DOCSLIB.ORG

Download SNH FOI Reply ADD 2020

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Download SNH FOI Reply ADD 2020 Director of Planning and Development The Highland Council Glenurquhart Road Inverness IV3 5NX FAO: Your ref: 19/02076/FUL Date: 6 September 2019 Dear , TOWN & COUNTRY PLANNING (SCOTLAND) ACT 1997 CHANGE OF EQUIPMENT AND RELOCATION OF EXISTING SALMON FARM AT LEINISH, LOCH DUNVEGAN, ISLE OF SKYE Thank you for consultation regarding the above. Summary In our view it is unlikely that the proposals as currently described will have a significant effect on harbour porpoise or common seal associated with the two Special Areas of Conservation. Any future proposals to change the anti-predator methods should be re-assessed and we recommend that you consider whether it is necessary to impose conditions to that effect. Background The proposal is to change the equipment at an existing fish farm from 10 x 90m circumference cages to 8 x 120m cages. The equipment would extend further north than the existing farm. Maximum biomass would increase from 1700T to 2100T and a CAR licence variation has already been granted by SEPA for this change. A previous planning application was submitted for substantially the same development in December 2017 (17/05689/FUL). We had detailed discussions with Highland Council and the applicant regarding possible use of secondary anti- predator nets and Acoustic Deterrent Devices (ADDs). That application was withdrawn in February 2018. We welcome the current proposal to operate the farm without using those anti-predation methods. Appraisal of the impacts of the proposal and advice • Ascrib, Isay and Dunvegan Special Area of Conservation (SAC) The proposal lies close to and could affect Ascrib, Isay and Dunvegan SAC which is designated for its common seal population. The site’s status means that the Scottish Natural Heritage, King’s House, The Green, Portree, Isle of Skye, IV51 9BS Tel: 01463 701663 www.nature.scot Dualchas Nàdair na h-Alba, Taigh an Rìgh, An Àilean, Port Rìgh, An t-Eilean Sgitheanach, IV51 9BS. Fòn: 01463 701663 www.nature.scot requirements of the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 as amended (the “Habitats Regulations”) or, for reserved matters the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 apply. Consequently, The Highland Council is required to consider the effect of the proposal on the SAC before it can be consented (commonly known as Habitats Regulations Appraisal). The SNH website has a summary of the legislative requirements: (https://www.snh.scot/professional-advice/safeguarding-protected-areas-and- species/protected-species/legal-framework/habitats-directive-and-habitats- regulations). In our view, it is unlikely that the proposal will have a significant effect on common seals within Ascribs, Isay and Dunvegan SAC, either directly or indirectly. An appropriate assessment is therefore not required. We have reached this judgement because: • The applicant proposes to use high break-strength mono nylon cage nets, tensioned using sinker tubes and slider weights; double netting at the bottom of the cages; an uplift system for the removal of morts. They state that this equipment has been successfully used in Shetland with no predation by seals, no need for ADDs and no seals shot. • The applicant states that they have ‘no plans to use separate anti-predator nets’. • They have committed not to use ADDs. Therefore the risk of seal mortality or disturbance arising from this development is low. However, you may wish to consider whether it is necessary to condition the anti-predator measures in order to maintain this situation in the future. Inner Hebrides and the Minches Special Area of Conservation (SAC) The proposal lies within Inner Hebrides and the Minches SAC designated for its harbour porpoise. The legislative requirements for this site are as detailed above. In our view, it is unlikely that the proposal will have a significant effect on harbour porpoise within Inner Hebrides and the Minches SAC, either directly or indirectly. An appropriate assessment is therefore not required. We have reached this judgement because: • The applicant proposes to use high break-strength mono nylon cage nets; • They have committed not to use ADDs which may disturb the porpoise. Therefore the risk of disturbance arising from this development is low. However, you may wish to consider whether it is necessary to condition the use of ADDs in case they are proposed in the future. 