IFA2 UK Onshore Development

Applicant’s Report to Inform Habitats Regulations Assessment

May 2016

Date

Page 1

IFA2 UK Onshore Development Applicant’s Report to Inform Habitat Regulations Assessment

Document reference IFA2-ENV-ASM-004

Version 2.0

Prepared by TEP on behalf of National Grid IFA2 Ltd

Address Genesis Centre Birchwood Science Park Warrington WA3 7BH

Telephone 01925 844004

Fax 01925 844002

Email [email protected]

Contact IFA2 [email protected]

0800 0194576

Contents

1. INTRODUCTION 5 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 9 3. SUMMARY OF SCREENING STAGE (HRA STAGE 1) 23 4. NATURA SITES BASELINE INFORMATION 24 5. IMPACT ASSESSMENT 48 6. IN-COMBINATION ASSESSMENT 69 7. CONCLUSIONS ON SITE INTEGRITY 79

TABLES

Table 4.1: Protected sites located of relevance to the HRA Assessment including component SSSIs and supporting habitat associated with SINCs.

Table 4.2. SSSI/SPA species and other waterbird assemblage species recorded within the Chilling survey area* during the winter bird surveys 2013-2014 and 2014-2015.

Table 4.3. SSSI/SPA species and other waterbird species recorded within the Chilling survey area during the Intertidal bird surveys 2013-2014 and 2014-2015.

Table 4.4. SSSI/SPA species and other waterbird assemblage species recorded within the Daedalus survey area during the winter bird surveys 2013-2014, 2014-2015 and 2015-2016.

Table 4.5. SSSI/SPA species and BoCC/protected species recorded within the Daedalus survey area during the Intertidal bird surveys 2013-2014, 2014-2015 and 2015-2016.

Table 4.6. Conservation Objectives for Natura 2000 sites included in IFA2 Stage 2 Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment (Scoped out receptors are greyed out)

Table 4.7: Potential environmental effects associated with cable laying on Portsmouth Harbour SPA birds

Table 5.1. Noise predictions at Chilling for different onshore and intertidal works activities

Table 5.2. Noise predictions for at Daedalus for different onshore and intertidal works activities

Page 3

FIGURES

Figure 1.1: Site Location Plan

Figure 1.2: European sites within a 20km radius of the IFA2 Interconnector development

Figure 4.1: Extent of bird survey area at Chilling

Figure 4.2: Extent of bird survey area at Daedalus

Figure 5.1: Predicted noise levels onshore at Chilling for different works activities

Figure 5.2: Predicted noise levels onshore at Daedalus for different works activities.

Figure 6.1: In-combination effects assessment

APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Detailed Project Description (onshore and offshore).

Appendix 2: Summary of Stage 1 Assessment of Likely Significant Effect.

Appendix 3: Natura 2000 sites citation sheets.

Appendix 4: Key environmental conditions that support site integrity for Natura site component SSSIs.

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Project Overview 1.1.1 National Grid IFA2 Limited (NG IFA2 Ltd) and Réseau de Transport d'Electricité (RTE) are jointly developing an electricity interconnector project to connect the British and French electricity networks in Hampshire and Normandy which would enable the import and export of power. 1.1.2 IFA2 would be a high voltage direct current (HVDC) electricity interconnector with an approximate capacity of 1 gigawatt (GW) which would allow the transfer of electrical power between the UK and France via subsea cables. The interconnector would be bi-directional allowing the import and export of electricity between the UK and France. 1.1.3 HVDC offers the most efficient technology for the bulk import and export of electricity over long distances with fewer losses than an AC system. It requires a converter station at each end of the HVDC link to convert the HVDC power to high voltage alternating current (HVAC) power for use on the HVAC electricity systems operated in GB and France and vice versa dependent on the direction of flow. 1.1.4 IFA2 would be around 240km long, connecting to the GB transmission system at Chilling on the south east Hampshire coast, and to the French transmission system at the Tourbe 400kV substation in the Lower Normandy region of France as shown diagrammatically on Inset 1.1. A site location plan is included at Figure 1.1.

Inset 1.1: IFA2 Interconnector route

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

1.2 Proximity to European Sites 1.2.1 Figure 1.2 illustrates the location of European sites within a 20km radius of the IFA2 Interconnector development. The proposed cable route passes through both the Solent and Southampton Water SPA and the Solent and Dorset Coast pSPA. In total 16 European sites are located within 20km radius of the IFA2 Interconnector development.

1.3 The Habitats Regulation Assement Process 1.3.1 SACs, SPAs and Ramsar sites are all European designations (also known as Natura 2000 sites) and are notified in the UK through the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended 2012) (the Habitats Regulations) which is the UK implementation of the European Habitats Directive1. 1.3.2 Under the Habitats Regulations the granting of approval (i.e. planning permissions, licenses and consents) for developments is restricted if they are likely to have a significant effect on an SAC or SPA/Ramsar site. If the development is likely to have a significant effect, then an appropriate assessment must be made by a competent authority of its implications for the site in view of the site’s conservation objectives. 1.3.3 Regulation 61 of the Habitats Regulations defines the procedure for the assessment of the implications of plans or projects on European sites. Under this Regulation, if a project is unconnected with site management and is likely to significantly affect the designated site, the competent authority must undertake an ‘appropriate assessment’ (Regulation 61(1)). 1.3.4 Guidance (EC, 2001) on undertaking assessment of plans or projects that may impact upon designated European sites recommends a staged approach to the assessment process:

 Screening (Stage 1): The process of identifying potentially relevant European sites and the likely impacts of a project upon the designated features of a European site, either alone or in combination with other plans and projects, and considering whether the impacts are likely to be significant.

 Appropriate Assessment (Stage 2): Assessment of the impacts, taking into account proposed mitigation measures, on the integrity of the European site, either alone or in combination with other plans and projects, with regard to the site’s structure and function and its conservation objectives. If it cannot be concluded beyond reasonable scientific doubt that the project would not adversely affect site integrity then development consent cannot be issued unless the steps set out in Stages 3 and 4 are successfully concluded.

