston Cross E N GF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 Nether Largie F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Ormiston Cross E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 South Cairn Ormiston Cross E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Nether Largie F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 South Cairn Ormiston Cross E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Nether Largie F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Ormiston Cross E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 South Cairn Peel Ring of Lumphanan F Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Nether Largie F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Peel Ring of Lumphanan F Y FF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 South Cairn Peel Ring of Lumphanan F Y GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 New Abbey Corn Mill A Y FF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Peel Ring of Lumphanan F Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 New Abbey Corn Mill A Y GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Peel Ring of Lumphanan F Y CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 New Abbey Corn Mill A Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Peel Ring of Lumphanan F Y PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 New Abbey Corn Mill A Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Picardy Symbol Stone E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 New Abbey Corn Mill A Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Picardy Symbol Stone E N GF 3 2 6 N A 3 1.25 3.75 New Abbey Corn Mill A Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Picardy Symbol Stone E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Newark Castle A Y CE 4 5 20 Y S 4 4.5 18 Picardy Symbol Stone E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Newark Castle A Y CE 4 5 20 Y S 4 4.5 18 Picardy Symbol Stone E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Newark Castle A Y GF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 Picardy Symbol Stone E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Newark Castle A Y CF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 Pierowall Church C N LA 3 5 15 N A 3 4.25 12.75 Newark Castle A Y GF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 Pierowall Church C N GF 4 3 12 N A 4 2.25 9 Newark Castle A Y CF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 Pierowall Church C N CF 4 3 12 N A 4 2.25 9 Newark Castle A Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Pierowall Church C N CE 1 5 5 N A 1 4.25 4.25 Newark Castle A Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Pierowall Church C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Newark Castle A Y FF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Pierowall Church C N FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Newark Castle A Y PF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Preston Market Cross E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Newark Castle A Y PF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Preston Market Cross E N GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Newark Castle A Y FF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Preston Market Cross E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Notland Castle B Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Preston Market Cross E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Notland Castle B Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Preston Market Cross E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Notland Castle B Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Preston Market Cross E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Notland Castle B Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Notland Castle B Y GF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Notland Castle B Y FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0

106 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 107 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) Quoyness Chambered B N CE 4 5 20 N A 4 4.25 17 Rispain Camp F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Cairn Rispain Camp F N GF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 Quoyness Chambered B N CF 5 4 20 N A 5 3.25 16.25 Rispain Camp F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Cairn Rispain Camp F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Quoyness Chambered B N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Cairn Rispain Camp F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Quoyness Chambered B N PF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Rispain Camp F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Cairn Rothesay Castle C Y GF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Quoyness Chambered B N GF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Rothesay Castle C Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Cairn Rothesay Castle C Y CF 3 3 9 Y A 3 2 6 Quoyness Chambered B N FF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Rothesay Castle C Y CE 1 5 5 Y A 1 4 4 Cairn Rothesay Castle C Y FF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Ravenscraig Castle C Y GF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Rothesay Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Ravenscraig Castle C Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Rowallan Castle B N PF 5 4 20 N A 5 3.25 16.25 Ravenscraig Castle C Y CE 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Rowallan Castle B N FF 5 4 20 N A 5 3.25 16.25 Ravenscraig Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Rowallan Castle B N GF 5 4 20 N A 5 3.25 16.25 Ravenscraig Castle C Y CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Rowallan Castle B N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Ravenscraig Castle C Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Rowallan Castle B N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Rennibister Earth House F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Rowallan Castle B N CF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Rennibister Earth House F N GF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 Ruthven Barracks C N LA 3 5 15 Y A 3 4 12 Rennibister Earth House F N CE 1 5 5 N A 1 4.25 4.25 Ruthven Barracks C N GF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Rennibister Earth House F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Ruthven Barracks C N FF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Rennibister Earth House F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Ruthven Barracks C N CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Rennibister Earth House F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Ruthven Barracks C N CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Restenneth Priory C Y GF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Ruthven Barracks C N PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Restenneth Priory C Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Ruthwell Cross E Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Restenneth Priory C Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Ruthwell Cross E Y GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Restenneth Priory C Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Ruthwell Cross E Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Restenneth Priory C Y CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Ruthwell Cross E Y CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Restenneth Priory C Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Ruthwell Cross E Y PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Ri-Cruin Cairn F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Ruthwell Cross E Y FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Ri-Cruin Cairn F N GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Scalloway Castle C N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Ri-Cruin Cairn F N FF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 Scalloway Castle C N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Ri-Cruin Cairn F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Scalloway Castle C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Ri-Cruin Cairn F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Scalloway Castle C N FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Ri-Cruin Cairn F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Scalloway Castle C N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Ring of Brodgar E Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Scalloway Castle C N GF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Ring of Brodgar E Y GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Scotstarvit Tower B N LA 1 5 5 Y A 1 4 4 Ring of Brodgar E Y FF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Scotstarvit Tower B N CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Ring of Brodgar E Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Scotstarvit Tower B N GF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Ring of Brodgar E Y PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Scotstarvit Tower B N PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Ring of Brodgar E Y CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Scotstarvit Tower B N CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Scotstarvit Tower B N FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0