3. Landscape & visual Leinish fish farm lies within the North-West Skye Special Landscape Area (SLA) which is a regional landscape designation. A Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment was carried out by a chartered landscape architect in April 2017. We recommended the assessment should focus on visual impacts but the report offers little detail on this topic. However the visualisations are of good quality and allow us to make our own assessment of the proposals. 2 Due to the intricate coastline of Loch Dunvegan and the back-clothing when viewed from the opposite shore, the existing site is not particularly prominent except from close by (Husabost, Totaig and road near Skye Silver). The photomontages demonstrate that the proposed changes (in particular moving the farm north) will result in a minor to moderate increase in the visibility and prominence of the fish farm from viewpoints on the west side of the loch. However, the farm remains well aligned with the adjacent coast and remains subordinate in scale to the open water of the loch (including in views from the east side of the loch where multiple fish farms are visible). The decision to keep the feed barge at the south end of the farm reinforces the visual linkage with Leinish Bay. It also increases the chances of the barge being back-clothed by the dark coloured woodland in views from the opposite shore of Loch Dunvegan. Overall, we advise that, when compared with the existing farm, the proposed changes are unlikely to have more than local impacts and will not have a significant effect on the Special Qualities of the SLA. 4. Benthic habitats Benthic visual surveys were carried out September 2017. Two ROV transects were run, starting at the edge of the existing cages and travel N and E. The footage is good quality, allowing assessment of the biotopes present across the expanded depositional footprint. The footage shows fairly uniform burrowed mud habitats throughout the survey area. The species present are typical of this habitat and none of the rarer biotopes, and few of the rarer macro-faunal species, were recorded. Grab sample data is available from monitoring the existing fish farm site and is consistent with this assessment. We advise that these proposals do not raise any issues of national interest regarding PMF habitats or species. Please let me know if you would like clarification or any further advice regarding this case. Yours sincerely, Alex Turner Area Officer, Skye and Lochalsh [email protected] 3 CSG 1909_03 Paper 3: Threshold Approach to Underwater Noise Assessment and Management in Harbour Porpoise SACs Threshold Approach to Underwater Noise Assessment and Management in Harbour Porpoise SACs Cover note by: Summary The following paper re-presents the SNCB threshold approach to underwater noise assessment and management in harbour porpoise SACs. The approach was first presented to CSG in September 2017 and was endorsed by CSG as the foundation for SNCB advice to regulatory authorities and other stakeholders (excluding its application in Scotland1). The risks of CSG not re-affirming support for the approach are presented, as are developments that have taken place since 2017. Action Requested CSG are requested to re-affirm their 2017 decision to endorse the threshold approach & associated guidance. 1 Application in Scotland was not considered necessary primarily due to a different set of noise issues relevant to the single Scottish harbour porpoise SAC in the Inner Hebrides & Minches. CSG 1909_03 Paper 3: Threshold Approach to Underwater Noise Assessment and Management in Harbour Porpoise SACs Threshold Approach to Underwater Noise Assessment and Management in Harbour Porpoise SACs Paper by: 1. Introduction In September 2017 CSG discussed a time-area threshold approach to underwater noise management in harbour porpoise SACs2 and were presented with the joint agency (excluding Scotland3) draft guidance for approval. CSG endorsed the recommended approach with a strong emphasis on adaptive management and the intention was to publish the guidance for use by regulatory authorities at that time. Due to continuing concerns by the regulators at that time, publication was postponed while further commentary was received, and the regulators formed a pilot working group on matters of implementation. While points of detail have continued to be queried and addressed through SNCB inter-agency working mechanisms, the real crux of the problem has always been implementation of the approach by regulatory authorities. Implementation requires in-combination assessment and management across sectoral and regulatory boundaries (e.g. across renewable energy and oil & gas