1 Directive92/43/EEC, amended by Directive 97/62/EC Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

 Assessment of Alternative Solutions (Stage 3): Examining alternative ways of achieving the objectives of the project, to establish whether there are solutions that would avoid an adverse effect on the integrity of a European site(s).

 Assessment of IROPI (Stage 4): If it is shown that there are no alternative solutions then the project can receive development consent only if it can also be demonstrated that it should proceed for imperative reasons of overriding public interest (IROPI). Where IROPI can be shown then compensatory measures required to maintain the overall coherence of the site or integrity of the European site network will need to be identified and secured.

1.3.5 All four stages of the process are referred to cumulatively as the Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA), to clearly distinguish the whole process from the step within it referred to as the ‘appropriate assessment’. 1.3.6 In respect of Step 2, guidance on what constitutes the integrity of a European site has been provided by the European Commission (EC, 2001) and adopted by the UK Government. In this guidance, integrity is defined as: ‘the coherence of the site’s ecological structure and function, across its whole area, which enables it to sustain the habitat, complex of habitats and/or populations of species for which the site has been designated’. 1.3.7 Guidance within The Habitats Regulations Assessment Handbook (DTA Publishing, accessed 19 April 2016) states that:

‘The ‘integrity’ of a site can also be considered to be the quality or condition of being whole or complete; or in a dynamic ecological context, as having the sense of resilience and ability to evolve in ways which are favourable to conservation. A site can be described as having a high degree of integrity where the inherent potential for meeting site conservation objectives is realised, the capacity for self-repair and self-renewal under dynamic conditions is maintained, and a minimum of external management support is required.’ 1.4 Purpose of the Report 1.4.1 In the UK, IFA2 would comprise onshore and offshore components. For the main part, these components are covered by different consent regimes.  The ‘onshore’ elements of IFA2 and parts of the offshore elements to the Mean Low Water Springs (MLWS) require planning permission under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.  A Marine Licence is needed under the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 for installation of the subsea cables from the MHWS.  The intertidal area, between the MLWS and MWHS, is an area of ‘overlap’ between the onshore and offshore consenting regimes – i.e. those works require both planning permission and a Marine Licence.

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

1.4.2 Given the overlap between onshore and offshore elements of IFA2, it has been agreed with stakeholders (Fareham Borough Council - FBC, Marine Management Organisation - MMO, Natural England and Environment Agency) that a single Habitats Regulation Assessment process is appropriate to cover all UK aspects of the Proposed Development. 1.4.3 This document has been produced to inform the HRA process. It provides the relevant information required by the Competent Authorities (Fareham Borough Council and the MMO) to understand the implications of the Project for Natura 2000 sites and has been informed by regular dialogue and consultation with Natural England. 1.4.4 An Assessment of Likely Significant Effects (ALSE) Report (TEP Report Ref: 3221.20.05) was submitted to Natural England in March 2016. A number of Natura 2000 sites were scoped out from further assessment including the Solent and Dorset Coast pSPA and a number of other maritime and terrestrial sites. The ALSE Report identified potential effects on the following Natura 2000 sites:

 Solent and Southampton Water SPA (Site code: UK9011061)  Solent and Southampton Water Ramsar (Site code: UK11063)  Portsmouth Harbour SPA (Site code: UK9011051)  Portsmouth Harbour Ramsar (Site code: UK11055)  Chichester and Langstone Harbours SPA (Site code: UK9011011)  Chichester and Langstone Harbours Ramsar (Site code: UK11013)  River Itchen SAC (Site code: UK0012599)

1.4.5 This Stage 2 Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment will make frequent reference to the brent goose. Dark-bellied brent goose is a qualifying feature for all Natura 2000 sites that have been scoped in with the exception of River Itchen SAC. Henceforth this distinct race of brent goose will be referred to simply as brent goose.

Structure of this Report

1.4.6 This Report to Inform the Appropriate Assessment is set out as follows:

 Chapter 2 – Project Description  Chapter 3 - Summary of the Stage 1 Screening Process already undertaken;  Chapter 4 – Natura sites Baseline Information;  Chapter 5 – Assessment of the effects on Natura 2000 sites. This will include a discussion on integrity in relation to the feature’s conservation objectives;  Chapter 6 – In combination effects;  Chapter 7 – Conclusions on Site Integrity.

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

2. Project Description

2.1 Background 2.1.1 Detailed Project Descriptions have been produced for the ‘Onshore’ and ‘Offshore’ EIAs for the Interconnector; these are appended in Appendices 1 (Onshore) and 2 (Offshore). A summary of the project is provided below. Please note, this summary includes some elements of the project which fall under the French consenting regime; they have been included to add context and are not part of the Proposed Development. 2.2 Project Overview 2.2.1 The IFA2 interconnector will connect into the GB transmission system at a new 400kV substation to be constructed by National Grid Electricity Transmission plc (NGET) at the existing Chilling sealing end compound in Hampshire, and into the French transmission system at the existing Tourbe 400kV substation in Normandy, France. 2.2.2 The AC electricity of the “sending” country is converted to DC electricity at the converter stations and then transmitted to the “receiving” country’s converter station, where it is converted back to AC and supplied to the receiving transmission system. The interconnector is reversible and capable of importing and exporting electricity depending on requirements at any given time. 2.2.3 The IFA2 project consists of two HVDC converter stations of similar construction, one sited in each country. The table below provides a summary of the main elements of the project.

2.2.4 The main components of IFA2 are as follows:  A converter station adjacent to the existing 400kV substation at Tourbe;  Onshore HVDC cables between the converter station at Tourbe and the landfall at Merville-Franceville-Plage;  Subsea HVDC cables between landfall at Merville-Franceville-Plage and landfall at Monks Hill Beach car park (near Daedalus);  Onshore HVDC cables between the landfall at Monks Hill Beach car park and the proposed converter station to the north east of Daedalus Airfield;  A converter station in the north east of Daedalus Airfield which would convert HVDC to HVAC or vice versa;  Onshore HVAC cables between the converter station in the north east corner of Daedalus Airfield and the landfall at Monks Hill Beach car park;  Subsea HVAC cables between the landfall at Monks Hill Beach car park and landfall at Brownwich (near Chilling); and Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

 Onshore HVAC cables between the landfall at Brownwich (near Chilling) and the NGET substation.at Chilling Lane.