108 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 109 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) Seton Collegiate Church B Y GF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 St Andrews Castle C Y CE 4 5 20 Y A 4 4 16 Seton Collegiate Church B Y FF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 St Andrews Castle C Y GF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Seton Collegiate Church B Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 St Andrews Castle C Y CF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Seton Collegiate Church B Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 St Andrews Castle C Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Seton Collegiate Church B Y PF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 St Andrews Castle C Y FF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Seton Collegiate Church B Y CF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 St Andrews Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Skara Brae B Y GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 St Andrews Cathedral C Y GF 4 3 12 Y A 4 2 8 Skara Brae B Y LA 3 5 15 Y A 3 4 12 St Andrews Cathedral C Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Skara Brae B Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 St Andrews Cathedral C Y CE 1 5 5 Y A 1 4 4 Skara Brae B Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 St Andrews Cathedral C Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Skara Brae B Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 St Andrews Cathedral C Y FF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Skara Brae B Y FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 St Andrews Cathedral C Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Skelmorlie Aisle B Y GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 St Blane’s Church C Y LA 4 5 20 N A 4 4.25 17 Skelmorlie Aisle B Y CE 3 5 15 Y A 3 4 12 St Blane’s Church C Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Skelmorlie Aisle B Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 St Blane’s Church C Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Skelmorlie Aisle B Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 St Blane’s Church C Y GF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Skelmorlie Aisle B Y FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 St Blane’s Church C Y CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Skelmorlie Aisle B Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 St Blane’s Church C Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Skipness Castle B Y GF 5 4 20 N A 5 3.25 16.25 St Bride’s Church B Y GF 4 4 16 Y A 4 3 12 Skipness Castle B Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 St Bride’s Church B Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Skipness Castle B Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 St Bride’s Church B Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Skipness Castle B Y FF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 St Bride’s Church B Y FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Skipness Castle B Y CF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 St Bride’s Church B Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Skipness Castle B Y PF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 St Bride’s Church B Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Skipness Chapel C Y CE 3 5 15 N A 3 4.25 12.75 St Bridget’s Kirk C GF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Skipness Chapel C Y GF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 St Bridget’s Kirk C LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Skipness Chapel C Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 St Bridget’s Kirk C CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Skipness Chapel C Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 St Bridget’s Kirk C FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Skipness Chapel C Y CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 St Bridget’s Kirk C PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Skipness Chapel C Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 St Bridget’s Kirk C CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Smailholm Tower A Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 St Clement’s Church, B Y LA 1 5 5 Y A 1 4 4 Smailholm Tower A Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Rodel Smailholm Tower A Y CF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 St Clement’s Church, B Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Rodel Smailholm Tower A Y PF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 St Clement’s Church, B Y FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Smailholm Tower A Y FF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Rodel Smailholm Tower A Y GF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 St Clement’s Church, B Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Spynie Palace C Y LA 4 5 20 Y S 4 4.5 18 Rodel Spynie Palace C Y GF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 St Clement’s Church, B Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Rodel Spynie Palace C Y CF 4 3 12 Y S 4 2.5 10 St Clement’s Church, B Y GF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Spynie Palace C Y FF 3 3 9 Y S 3 2.5 7.5 Rodel Spynie Palace C Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Spynie Palace C Y PF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0