sectors). The primary activities of management concern outside of Scotland are pile driving, seismic exploration and UXO clearance operations, all of which create loud impulsive underwater noises. An impasse has persisted which has been unsatisfactory for all stakeholders and the guidance has remained unpublished. In recent months DEFRA has stepped in to take a lead facilitation role, convening and chairing regulatory meetings and most recently a stakeholder workshop on 12 July 2019. The main objective of the stakeholder workshop was to give all stakeholders a chance to say their piece and to move the debate to a point where the guidance is accepted (in the absence of viable alternatives) and work can move forward to practical implementation. The workshop was a significant step forward and practical points of implementation started to be seriously aired. While there are theoretically other approaches (e.g. statutory limits on sound levels propagated – currently advocated by the NGOs) no practical alternatives to the SNCB approach have been forthcoming.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Firth of Lorn Management Plan
    FIRTH OF LORN MARINE SAC OF LORN MARINE SAC FIRTH ARGYLL MARINE SPECIAL AREAS OF CONSERVATION FIRTH OF LORN MANA MARINE SPECIAL AREA OF CONSERVATION GEMENT PLAN MANAGEMENT PLAN CONTENTS Executive Summary 1. Introduction CONTENTS The Habitats Directive 1.1 Argyll Marine SAC Management Forum 1.2 Aims of the Management Plan 1.3 2. Site Overview Site Description 2.1 Reasons for Designation: Rocky Reef Habitat and Communities 2.2 3. Management Objectives Conservation Objectives 3.1 Sustainable Economic Development Objectives 3.2 4. Activities and Management Measures Management of Fishing Activities 4.1 Benthic Dredging 4.1.1 Benthic Trawling 4.1.2 Creel Fishing 4.1.3 Bottom Set Tangle Nets 4.1.4 Shellfish Diving 4.1.5 Management of Gathering and Harvesting 4.2 Shellfish and Bait Collection 4.2.1 Harvesting/Collection of Seaweed 4.2.2 Management of Aquaculture Activities 4.3 Finfish Farming 4.3.1 Shellfish Farming 4.3.2 FIRTH OF LORN Management of Recreation and Tourism Activities 4.4 Anchoring and Mooring 4.4.1 Scuba Diving 4.4.2 Charter Boat Operations 4.4.3 Management of Effluent Discharges/Dumping 4.5 Trade Effluent 4.5.1 CONTENTS Sewage Effluent 4.5.2 Marine Littering and Dumping 4.5.3 Management of Shipping and Boat Maintenance 4.6 Commercial Marine Traffic 4.6.1 Boat Hull Maintenance and Antifoulant Use 4.6.2 Management of Coastal Development/Land-Use 4.7 Coastal Development 4.7.1 Agriculture 4.7.2 Forestry 4.7.3 Management of Scientific Research 4.8 Scientific Research 4.8.1 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Naturescot SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY COMMITTEE Sub-Group Report on Surveillance and Monitoring
    SAC/2020/09/01 NatureScot SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY COMMITTEE Sub-group Report on Surveillance and Monitoring Draft (August 2020) Monitoring & Surveillance Sub-group Report to the Scientific Advisory Committee by the Sub-group reviewing on land monitoring and surveillance by NatureScot Mitchell, R.J.1, Blake, D.2, Boulcott, P.3, Pearce-Higgins, J.4, Nisbet, A.5, Scott, B.,6 Wilson, J.7, Woodin, S.6, and Eardley, B.2 1The James Hutton Institute 2NatureScot 3Marine Scotland 4British Trust for Ornithology 5Natural England 6University of Aberdeen 7RSPB When published, this report should be cited as: Mitchell, R.J., Blake, D., Boulcott, P., Pearce-Higgins, J., Nisbet, A., Scott, B., Wilson, J., Woodin, S., and Eardley, B. (2020). Report to the Scientific Advisory Committee by the Sub-group reviewing on land monitoring and surveillance by NatureScot. NatureScot, Inverness. i SAC/2020/09/01 Executive Summary Background Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH)1 (NatureScot from 24th August 2020) is reliant on up to date and accurate monitoring and surveillance data in order to fulfil its statutory role. NatureScot defines surveillance as ‘systematic observation through time to establish the baseline state and track natural heritage change’. It defines monitoring as ‘surveillance against a target’. A major component of NatureScot’s monitoring work is the Site Condition Monitoring (SCM) programme which monitors the condition of features (species, habitats, geological features) on protected areas. In 2019 the third cycle of SCM was completed, and NatureScot’s Surveillance Strategy became due for review. It was recognised that within NatureScot, monitoring and surveillance had been operating under separate work streams.