Table 2.1: Key Project Information

Planned Final Power Capacity 1000 MW (received) Investment Decision Q4 2016 date

Interconnector Planned Energisation & Route Length Total Route: ~240km Commissioning date Q4 2019/20 DC Route : ~234km GB Connection Chilling 400kV Planned Trial Q4 2020 Location substation, Hampshire Operations date GB HVDC Daedalus airfield, Lee- Planned 1st full year of Converter on-the-Solent, commercial operations 2021 Location Hampshire French HVDC converter Connection Tourbe 400kV Voltage Source technology Location substation, Normandy Converter (VSC) French HVDC Adjacent to Tourbe HVDC cable Converter 400kV substation, technology MIND / XLPE Location Normandy HVDC operating

Voltage <400 kV

2.2.5 The HVDC converters are connected by 2 HVDC cables – underground and subsea along a defined cable route. Typically, these cables are approximately 15cm in diameter. 2.2.6 HVAC cables connect each converter station to the transmission network substations. In the UK, part of the AC cable route is located offshore, due to onshore constraints.

Converter Station 2.2.7 Two converter stations - one near Lee on Solent in the UK at Daedalus and one adjacent to the existing 400kV substation at Tourbe 400kV substation near La Hogue - will be required for the project. These converter stations would convert HVAC to HVDC and vice versa. 2.2.8 A converter station includes equipment similar to a typical electrical substation, as well as converter transformers, a valve hall which houses electronic devices that converts the AC waveform to DC and vice versa and a control room. It typically comprises a collection of steel-framed buildings with cladding. All of the buildings and equipment would all be contained within a securely fenced compound. The Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

detailed design will be done by the contractor that will be appointed to supply and build the converter station. 2.2.9 In the UK, the proposed site for the converter station is a mixture of semi-improved grassland and arable field to the north east of Daedalus Airfield. The proposed site is approximately 750m to the north of Lee-on-the-Solent, 1km to the east of Stubbington, approximately 1.5km inland from Southampton Water. It is approximately 6.5km to the east of the CSE compound at Chilling. 2.2.10 It would occupy a site approximately 120m by 205m. This would comprise a collection of buildings up to 22m in height. The Valve Hall would be the largest building at 120m by 40m, with a maximum height of 22m, and would be adjoined by an AC Reactor building 60m by 50m, and a series of smaller structures measuring 40m by 15m. An additional laydown and a temporary construction area measuring approximately 3ha, would be required, which would be fully reinstated following construction. 2.2.11 The converter station would be designed for a 40 year lifespan, with control equipment and a valve expected to require replacement during that time. 2.2.12 Lighting would be controlled to avoid the unnecessary illumination of areas beyond the Proposed Development. Glare and the spread of upward light would be kept to a minimum to reduce sky glow and minimise visual intrusion within the landscape. The entrance, emergency exits and walkways for access and egress would likely be illuminated for safety reasons. 2.2.13 The construction of the converter station would be undertaken over a period of approximately two years, and it would be commissioned in 2020. 2.2.14 The proposed converter station site includes a small proportion of land proposed as open space in the Daedalus Vision. To assist in screening the lower parts of the converter station, landscaping will take the form of mounding and native planting immediately north and east of the proposed buildings and native planting along the western edge of Broom Way up to Peel Hall roundabout and along the southern edge of Gosport Road for approximately 250m. The remainder of the existing green space to the north of the proposed site would remain grassland, hedges, scattered trees and tree groups as the converter station is built.

Onshore Cables and Cable Landfalls 2.2.15 HVDC cables will be installed between each converter station and transition joint bays that will be located close the landfall areas. The subsea cables will be joined to the onshore cables in these joint bays. In the UK the grid connection point at Chilling is located several kilometres away from the converter station location. Therefore there will also be up to six HVAC cables installed between the converter station in the UK and the grid connection point at Chilling. The HVAC cable route follows the HVDC cable route from the converter station then proceeds offshore for approximately 5km before the cables reach landfall at Chilling. Inset 2.1: HVDC cable route from the UK landfall to the UK converter station and the HVAC cable route from the converter station to the connection point Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

2.2.16 In the UK the proposal is to install the HVDC cables alongside the runway of the Daedalus airfield. At the end of the runway there are various options for cable installation between this point and the landfall area at the beach including horizontal directional drilling (HDD) out to sea and pipe jacking to avoid open cut trenching across the road. In the intertidal area the cables could be installed via HDD techniques, traditional open cut trenching and burial of the cables using excavators or installation of ducts (also using open cut trenching) which the cables will be pulled into. This last method would mean that the ducts could be installed and the area reinstated before the marine cables are brought ashore.

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Inset 2.2: Daedalus Cables Landfall

2.2.17 At Chilling, conduits will be installed between the land and sea using Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) techniques to avoid an area of coastal erosion and prevent disturbance of protected seagrass beds.

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Inset 2.3: Chilling Cable Landfall

2.2.18 HDD is a technique which uses a drilling machine, which would be placed in an excavated pit, in this case a Transition Joint Bay (TJB), and has a drilling head which can be steered to control the depth and direction to emerge in a pit (or TJB) at the other end of the section to be drilled. 2.2.19 The first stage of the HDD process would be the creation of a pilot hole. The exact technique for drilling the pilot hole would be determined following detailed ground investigation works. 2.2.20 The pilot hole would be stopped short of the exit point. This ensures that the drilling fluid is not accidentally discharged into the surrounding environment. 2.2.21 Once the pilot hole is completed, the drill may undertake a number of passes to make the hole wider and would then pull ducts through. Thrust boring would use a hydraulic technique to push a pipe through the ground from the excavated pit to the receptor pit and then a duct would be installed through each hole created. A draw wire would be installed in each duct to be used to pull the cables through the ducts. 2.2.22 Inset 2.4 below shows a schematic diagram of an example of a cable landfall using HDD.