110 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 111 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) St Machar’s Cathedral C Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 St Mary’s Chapel, B Y GF 3 4 12 Y A 3 3 9 Transepts Rothesay St Machar’s Cathedral C Y GF 3 3 9 N A 3 2.25 6.75 St Mary’s Chapel, B Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Transepts Rothesay St Machar’s Cathedral C Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 St Mary’s Chapel, B Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Transepts Rothesay St Machar’s Cathedral C Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 St Mary’s Chapel, B Y FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Transepts Rothesay St Machar’s Cathedral C Y CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 St Mary’s Chapel, B Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Transepts Rothesay St Machar’s Cathedral C Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 St Mary’s Chapel, B Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Transepts Rothesay St Magnus Church, C LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 St Mary’s Chapel, Wyre C N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Egilsay St Mary’s Chapel, Wyre C N GF 3 3 9 N A 3 2.25 6.75 St Magnus Church, C CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 St Mary’s Chapel, Wyre C N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Egilsay St Mary’s Chapel, Wyre C N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 St Magnus Church, C PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Egilsay St Mary’s Chapel, Wyre C N FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 St Magnus Church, C FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 St Mary’s Chapel, Wyre C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Egilsay St Mary’s Church B N GF 3 4 12 N A 3 3.25 9.75 St Magnus Church, C GF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Grandtully Egilsay St Mary’s Church B N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 St Magnus Church, C CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Grandtully Egilsay St Mary’s Church B N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 St Martin’s Kirk, C N GF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Grandtully Haddington St Mary’s Church B N CF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 St Martin’s Kirk, C N FF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Grandtully Haddington St Mary’s Church B N PF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 St Martin’s Kirk, C N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Grandtully Haddington St Mary’s Church B N FF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 St Martin’s Kirk, C N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Grandtully Haddington St Mary’s Kirk, C N GF 4 3 12 N A 4 2.25 9 St Martin’s Kirk, C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Auchindoir Haddington St Mary’s Kirk, C N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 St Martin’s Kirk, C N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Auchindoir Haddington St Mary’s Kirk, C N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 St Mary’s Chapel, C N LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Auchindoir Crosskirk St Mary’s Kirk, C N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 St Mary’s Chapel, C N GF 3 3 9 Y A 3 2 6 Auchindoir Crosskirk St Mary’s Kirk, C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 St Mary’s Chapel, C N CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Auchindoir Crosskirk St Mary’s Kirk, C N FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 St Mary’s Chapel, C N PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Auchindoir Crosskirk St Mary’s Chapel, C N CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Crosskirk St Mary’s Chapel, C N FF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Crosskirk

112 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 113 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) St Mary’s Kirkheugh, D N GF 4 3 12 N A 4 2.25 9 St Peter’s Church, Duffus C Y GF 4 3 12 Y A 4 2 8 St Andrews St Peter’s Church, Duffus C Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 St Mary’s Kirkheugh, D N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 St Peter’s Church, Duffus C Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 St Andrews St Peter’s Church, Duffus C Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 St Mary’s Kirkheugh, D N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 St Andrews St Peter’s Church, Duffus C Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 St Mary’s Kirkheugh, D N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 St Peter’s Church, Duffus C Y FF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 St Andrews St Rules Tower, B N GF 3 4 12 Y A 3 3 9 St Mary’s Kirkheugh, D N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 St Andrews St Andrews St Rules Tower, B N LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 St Mary’s Kirkheugh, D N FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 St Andrews St Andrews St Rules Tower, B N CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 St Nicholas Church, GF 5 0 0 5 0 0 St Andrews Orphir St Rules Tower, B N FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 St Nicholas Church, LA 2 0 0 2 0 0 St Andrews Orphir St Rules Tower, B N CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 St Nicholas Church, PF 0 0 0 0 0 0 St Andrews Orphir St Rules Tower, B N PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 St Nicholas Church, FF 0 0 0 0 0 0 St Andrews Orphir St Serf’s Church, B Y GF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 St Nicholas Church, CF 0 0 0 0 0 0 Dunning Orphir St Serf’s Church, B Y FF 4 4 16 Y S 4 3.5 14 St Nicholas Church, CE 1 0 0 1 0 0 Dunning Orphir St Serf’s Church, B Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 St Ninian’s Cave F N LA 3 5 15 N A 3 4.25 12.75 Dunning St Ninian’s Cave F N GF 3 2 6 N A 3 1.25 3.75 St Serf’s Church, B Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Dunning St Ninian’s Cave F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 St Serf’s Church, B Y PF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 St Ninian’s Cave F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Dunning St Ninian’s Cave F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 St Serf’s Church, B Y CF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 St Ninian’s Cave F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Dunning St Ninian’s Chapel, C N CE 3 5 15 N A 3 4.25 12.75 St Serf’s Priory, C N FF 5 3 15 N C 5 3 15 Isle of Whithorn Loch Leven St Ninian’s Chapel, C N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 St Serf’s Priory, C N GF 5 3 15 N C 5 3 15 Isle of Whithorn Loch Leven St Ninian’s Chapel, C N CF 3 3 9 N A 3 2.25 6.75 St Serf’s Priory, C N LA 2 5 10 N C 2 5 10 Isle of Whithorn Loch Leven St Ninian’s Chapel, C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 St Serf’s Priory, C N CE 0 5 0 N C 0 5 0 Isle of Whithorn Loch Leven St Ninian’s Chapel, C N GF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 St Serf’s Priory, C N PF 0 3 0 N C 0 3 0 Isle of Whithorn Loch Leven St Ninian’s Chapel, C N FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 St Serf’s Priory, C N CF 0 3 0 N C 0 3 0 Isle of Whithorn Loch Leven St Orland’s Stone E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 St Triduana’s Aisle B Y GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 St Orland’s Stone E N GF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 St Triduana’s Aisle B Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 St Orland’s Stone E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 St Triduana’s Aisle B Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 St Orland’s Stone E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 St Triduana’s Aisle B Y FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 St Orland’s Stone E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 St Triduana’s Aisle B Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 St Orland’s Stone E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 St Triduana’s Aisle B Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0