    [Show full text]
  • Talking About Heritage
    Talking about heritage Draft guidance for consultation September 2020 1 Introduction Heritage is everywhere and it means different things to different people. This guide is all about exploring and talking about heritage, so we’ve included some of the things that people have said to us when we’ve asked them, ‘What’s your heritage?’ Heritage to me is everything in Scotland’s history. It’s not just buildings but everything that’s passed down like songs, stories, myths. Perthshire ‘What’s Your Heritage’ workshop. Your heritage might be the physical places that you know and love – your favourite music venue, your local park, a ruined castle you’ve explored, or the landscapes you picture when you think of home. Your heritage could also be your working life, the stories you were told as a child, the language you speak with your family, the music or traditions you remember from an important time in your life. Heritage can inspire different emotions, both positive and negative. It can be special to people for lots of different reasons. Here are a few: • It’s beautiful. • It’s what I think of when I picture home. • It’s part of who I am • I can feel the spirits, my history. • It’s where I walk my dog. • It’s an amazing insight into my past. • It’s my home town and it reminds me of my family. Heritage can help to us to feel connected. It might be to a community, a place, or a shared past. It reflects different viewpoints across cultures and generations and is key to local distinctiveness and identity.
    [Show full text]
  • Nature Networks Event Report
    Nature Networks Film Screening and Panel Discussion – Online Event Thursday 3 December 2020 Purpose of the event This event was used to launch LINK’s Nature Networks Matter film to an audience of parliament, government and NGO representatives. The film screening was followed by reflections and discussion with a panel of four speakers. LINK’s aim is to explain what we mean by a Nature Network, increase understanding of the value, and encourage willingness to implement the approach in efforts to tackle both the nature and climate emergencies. Event format 13.30 – 13.35 Welcome and introduction from Dr Deborah Long (Scottish Environment LINK) 13.35 – 13.40 Nature Networks film screened 13.40 – 14.00 Panel discussion with Alistair Whyte (Plantlife Scotland), Dr Alessandro Gimona (James Hutton Institute), Emma Cooper (Scottish Land Commission) and Claudia Beamish MSP (Member for South Scotland) 14.00– 14.25 Q&A with audience 14.25 – 14.30 Closing remarks from Dr Deborah Long Welcome and introduction Deborah Long, Scottish Environment LINK’s Chief Officer, welcomed everyone to the event. She explained that LINK is a 40 strong network of member organisations. These members are all eNGOs working in Scotland towards the joint aim of building a sustainable Scotland where Scotland’s nature, land and seascapes are healthy and resilient, supporting thriving communities and flourishing people. Deborah highlighted that we are all too aware we are in the midst of world changing events. We are suffering a global pandemic, and human disease on a scale not seen since the Spanish flu of 1918. On top of that, we are in a climate emergency with global temperatures rising at unprecedented rates.