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Inset 2.4: HDD Cable Landfall Diagram (exaggerated vertical scale)

2.2.23 Inset 2.5 below gives an example of a transition joint bay. Once the cables are installed and jointed together the joint bay is closed and the ground above reinstated. Inset 2.5 Example Transition Joint Bay

2.2.24 Installation of the onshore cables and marine cables at the landfalls will take place over a period of several months to complete and is expected to be undertaken in several phases (e.g. preparatory works, onshore cable installation, installation of HDD conduits or ducts in the intertidal area, construction of the transition joint bays, pull in and burial of the marine cables etc) which may run in parallel. Timescales for work in the vicinity of the beaches will be minimised to reduce disruption to beach use as far as is possible.

Offshore Cables 2.2.25 The proposed offshore HVDC cables will run between the landfall at Merville- Franceville-Plage and landfall at Monks Hill Beach. The proposed offshore HVAC cables in the UK will run from Monks Hill Beach to Brownwich, Chilling. 2.2.26 Cable laying and burial for the HVAC and HVDC cables may take place either simultaneously or in two separate operations whereby the cables may be laid on the seabed with burial occurring by another vessel as a further operation. Prior to laying the cable, a pre-lay grapnel run will be performed and out of service cables and debris will be cleared. These processes are summarised in Table 2.2 below. Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Table 2.2: Summary of the required stages of subsea cable installation for IFA2. Aspect Footprint Equipment

Pre-lay grapnel Prior to cable laying and burial a grapnel will be Grapnel run vessel run pulled through the seabed to clear any debris Grapnel equipment present. The grapnel will be approximately 1 m Support vessel(s) wide. Clearance of Out of service cables will be lifted and cut 50 m Clearance works vessel out of service either side of the cable route. Cutting equipment. cables and Support vessel(s) debris Shallow water Cable laying or burial vessels may need to ground Cable laying barge or jack up (intertidal zone out or jack up in shallow waters. barge to <10 m water Anchors may be used to maintain vessel position – Burial vessel and associated depths) cable deployed approx 100 m from vessel. burial equipment (e.g. plough/ installation Cables will be buried to approx 1-3 m. mechanical trencher/jetting Footprint of burial machine up to 15 m. machine) Footprint of trench approx 1-5 m. Flotation equipment HVDC Cables to be bundled in a single trench. Support vessel(s) Up to 6 HVAC cables to be installed. Divers Offshore (>10 Anchors or dynamic positioning may be used to Cable laying barge/vessel m water depth) maintain vessel position – anchors deployed Cable burial barge/vessel cable approx 100 m from vessel. Burial vessel and associated installation Cables will be buried to approx 1-2 m. burial equipment Footprint of burial machine up to 15 m. (plough/mechanical Footprint of trench approx 1-5 m. trencher/jetting machine) HVDC Cables to be bundled in a single trench. Support vessel(s)

2.2.27 Offshore installation will take place over several laying campaigns (preferably in summer months where the weather conditions are likely to be more suitable for offshore works), over a period of 2 – 3 years. As it is not possible to load the whole HVDC cable length on board, cable laying will likely consist of 4 or 5 sections of cable with joints between each section rather than a continuous cable run. 2.2.28 Cable burial could be undertaken by three key types of equipment – a plough, a mechanical trencher or a jetting machine (see Insets 2.5 to 2.7 below).

Inset 2.5: A cable plough in operation. Inset 2.6: A mechanical trencher. Inset 2.7: A jetting machine.

2.2.29 Ploughing involves a large mechanical plough being lowered from a cable laying barge or vessel to sit on the seabed. As the barge moves forward, the plough is towed behind the vessel and adjustable skids on the plough are gradually raised, allowing the plough share to create a trench of the required depth. The width of the trench is typically 500 mm and the cable is laid simultaneously with the lifted seabed Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

being to some extent deposited in its original position to cover the cable. There are modifications to this technique which may be used, such as the use of a rock cutting plough or a vibrating share plough, both of which are used in areas where the substrate is very hard and challenging to trench using other methods. 2.2.30 Mechanical trenching creates a trench using a series of metal picks mounted on a chain or a cutting wheel. As the chain/wheel rotates the substrate is excavated by the picks and removed by the rotation of the mechanism. This technique is generally used to excavate stiff to hard substrates. Some mechanical trenchers use a combination of mechanical trenching and jetting modification, and they generally rely on tracked propulsion systems to move forwards rather than towing. 2.2.31 Jetting machines can either be free-flying (with neutral buoyancy manoeuvred by multiple thrusters) or tracked vehicles which are driven forwards using integral caterpillar tracks. Jetting creates a trench by directing a forwards-facing high pressure jet of water at the trench face through nozzles set into adjustable legs which stand aside the cable and create the trench below. The water jet fluidises sandy substrates after which the cable naturally lowers into the trench, often using a depressor, and the fluidised sediment settles over the installed cable. In clay sediments, the water jet cuts through the clay creating a slot-shaped trench into which the cable lowers. Spoil is carried out of the trench by the flow of water. 2.2.32 It is possible in areas of hard sediments where there is rock close to the seabed surface rock it will not be possible to bury the cables. In such locations it is anticipated that rock placement will be used to protect the cables, although other possible methods include concrete mattresses/grout bagged solutions. Inset 2.8 Rock Placement

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

2.3 Mitigation Measures

2.3.1 A range of mitigation measures will be implemented for the duration of the construction phase of the IFA2 development through a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP).

Chilling

2.3.2 Winter bird surveys in 2013-14 and 2014-15 have demonstrated that the SPA species brent geese regularly uses the Chilling-Brownwich Wader Roost SINC during the winter months, especially at high tide as well as the intertidal and marine habitat adjacent to Chilling Cliff. 2.3.3 Construction activities will not be undertaken onshore at Chilling or within marine habitat within 1km of the landfall site during the core winter months October to March inclusive. However there is the potential for disturbance of brent geese to occur in September when brent geese have started to return to the south coast from their breeding sites in northern Russia.