114 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 115 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) St Vigeans Stones A Y GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Stone positions – E N LA 3 5 15 N A 3 4.25 12.75 (& Museum) Dunfallandy, St Orlands St Vigeans Stones A Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Stone positions – E N GF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 & Museum) Dunfallandy, St Orlands St Vigeans Stones A Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Stone positions – E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 (& Museum) Dunfallandy, St Orlands St Vigeans Stones A Y FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Stone positions – E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 (& Museum) Dunfallandy, St Orlands St Vigeans Stones A Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Stone positions – E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 (& Museum) Dunfallandy, St Orlands St Vigeans Stones A Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Stone positions – E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 (& Museum) Dunfallandy, St Orlands Stanley Mills A Y LA 4 5 20 Y S 4 4.5 18 Stones of Stenness E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Stanley Mills A Y FF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 Stones of Stenness E N GF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 Stanley Mills A Y GF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 Stones of Stenness E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Stanley Mills A Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Stones of Stenness E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Stanley Mills A Y CF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Stones of Stenness E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Stanley Mills A Y PF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Stones of Stenness E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Stanydale Temple F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Sueno’s Stone E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Stanydale Temple F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Sueno’s Stone E N GF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 Stanydale Temple F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Sueno’s Stone E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Stanydale Temple F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Sueno’s Stone E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Stanydale Temple F N GF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Sueno’s Stone E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Stanydale Temple F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Sueno’s Stone E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Steinacleit Cairn E N LA 1 5 5 N A 1 4.25 4.25 Sunnybrae Cottage B Y GF 5 4 20 N A 5 3.25 16.25 and Stone Circle Sunnybrae Cottage B Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Steinacleit Cairn E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Sunnybrae Cottage B Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 and Stone Circle Sunnybrae Cottage B Y CF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Steinacleit Cairn E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 and Stone Circle Sunnybrae Cottage B Y PF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Steinacleit Cairn E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Sunnybrae Cottage B Y FF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 and Stone Circle Sweetheart Abbey C Y GF 4 3 12 Y A 4 2 8 Steinacleit Cairn E N GF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Sweetheart Abbey C Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 and Stone Circle Sweetheart Abbey C Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Steinacleit Cairn E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Sweetheart Abbey C Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 and Stone Circle Sweetheart Abbey C Y FF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Stirling Castle A Y LA 3 5 15 Y A 3 4 12 Sweetheart Abbey C Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Stirling Castle A Y GF 3 4 12 Y A 3 3 9 Sweetheart Abbey C N FF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Stirling Castle A Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Precinct Walls Stirling Castle A Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Sweetheart Abbey C N GF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Stirling Castle A Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Precinct Walls Stirling Castle A Y FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Sweetheart Abbey C N LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Stirling Old Bridge C N LA 3 5 15 N A 3 4.25 12.75 Precinct Walls Stirling Old Bridge C N FF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Sweetheart Abbey C N CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Precinct Walls Stirling Old Bridge C N CF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Sweetheart Abbey C N CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Stirling Old Bridge C N GF 4 3 12 N A 4 2.25 9 Precinct Walls Stirling Old Bridge C N CE 1 5 5 N A 1 4.25 4.25 Sweetheart Abbey C N PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Stirling Old Bridge C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Precinct Walls