    [Show full text]
  • Biodiversity Duty Report Scottish Enterprise 2018-2020
    Biodiversity Duty Report Scottish Enterprise 2018-2020 Contents Section 1: Introductory information about your public body ................................................................. 3 SE’s approach to Net Zero and Natural Capital .................................................................................. 3 Section 2: Actions to protect biodiversity and connect people with nature .......................................... 4 Partnership Working ........................................................................................................................... 4 Cairngorms National Park Green Recovery Plan ................................................................................. 4 Local Action Groups ............................................................................................................................ 4 CAN DO Innovation Challenge Fund Projects ..................................................................................... 5 Scottish Forum on Natural Capital ...................................................................................................... 6 Agri –Tourism Monitor Farm Initiative ............................................................................................... 6 The Leven Programme ........................................................................................................................ 6 Alba Trees ..........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2 February 2021, 10:30
    Page 1454. Minute Development and Infrastructure Committee Tuesday, 2 February 2021, 10:30. Microsoft Teams. Present Councillors Graham L Sinclair, Andrew Drever, Norman R Craigie, Robin W Crichton, David Dawson, J Harvey Johnston, Rachael A King, W Leslie Manson, Stephen Sankey, James W Stockan, Duncan A Tullock and Heather N Woodbridge. Councillor John A R Scott, who had been invited for Items 8 to 10. Clerk • Angela Kingston, Committees Officer. In Attendance • Gavin Barr, Executive Director of Development and Infrastructure. • James Buck, Head of Marine Services, Transport and Harbour Master. • Hayley Green, Head of IT and Facilities (for Items 8 to 12). • Roddy Mackay, Head of Planning, Development and Regulatory Services (for Items 1 to 16). • Colin Kemp, Corporate Finance Senior Manager. • Karen Bevilacqua, Solicitor. • Jackie Thomson, Development and Regeneration Manager (for Items 1 to 16). • Stuart Allison, Economic Development Manager (for Items 10 to 16). • Graeme Christie, Estates Manager (for Items 10 to 12). • Laura Cromarty, Transport Manager (for Items 14 to 19). • Gary Foubister, Trading Standards Manager (for Item 7). • Kenneth Roy, Roads Support Manager (for Items 1 to 5). • Susan Shearer, Planning Manager (Development and Marine Planning) (for Items 1 to 10). • Jordan Low, Economic Development Officer (for Items 14 to 16). Observing • David Custer, Engineering Services Manager (for Items 1 to 6). • Mark Evans, Animal Welfare Officer (for Items 1 to 5). • Rebecca McAuliffe, Press Officer. Page 1455. Declarations of Interest • Councillor Robin W Crichton – Item 15. • Councillor David Dawson – Item 3. • Councillor Andrew Drever – Item 13. • Councillor J Harvey Johnston – Item 7. • Councillor Rachael A King – Item 13.
    [Show full text]
  • Kennacraig Ferry Terminal Habitats Regulations Appraisal
    Kennacraig Ferry Terminal Habitats Regulations Appraisal B2383700/Doc 010 Rev 1 June 2021 Caledonian Maritime Assets Limited Habita ts Reg ula tions Ap praisal Caled onian Ma ritim e A ssets Limite d Kennacraig Ferry Terminal Habitats Regulations Appraisal Kennacraig Ferry Terminal Project No: B2383700 Document Title: Habitats Regulations Appraisal Document No.: B2383700/Doc 010 Revision: Rev 1 Document Status: Final Date: June 2021 Client Name: Caledonian Maritime Assets Limited Project Manager: PM1 Author: EC4 File Name: Kennacraig HRA Rev 1_Final Jacobs U.K. Limited 95 Bothwell Street Glasgow, Scotland G2 7HX United Kingdom T +44 (0)141 243 8000 F +44 (0)141 226 3109 www.jacobs.com © Copyright 2019 Jacobs U.K. Limited. The concepts and information contained in this document are the property of Jacobs. Use or copying of this document in whole or in part without the written permission of Jacobs constitutes an infringement of copyright. Limitation: This document has been prepared on behalf of, and for the exclusive use of Jacobs’ client, and is subject to, and issued in accordance