Specific onshore mitigation at Chilling 2.3.4 The following mitigation measures are appropriate to protect brent geese in September: (a) The site compound will be located on the northern edge of the SINC adjacent to the access off Chilling Lane. Brent geese have not been recorded in this part of the SINC during winter bird surveys 2013-14 and 2014-15; (b) Access routes between the site compound and each works area will use the field boundaries as far as possible to keep disturbance to the edge of the field and minimise crop loss thus at the same time protecting brent goose foraging resource. This will entail following designated access routes along the northern and eastern boundaries of the field; (c) Temporary boundary fencing 2.1 metres high with solid hoardings will be erected around the seaward side and SINC side of the HDD works area within the Chilling-Brownwich Wader Roost SINC for the entire construction phase at Chilling; (d) Other active works areas within the Chilling-Brownwich Wader Roost SINC will be screened off using heras fencing and visual screening/acoustic hoarding. The location of this screening will be moved during the construction phase to target current works areas. This screening is only required facing into the SINC; (e) Workers will not be permitted access to the intertidal area or the cliff top unless it is strictly necessary for the HDD operation;

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

2.3.5 An ecology watching brief will be established at Chilling for construction activities taking place at Chilling in September. An ecologist will attend the Chilling works site on a daily basis to continuously monitor Brent geese using the Chilling- Brownwich Wader Roost SINC to monitor for evidence of disturbance effects ranging from reduced feeding through to displacement from the SINC. The ecology watching brief will ensure that workers are complying with other mitigation measures as well as measures inferent to the design of the works such as ensuring that HDD operations are set back at least 100 metres from the cliff edge. 2.3.6 In the unlikely event that brent geese are displaced from the SINC during construction phase works in September this will trigger additional control measures. 2.3.7 It is important that an additional control measure is available to avoid brent goose displacement from the Chilling Roost SINC becoming a regular occurrence in September. Therefore if daily brent goose monitoring records evidence of goose displacement from the SINC then constraints will be placed on works 1.5 hours either side of high tide for the remainder of the works period. This constraint will be triggered where brent geese have not been recorded using the SINC for four consecutive working days not including weekends. Days where the brent geese are observed being completely displaced from the SINC due to the works will also counted towards the four consecutive day threshold. This control measure will ensure that the brent geese are able to access the SINC at high tide each day. 2.3.8 Mitigation measures stipulated to protect brent geese at Chilling will also be effective at protecting other SPA shorebirds during the spring and autumn migration months outside the period October to March. Mitigation measures relevant to shorebirds will therefore also be enforced in April as well as September. This will include points (a) to (e) and especially point (c) and (d) concerning the use of protective screening in the Chilling-Brownwich Wader Roost SINC to avoid disturbance of oystercatchers using the field for feeding and roosting. However it is not proposed to maintain an ecology watching brief specifically to protect SPA birds outside September. 2.3.9 The public footpath along the top of Chilling Cliff has been closed by Fareham Council due to it being unsafe as a result of cliff erosion. However members of the public continue to walk the field boundary on private land which runs parallel with the former cliff path. This Chilling landfall area and HDD works area will be fenced off for the duration of the proposed works which will prevent members of the public from walking the perimeter of the SINC in this location. The fencing is required for Health and Safety reasons and it will provide an effective barrier to walkers. This measure will discourage members of the public from walking the south boundary of the SINC along the top of Chilling Cliff since a circular walk around the SINC will not be possible. No alternative paths will be provided to facilitate access to the SINC by members of the public. 2.3.10 The cables route from the landfall has been identified to minimise disruption to agricultural practice and follows the field margins. The installation of the cables would be of short duration and it would be carefully managed with a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) setting out careful working measures to ensure careful soil management. Taking the worse-case scenario there would be a temporary disruption of one growing season to farming over a small area of the field, i.e. the Chilling redline works area (Red Line Boundary within field area – 4.77ha and Unworkable Area within field area due to Red Line Boundary – 1.51ha). Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

There will be no impediment to the farmer accessing the remainder of the field (43.7ha or 87.5% of the field) during the works period at Chilling to undertaking crop planting and ground preparation activities as required to keep the land productive. 2.3.11 Parts of the field within the works area would be reinstated following the cable installation and normal agricultural practise would continue. Applying the worse- case scenario it is assumed that soil within the works area would need to settle for a short period and that planting would not be practical within 12.5% of the field in the October immediately following the completion of works. The magnitude of the effect of temporary habitat loss for brent geese is considered to be negligible. 2.3.12 Whilst no specific mitigation is required the predicted effects can be further managed or reduced with the implementation of standard mitigation measures as part of the development of a CEMP. The development of a Soils Management Plan is anticipated as being the mechanism for capturing standard mitigation measures typical of best practice including methods to ensure sustainable re-use of site won material and effective stockpile management to help secure rapid and successful reinstatement of land after cables installation. Soil management practices including topsoil stripping, subsoil stripping, soil storage and soil replacement would be accordance with Defra guidance2. All soil movement operations shall only be carried out when the full volume of soil involved is in a dry and friable condition, i.e. the soil is in a non-plastic state such that damage to its structure shall be avoided. Conditions shall be sufficiently dry for the topsoil to be separated from the subsoil without difficulty. Soil handling and movement shall not be carried out between the months of November to March inclusive

2 Defra (2009) Construction Code of Practice for Sustainable Use of Soils on Construction Sites. Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Specific offshore mitigation at Chilling 2.3.13 The presence of cable laying and installation support vessels will be kept to a minimum within 1km of the Chilling Cliff intertidal area in September. 2.3.14 The HDD exit points have been designed to be at least 167m away from the IFCA no trawling zone (within which the seagrass area is located) to avoid potential issues of smothering of the seagrass during HDD works. This measure will greatly reduce sedimentation within sea-grass habitat during the HDD drilling operation (refer to paragraphs 5.1.96 to 5.1.100). 2.3.15 The distance of the exit points from the high water mark (at least 500m) will also result in little vessel movement in the shallow subtidal zone which has the potential to result in disturbance to geese. 2.3.16 There are no other marine and/or intertidal habitats for which specific mitigation measures are required.

Daedalus 2.3.17 The proposed IFA2 Project Programme allows for works to be undertaken at Daedalus during the winter months. There is no planned installation works along the beach at Daedalus in the winter, the only works would be re-instatement of the Monks Hill car park or possible drilling works depending on which landfall option is chosen. 2.3.18 Overwintering birds are most vulnerable to the effects of disturbance during periods of extreme cold when they are more energetically stressed. Works will avoid periods of prolonged freezing conditions and will not be undertaken following seven consecutive days of frozen conditions in line with JNCC guidance. Night time air temperatures will be monitored to ensure that this guidance is implemented.