116 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 117 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) Tantallon Castle C Y LA 3 5 15 Y A 3 4 12 Temple Wood E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Tantallon Castle C Y LA 3 5 15 Y A 3 4 12 Stone Circle Tantallon Castle C Y GF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Temple Wood E N GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Stone Circle Tantallon Castle C Y FF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Temple Wood E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Tantallon Castle C Y CF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Stone Circle Tantallon Castle C Y FF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Temple Wood E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Tantallon Castle C Y GF 3 3 9 Y A 3 2 6 Stone Circle Tantallon Castle C Y CE 1 5 5 Y A 1 4 4 Temple Wood E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Stone Circle Tantallon Castle C Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Temple Wood E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Tantallon Castle C Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Stone Circle Tantallon Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Threave Castle C Y FF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Tantallon Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Threave Castle C Y GF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Tarves Tomb D Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Threave Castle C Y PF 4 3 12 Y S 4 2.5 10 Tarves Tomb D Y GF 3 3 9 N A 3 2.25 6.75 Threave Castle C Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Tarves Tomb D Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Threave Castle C Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Tarves Tomb D Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Threave Castle C Y CF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Tarves Tomb D Y CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Tolquhon Castle C Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Tarves Tomb D Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Tolquhon Castle C Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Taversoe Tuick D N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Tolquhon Castle C Y FF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Chambered Cairn Tolquhon Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Taversoe Tuick D N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Chambered Cairn Tolquhon Castle C Y GF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Taversoe Tuick D N GF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Tolquhon Castle C Y CF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Chambered Cairn Tomnavervie Stone E Y LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Taversoe Tuick D N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Circle Chambered Cairn Tomnavervie Stone E Y GF 3 3 9 N A 3 2.25 6.75 Taversoe Tuick D N FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Circle Chambered Cairn Tomnavervie Stone E Y CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Taversoe Tuick D N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Circle Chambered Cairn Tomnavervie Stone E Y FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Tealing Dovecot B N GF 5 4 20 N S 5 3.75 18.75 Circle Tealing Dovecot B N FF 5 4 20 N S 5 3.75 18.75 Tomnavervie Stone E Y PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Circle Tealing Dovecot B N PF 5 4 20 N S 5 3.75 18.75 Tomnavervie Stone E Y CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Tealing Dovecot B N LA 2 5 10 N S 2 4.75 9.5 Circle Tealing Dovecot B N CE 0 5 0 N S 0 4.75 0 Torhouse Stone Circle E N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Tealing Dovecot B N CF 0 4 0 N S 0 3.75 0 Torhouse Stone Circle E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Tealing Souterrain F N LA 2 5 10 N S 2 4.75 9.5 Torhouse Stone Circle E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Tealing Souterrain F N GF 5 2 10 N S 5 1.75 8.75 Torhouse Stone Circle E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Tealing Souterrain F N CE 0 5 0 N S 0 4.75 0 Torhouse Stone Circle E N GF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Tealing Souterrain F N PF 0 2 0 N S 0 1.75 0 Torhouse Stone Circle E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Tealing Souterrain F N FF 0 2 0 N S 0 1.75 0 Tormiston Mill A N GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Tealing Souterrain F N CF 0 2 0 N S 0 1.75 0 Tormiston Mill A N FF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 Tormiston Mill A N LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Tormiston Mill A N CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Tormiston Mill A N CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Tormiston Mill A N PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0