with, the provisions of the contract between Jacobs and the client. Jacobs accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for, or in respect of, any use of, or reliance upon, this document by any third party. Document history and status Revision Date Description Author Checked Reviewed Approved 0 May 2021 Draft for client comment EC4 EC5 EC6 PM 1 June 2021 Final Issue EC4 EC5 EC6 PM Issued to Marine Scotland B2383700/Doc 010 – Rev 1 Kennacraig Ferry Terminal Habitats Regulations Appraisal Revision Date Description Author Checked Reviewed Approved B2383700/Doc 010 – Rev 1 Kennacraig Ferry Terminal Habitats Regulations Appraisal Contents 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Scottish Biodiversity Strategy Post-2020: a Statement of Intent
    Scottish Biodiversity Strategy Post-2020: A Statement of Intent December 2020 INTRODUCTION have to change how we interact with and care for nature. The world faces the challenges of climate change and biodiversity loss. Globally, The twin global crises of biodiversity loss nationally and locally an enormous effort and climate change require us to work is needed to tackle these closely linked with nature to secure a healthier planet. issues. As we move from the United Our Climate Change Plan update outlines Nations Decade on Biodiversity to the new, boosted and accelerated policies, beginning of the United Nations Decade putting us on a pathway to our ambitious of Ecosystem Restoration, with climate change targets and to deliver a preparations being made for the range of co-benefits including for Convention on Biological Diversity’s biodiversity. The way we use land and Conference of the Parties 15 to be held in sea has to simultaneously enable the 2021, this is an appropriate time to reflect transition to net zero as part of a green and set out our broad intentions on how economic recovery, adapt to a changing we will approach the development of a climate and improve the state of nature. new post-2020 Scottish Biodiversity This is an unprecedented tripartite Strategy. challenge. The new UN Decade signals the massive The devastating impact of COVID-19 has effort needed and it is highlighted our need to be far more resilient to pandemics and other ‘shocks’ “…a rallying call for the protection which may arise from degraded nature. and revival of ecosystems around Our Programme for Government and the world, for the benefit of people Climate Change Plan update set out and nature… Only with healthy steps we will take to support a green ecosystems can we enhance recovery.
    [Show full text]
  • EGCP%20Key%20Issues Document
    1 Foreword time and effort by Ian Hay – EGCP Marine Scotland Project Manager – and a number of experts to provide an up-to date insight into the key In 2009, the East Grampian Coastal Partnership (EGCP) undertook the current and future issues facing the East Grampian Coast, and more completion of a comprehensive stocktake of the State of the East importantly to help set the context for further discussion and Grampian Coast (https://www.egcp.scot/publications) extending from engagement, particularly as we emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic St. Cyrus in the south to Fraserburgh in the north. This document laid and growing concerns about the future impacts of climate change on the early foundations for examining factors influencing coastal our coast. management along the Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire coast. The report EGCP welcomes your active engagement in this consultation and we was followed up by a number of EGCP workshops in 2017 to establish look forward to working with you in progressing a local regional a dialogue between coastal stakeholders and to examine the potential marine plan for the Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire coast. for implementing marine spatial planning (MSP) for future management of the East Grampian coastline (https://www.egcp.scot/marine-spatial-planning). Although the implementation of marine planning has to date been confined to a number of pilots, Marine Scotland is keen to pursue the development of marine planning partnerships around the Scottish coast to develop regional marine plans. Further information on Marine Planning, the National Marine Plan, Scottish Marine Regions and the National Marine Plan interactive (NMPi) tool to help the development of national and regional marine planning can be found on Marine Scotland’s website: https://www.gov.scot/policies/marine-planning/.