Specific onshore mitigation at Daedalus 2.3.19 The following mitigation measures are appropriate to protect SPA birds for the period September to March: (f) Access routes between the site compound and each works area will use existing access, perimeter and internal roads and the new access road to Broom Way. This will minimise disturbance of grassland habitat at the centre of the airfield; (g) In the event that Landfall Option 1 is chosen the TJB within the Monk Hills Car Park will be screened off from adjacent intertidal habitat in this location using heras fencing and visual screening/acoustic hoarding. The route of the open cut trenching works within the intertidal habitat will also be screened in this way; (h) In the event that Landfall Option 2 is chosen the TJB would be located within a small field occasionally used by oystercatcher flocks between Crofton Avenue and Monks Hill Car Park. The duration of works will be kept to a minimum during the period October to March as development priorities allow; Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

(i) It is not proposed to provide any screening to reduce disturbance of winter birds within the Daedalus Airfield. Bird control measures are already actively implemented within the airfield for the purposes of air safety; (j) Individual workers will not be permitted access to the intertidal area unless it is strictly necessary for the HDD operation (measure relevant to all Landfall option 2 and option 3);

2.3.20 An ecological watching brief will be implemented in the event that Landfall Option 1 is chosen and trenching works are required on intertidal habitat at Daedalus during the winter months October to March. The purpose of the ecological brief will be to ensure that workers implement mitigation measures correctly. Daily monitoring of shorebirds in the vicinity of the landfall site will also be undertaken. No bird monitoring or ecological watching brief is specifically proposed within the Daedalus Airfield for the purpose of protecting wintering birds.

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

3. Summary of Screening Stage (HRA Stage 1)

3.1.1 An Assessment of Likely Significant Effects (ALSE) Report (TEP Report Ref: 3221.20.05) was submitted to Natural England in March 2016. This provided the basis for discussions with Natural England regarding the scoping in or out of Natura 2000 sites for Stage 2 of the Habitat Regulations Assessment. 3.1.2 The Stage 1 screening report concluded that there would be no likely significant effects on the following Natura 2000 sites:

 New Forest Ramsar (Site code: UK11047)  New Forest SPA (Site code: UK9011031)  New Forest SAC (Site code: UK0012557)  Solent Maritime SAC (Site code: UK0030059)  South Wight Maritime SAC (Site code: UK0030061)  Solent and Isle of Wight Lagoons SAC (Site code: UK001703)  Briddlesford Copses SAC (Site code: UK0030328)  Emer Bog SAC (Site code: UK0030147)  Solent and Dorset Coast pSPA 3.1.3 The ALSE Report identified potential effects on the following Natura 2000 sites:

 Solent and Southampton Water SPA (Site code: UK9011061)  Solent and Southampton Water Ramsar (Site code: UK11063)  Portsmouth Harbour SPA (Site code: UK9011051)  Portsmouth Harbour Ramsar (Site code: UK11055)  Chichester and Langstone Harbours SPA (Site code: UK9011011)  Chichester and Langstone Harbours Ramsar (Site code: UK11013)  River Itchen SAC (Site code: UK0012599) 3.1.4 A more detailed summary of which Natura 2000 sites were scoped in/out is provided in Appendix 2. Potential likely significant effects on the scoped in Natura 2000 sites need to be taken through to Stage 2 Appropriate Assessment. 3.1.5 Section 4.3 also summarises which species are scoped in for the Stage 2 Appropriate Assessment. 3.1.6 No operational effects are predicted on Natura 2000 sites once the cable is buried. There may be some requirement for non-routine repair or maintenance work during the lifetime of the development. 3.1.7 The proposed IFA2 development is not connected with fulfilling the management objectives of any Natura 2000 site.

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

4. Natura Sites Baseline Information

4.1 Protected sites 4.1.1 Table 4.1 lists all protected sites located in the vicinity of the site including the reasons for the designations. Citation sheets for protected sites are included at Appendix 3. The locations of protected sites for birds are also illustrated in Drawing 2.

Table 4.1: Protected sites located of relevance to the HRA Assessment including component SSSIs and supporting habitat associated with SINCs. Protected Site Location Reason for Designation

Solent and Immediately The site qualifies under Article 4.1 of the Directive Southampton adjacent to land- (79/409/EEC) by supporting populations of European Water SPA based Chilling importance of the following Annex I species: and Daedalus survey areas. . Mediterranean gull – 2 pairs or at least 20% GB breeding pop. (1994-98) . Sandwich tern – 231 pairs or at least 1.7% GB breeding pop. (1993-97) . Roseate tern – 2 pairs or at least 3.3% GB breeding pop. (1993-97) . Common tern – 267 pairs or at least 2.2% of GB breeding pop. (1993-97) . Little tern – 49 pairs or at least 2% of GB breeding pop. (1993-97)

The site qualifies under Article 4.2 of the Directive (79/409/EEC) by supporting populations of European importance of the following migratory species:

. Black-tailed godwit – 1,125 indiv. or at least 1.6% GB wintering pop. (1992/3-1996/7) . Dark-bellied brent goose – 7,506 indiv. or at least 2.5% GB wintering pop. (1992/3-1996/7) . Ringed plover – 552 indiv. or at least 1.1% GB wintering pop. (1992/3-1996/7) . Teal – 4,400 indiv. or at least 1.1% GB wintering pop. (1992/3-1996/7)

The area qualifies under Article 4.2 by supporting at least 20,000 water fowl – supports 52,948 waterfowl (1991/2-1995/6):

Gadwall, teal, ringed plover, black-tailed godwit, little grebe, great crested grebe, cormorant, dark- bellied brent goose, wigeon, redshank, pintail, Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Protected Site Location Reason for Designation

shoveler, red-breasted merganser, grey plover, lapwing, dunlin, curlew, shelduck.

Solent and Immediately Ramsar criterion 5: Southampton adjacent to land- Water Ramsar based Chilling Assemblage of International importance: winter site and Daedalus Ramsar criterion 6: survey areas.

Species with peak counts in the spring/autumn: ringed plover

Species with peak counts in the winter:

Dark-bellied brent goose, teal and black-tailed godwit.