118 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 119 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Controls (Existing) Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Closed (C) Torphichen Preceptory B Y GF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 Wanlockhead C N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Torphichen Preceptory B Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Beam Engine Torphichen Preceptory B Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Wanlockhead C N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Beam Engine Torphichen Preceptory B Y FF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Wanlockhead C N GF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Torphichen Preceptory B Y PF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Beam Engine Torphichen Preceptory B Y CF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Wanlockhead C N FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Torr A’Chaisteil Fort F N LA 3 5 15 N A 3 4.25 12.75 Beam Engine Torr A’Chaisteil Fort F N GF 5 2 10 N A 5 1.25 6.25 Wanlockhead C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Beam Engine Torr A’Chaisteil Fort F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Wanlockhead C N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Torr A’Chaisteil Fort F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Beam Engine Torr A’Chaisteil Fort F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 West Port, C N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Torr A’Chaisteil Fort F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 St Andrews Torrylin Cairn F N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 West Port, C N GF 3 3 9 N A 3 2.25 6.75 Torrylin Cairn F N GF 4 2 8 N A 4 1.25 5 St Andrews Torrylin Cairn F N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 West Port, C N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 St Andrews Torrylin Cairn F N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 West Port, C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Torrylin Cairn F N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 St Andrews Torrylin Cairn F N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 West Port, C N FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Trinity House A Y GF 5 4 20 Y A 5 3 15 St Andrews Trinity House A Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 West Port, C N CF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Trinity House A Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 St Andrews Trinity House A Y PF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Westquarter Dovecot B N GF 4 4 16 N A 4 3.25 13 Trinity House A Y CF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Westquarter Dovecot B N LA 2 5 10 N A 2 4.25 8.5 Trinity House A Y FF 0 4 0 Y A 0 3 0 Westquarter Dovecot B N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Tullibardine Chapel B N GF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 Westquarter Dovecot B N PF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Tullibardine Chapel B N LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Westquarter Dovecot B N FF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Tullibardine Chapel B N CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Westquarter Dovecot B N CF 0 4 0 N A 0 3.25 0 Tullibardine Chapel B N FF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Westside Church, C N LA 3 5 15 N A 3 4.25 12.75 Tuquoy Tullibardine Chapel B N PF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Westside Church, C N CF 5 3 15 N A 5 2.25 11.25 Tullibardine Chapel B N CF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 Tuquoy Urquhart Castle C Y FF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Westside Church, C N GF 4 3 12 N A 4 2.25 9 Urquhart Castle C Y GF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Tuquoy Urquhart Castle C Y GF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Westside Church, C N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Tuquoy Urquhart Castle C Y FF 5 3 15 Y A 5 2 10 Westside Church, C N PF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Urquhart Castle C Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Tuquoy Urquhart Castle C Y LA 2 5 10 Y A 2 4 8 Westside Church, C N FF 0 3 0 N A 0 2.25 0 Urquhart Castle C Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Tuquoy Urquhart Castle C Y CE 0 5 0 Y A 0 4 0 Whithorn Priory C Y FF 5 3 15 Y S 5 2.5 12.5 Urquhart Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Whithorn Priory C Y LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 Urquhart Castle C Y PF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Whithorn Priory C Y CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 Urquhart Castle C Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Whithorn Priory C Y GF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Urquhart Castle C Y CF 0 3 0 Y A 0 2 0 Whithorn Priory C Y CF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0 Whithorn Priory C Y PF 0 3 0 Y S 0 2.5 0

120 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 121 THE RISK REGISTER

CURRENT CLIMATE RISK REGISTER Inherent Risk Mitigants & Residual Risk Controls (Existing) Property Name Category Collections Hazard Likelihood Impact Risk Staffed Access – Likelihood Impact Risk Rating (Y/N) All year (A) Rating Seasonal (S) Closed (C) Whithorn Priory Crosses A N FF 5 4 20 Y S 5 3.5 17.5 (& Museum) Whithorn Priory Crosses A N LA 2 5 10 Y S 2 4.5 9 (& Museum) Whithorn Priory Crosses A N CE 0 5 0 Y S 0 4.5 0 (& Museum) Whithorn Priory Crosses A N GF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 (& Museum) Whithorn Priory Crosses A N PF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 (& Museum) Whithorn Priory Crosses A N CF 0 4 0 Y S 0 3.5 0 (& Museum) Wideford Hill E N LA 4 5 20 N A 4 4.25 17 Chambered Cairn Wideford Hill E N CE 0 5 0 N A 0 4.25 0 Chambered Cairn Wideford Hill E N PF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Chambered Cairn Wideford Hill E N FF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Chambered Cairn Wideford Hill E N CF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Chambered Cairn Wideford Hill E N GF 0 2 0 N A 0 1.25 0 Chambered Cairn Wren’s Egg E N LA 2 5 10 N C 2 5 10 Wren’s Egg E N GF 5 2 10 N C 5 2 10 Wren’s Egg E N CE 0 5 0 N C 0 5 0 Wren’s Egg E N PF 0 2 0 N C 0 2 0 Wren’s Egg E N FF 0 2 0 N C 0 2 0 Wren’s Egg E N CF 0 2 0 N C 0 2 0

122 A Climate Change Risk Assessment 123 INTRODUCTION

Historic Environment Scotland Longmore House, Salisbury Place Edinburgh EH9 1SH T. 0131 668 8600

124