    [Show full text]
  • Argyll and Bute Community Planning Partnership Bute & Cowal Area
    Argyll and Bute Community Planning Partnership Bute & Cowal Area Community Planning Group 4 May 2021 Campervan, Motorhome and Staycation Activity Summary This report provides CPP Area Committee members with a brief update following on from the previous report regarding informal camping. 1. Purpose To provide a brief update on activity within this area. 2. Recommendations 2.1 That the partnership group note the content of this paper and progress to date, 2.2 That partners continue to collaborate to try and address the challenges faced due to increased informal camping activity. 3. Background The last report presented was on Informal Camping and outlined the opportunities and challenges, some of which is being driven by the pandemic and some of which has been a longer term trend. 4. Detail Some relevant updates are provided below - The Motorhome and Informal Camping Survey went live at the beginning of February 2021. This was promoted through Argyll and Bute Council’s communication channels and by partners. Over 150 responses from throughout Argyll and Bute were received. There were a range of views and locations shared across the Argyll and Bute Council region, with varying experiences. Feedback came from local community organisations, representatives, landowners, as well as local companies that fit out motorhomes. Although the survey was focused on communities within Argyll and Bute we received feedback from out with the area too. A link to the survey can be found here Motorhome and Informal Camping Survey (argyll- bute.gov.uk). The survey data will have some operational value and will also help in future project work.
    [Show full text]
  • CAIRNGORMS NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY Planning Committee Agenda Item 7 23/04/2021
    CAIRNGORMS NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY Planning Committee Agenda Item 7 23/04/2021 CAIRNGORMS NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED: Corriegarth 2 wind farm Consultation from Scottish Government Energy Consents & Deployment Unit REFERENCE: 2021/0050/PAC (ECU00002175) APPLICANT: Corriegarth 2 Wind farm Ltd DATE CONSULTED: 10 February 2021 RECOMMENDATION: No objection CASE OFFICER: Nina Caudrey, Planning Officer 1 CAIRNGORMS NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY Planning Committee Agenda Item 7 23/04/2021 2 CAIRNGORMS NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY Planning Committee Agenda Item 7 23/04/2021 PURPOSE OF REPORT 1. The purpose of this report is to inform the committee decision and subsequent consultation response to the Scottish Government Energy Consents & Deployment Unit (ECDU) on an application submitted under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 for a proposed wind farm located to the south west of the Cairngorms National Park. The Scottish Government are the determining Authority for this application as the output is more than 50 MW. The application is accompanied by an Environmental Report (ER), which presents the findings of the applicant’s Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). 2. The planning issues to be considered are confined to the effects of the proposed wind farm on the landscape character and Special Landscape Qualities (SLQs) of the National Park. All other matters, such as ecology, noise, general amenity, etc, are assessed by the decision maker (Scottish Ministers) with advice from statutory consultees. 3. Under the current working agreement on roles in landscape casework between NatureScot and the Park Authority, NatureScot lead on the provision of advice on the effects on the SLQs caused by proposals outwith the Cairngorms National Park.
    [Show full text]
  • Saveseilsound
    RURAL ECONOMY AND CONNECTIVITY COMMITTEE SALMON FARMING IN SCOTLAND SUBMISSION FROM SAVESEILSOUND INTRODUCTION The saveseilsound campaign group was formed in 2011 in response to an application for planning permission to site a fish farm in Seil Sound, following the failure of another site further North due to environmental concerns. The application generated a lot of objections, which the Argyll & Bute planning committee ignored when they granted the application unanimously. Local residents have since seen a merciless expansion of permitted biomass in the stretch of water comprising Seil, Shuna and Melfort, which we have always argued deserves to be seen in scientific terms as effectively one medium-sized sea loch, rather than geographically as SEPA insist, open sea or a strait, the significance being that the latter escape the prohibition on new developments in “inshore sea lochs and voes”. We were among the contributors to the current Consultation before the ECCLR Committee and endorse the findings in their report to you, which, we believe, demonstrates that current policy aimed at doubling the size of fish farm production in Scotland by 2030 is not environmentally sustainable. In this submission we argue that the policy is also unsustainable economically, because it ignores the diversity of employment and entrepreneurial opportunities in areas such as mid-Argyll, where local micro-economies are fragile and small businesses struggle to be heard against the public relations efforts of large multi-nationals. The application was part of a pilot relocation project from which Marine Scotland were promised there would be a “lessons learned report” but this has never appeared.
    [Show full text]