Lee on the Immediately The SSSI extends along the eastern shore of Solent to Itchen adjacent to land- Southampton Water from the Lee-on-the-Solent to Estuary SSSI based Chilling the mid-Itchen Estuary and includes the lower survey area. estuary of the River Hamble. Intertidal area including estuarine mud, sandy beaches and mixed sediments with gravel and cobbles. The citation (component of mentions various invertebrate species including the Solent and Northern Quahog, common cockle, sand mason, Southampton peppery furrow snail and laver spire snail. Water SSSI) At low water the SSSI is a major feeding area for waders (black-tailed godwit, dunlin, grey plover, ringed plover, redshank, curlew and turnstone) and dark-bellied brent geese. In the early winter the brent geese feed on green algae and eel grass within the SSSI, but later exploit farmland outside SSSI including Hook Links grazing marsh.

At high tide the shallow water over the flats between Hamble and Hillhead is an important feeding/roosting area for great crested grebe (nationally important numbers), red-breasted merganser and other marine birds.

North Solent Approximately The site extends along 13km of the north shoreline SSSI 2.1km to of the West Solent and includes the parallel valleys southwest (far of the Beaulieu River, Dark Water and the side of the Solent) Stanswood Valley. Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Protected Site Location Reason for Designation

(component of Shingle spits and saltmarsh provide nesting habitat Solent and for terns, gulls and waders. The SSSI supports the Southampton largest colonies of sandwich and common terns on Water SSSI) the south coast and 7% of the British little tern breeding population. A very large black-headed gull colony is present. The saltmarsh support nationally important numbers of breeding ringed plover and regionally important numbers of breeding redshank and oystercatcher.

The intertidal mudflat within the estuary is small but supports substantial populations of wintering and migratory birds including dark-bellied brent goose, teal, ringed plover, grey plover, dunlin, black-tailed godwit and spotted redshank. Outside the estuary the intertidal mudflats of the Solent attract turnstone, ringed plover, oystercatcher and dark-bellied brent geese.

Hythe to Calshot Approximately This SSSI includes the largest areas of remaining Marshes SSSI 2km to southwest saltmarsh and mudflats in Southampton Water. It (far side of the regularly supports over 1% of the national winter Solent) populations of wigeon, teal, ringed plover, grey plover, black-tailed godwit, redshank and dunlin as (component of well as over 1% of the international population of Solent and dark-bellied brent goose. The numbers of great Southampton crested grebe, gadwall and shoveler can approach Water SSSI) nationally important numbers as well.

Portsmouth Approximately The site qualifies under Article 4.2 of the Directive Harbour SPA 2.2km to (79/409/EEC) by supporting populations of European northeast of importance of the following migratory species: Daedalus survey area. . Dark-bellied brent geese – 2,847 indiv. or at least 0.9% GB wintering pop. (1991/2-1995/6) . Red-breasted merganser – 87 indiv. or at least 0.9% GB wintering pop. (1991/2-1995/6) . Dunlin – 5,123 indiv. or at least 1% GB wintering pop. (1991/2-1995/6) . Black-tailed godwit – 31 indiv. or at least 0.4% GB wintering pop. (1991/2-1995/6) Portsmouth Approximately Ramsar criterion 3: Harbour Ramsar 2.2km to site northeast of Extensive eelgrass beds which support feeding Brent Daedalus survey geese. High densities of mud snail Hydrobia ulvae area. provide an important wader food resource. Ramsar criterion 6:

Species with peak counts in the winter: Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Protected Site Location Reason for Designation

Dark-bellied brent goose – 2,105 indiv. or at least 2.1% GB population. (1998/9-2002/3)

Portsmouth Approximately Portsmouth Harbour is the westernmost of three Harbour SSSI 2.2km to extensive and connected tidal basins – Portsmouth, northeast of Langstone and Chichester Harbours. The eelgrass Daedalus survey beds are among the most extensive in Britain. The area. SSSI is of national importance for grey plover, black- (component of tailed godwit, dunlin and dark-bellied brent geese. Portsmouth The intertidal area of Portsmouth Harbor SSSI Harbour SPA) includes 776ha of mudflats and 173ha cord-grass Spartina marshes.

Titchfield Haven Approximately Titchfield Haven was formerly the estuary of the SSSI* 1.4km southeast River Meon. Tidal water is excluded by one-way of Chilling survey tidal valves and the former estuary is now a area. freshwater marsh.

*Also an NNR. The SSSI is important for winter populations of 2,000 wigeon, 1,500 teal and small numbers of other surface feeding ducks. Breeding birds include bearded tit, reed warbler and sedge warbler. It is an important pre-migratory feeding site for some wetland birds.

Chichester and Approximately The site qualifies under Article 4.1 of the Directive Langstone 10.6km to the (79/409/EEC) by supporting populations of European Harbours SPA east of Daedalus importance of the following Annex I species: survey area. . Little tern – 100 pairs or at least 4.2% of the GB pop. (1992-1996) . Sandwich tern – 31 pairs or at least 0.2% of the GB pop. (1993-1997) . Little egret . Common tern – 33 pairs or at least 0.3% of the GB pop. (1992-1996) . Bar-tailed godwit – 1,692 indiv. or at least 3.2% GB wintering pop. (1991/2-1995/6)

The site qualifies under Article 4.2 of the Directive (79/409/EEC) by supporting populations of European importance of the following migratory species:

. Dark-bellied brent geese – 17,119 indiv. or at least 5.7% International wintering pop. (1991/2- 1995/6) . Shelduck – 2,410 indiv. or at least 3.3% GB wintering pop. (1991/2-1995/6) . Wigeon – 2,055 indiv. or at least 0.7% GB wintering pop. (1991/2-1995/6) Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Protected Site Location Reason for Designation

. Teal – 1,824 indiv. or at least 0.5% International wintering pop. (1991/2-1995/6) . Pintail – 330 indiv or at least 1.2% GB wintering pop. (1991/2-1995/6) . Shoveler – 100 indiv. or at least 1% GB wintering pop. (1991/2-1995/6) . Red-breasted merganser – 297 indiv. or at least 3% GB wintering pop. (1991/2-1995/6) . Sanderling – 236 indiv. or at least 0.2% International wintering pop. (1991/2-1995/6) . Ringed plover – 846 indiv. or at least 3% GB wintering pop. (1991/2-1995/6) . Black-tailed godwit . Dunlin – 44,294 indiv. or at least 3.2% International wintering pop. (1991/2-1995/6) . Curlew – 1,861 indiv. or at least 1.6% GB wintering pop. (1991/2-1995/6) . Grey plover – 3,825 indiv. or at least 2.3% International wintering pop. (1991/2-1995/6) . Redshank – 1,788 indiv. or at least 1% International wintering pop. (1991/2-1995/6) . Turnstone – 430 indiv. or at least 0.7% GB wintering pop. (1991/2-1995/6)

The area qualifies under Article 4.2 by supporting at least 20,000 water fowl – supports 93,142 waterfowl (1991/2-1995/6):

Bar-tailed godwit, teal, ringed plover, black-tailed godwit, little grebe, little egret, cormorant, dark- bellied brent goose, wigeon, redshank, oystercatcher, pintail, shoveler, red-breasted merganser, grey plover, lapwing, knot, sanderling, whimbrel, dunlin, curlew, shelduck.

Langstone Approximately Langstone Harbour is a tidal basin which resembles Harbour SSSI 10.6km to the a land locked lake at high water. It contains one of east of Daedalus the largest areas of saltmarsh on the south coast. survey area. The eel grass beds are among the largest in Britain.

(component of The SSSI is an important summer and autumn Langstone and assembly ground for waders during the moult and as Chichester a post-moult wintering ground. Dunlin often exceed Harbour SPA) 30,000 indiv. Grey plover and black-tailed godwit achieve 1-2% of the European and north African

flyway population; and redshank and ringed plover do so periodically. The site has supported between 5-10% pf the world population of dark-bellied brent geese (in the 70s and 80s) and up to 2.5% of the European winter population of shelduck. Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Protected Site Location Reason for Designation

Chichester Approximately Chicester Harbour is a large estuarine basin in which Harbour SSSI 15km to the east large areas of mud and sand flats are exposed. The of Daedalus mudflats are feeding grounds of international survey area. importance for ringed plover, grey plover, redshank, black-tailed godwit, dunlin, sanderling, curlew and (component of greenshank (the latter two particularly in the Langstone and autumn). Bar-tailed godwit numbers are of Chichester European importance. Shelduck, teal and dark- Harbour SPA) bellied brent goose numbers are of International importance with 5% of the world population of the latter.

Hook with Partially overlaps Habitats include scrapes, reedbed, coastal grazing Warsash LNR with Chilling marsh, scrub, saltmarsh, intertidal mud, stable survey area. shingle ridge and woodland. Birds include dark- bellied brent goose, little egret, wigeon, black-tailed godwit, lapwing, little owl and cuckoo.

Calshot Approximately The LNR regularly attracts more than 1% of the Marshes LNR 2km to southwest national populations of wigeon, teal, ringed plover, (far side of the grey plover, black-tailed godwit, redshank and Solent) dunlin.

The Wild Approximately The site is most noted for its ancient oaks although Grounds LNR 1.1km to east of hole-nesting birds are noted including all three Daedalus survey English species of woodpecker. area.

Chilling- FA0017 and SINC Refs. FA0017 and FA0024. Site consists of Brownwich FA0024 located two areas of agricultural land designated for dark- Wader Roost within Chilling bellied brent goose. SINC survey area.

Great Prosbrook FA0056 located SINC Ref. FA0056. Site consists of agricultural land Farm Wader approximately designated for dark-bellied brent goose. Roost 3 SINC 1.8km to northeast of Chilling survey area.

River Itchen 12.3km northwest Annex I Habitats (primary reason): SAC the Chilling HVAC cables . Water courses of plain to montane levels with the Ranunculion fluitantis and Callitricho- Batrachion vegetation

Annex II Species (primary reason): Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Protected Site Location Reason for Designation

. Southern damselfly Coenagrion mercurial . Bullhead Cottus gobio

Annex II Species (qualifying feature):

. White-clawed crayfish Austropotamobius pallipes . Brook lamprey Lampetra planeri . Atlantic Salmon Salmo salar . Otter Lutra lutra

4.2 Survey Results for Winter Birds

Chilling 4.2.1 The findings of winter terrestrial and intertidal bird surveys are summarised here (Refer to Appendix G in Onshore Environmental Statement for more detail). 4.2.2 Winter bird survey records obtained during field surveys were analysed using GIS to determine bird counts within 250m and 500m of the redline boundaries for Chilling and Daedalus. The records were then analysed to determine the annual peak count for SPA and SSSI bird species for the winter periods 2013-2014, 2014- 2015 and 2015-2016. Data obtained for the Intertidal survey and the Line Transect (Terrestrial) survey were analysed separately. Literature research into the likely zone of influence of disturbance associated with the Proposed Development indicate that it is less likely that noise and visual disturbance effects will extend beyond 250m from the source of the disturbance. However as a precautionary measure a 500m survey buffer was also used for SPA and SSSI birds. 4.2.3 The Chilling survey area may be defined as the total extent of the onshore and intertidal zone works plus a 500 metre survey buffer. The Daedalus survey area may be defined as the total extent of the onshore and intertidal zone works plus a 500 metre survey buffer. The extent of each of these survey areas are illustrated in Figures 4.1 and 4.2. 4.2.4 The SPA and SSSI bird species, as well as other waterbird assemblage species recorded at Chilling during the 2013-2014 and 2014–2015 winter bird surveys, are presented at Table 4.2. The winter bird survey was a line transect survey focussing on terrestrial habitats with some coverage of coastal habitats but only at high tide. 4.2.5 SPA and SSSI species recorded during the 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 Chilling intertidal bird surveys are presented at Table 4.3. The intertidal bird surveys focussed exclusively on recording waterbirds (waders, wildfowl and gulls) at all states of tide (high, mid and low tide).

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Table 4.2. SSSI/SPA species and other waterbird assemblage species recorded within the Chilling survey area* during the winter bird surveys 2013-2014 and 2014-2015. Winter 2013-14 Winter 2014-15 Species

present present of redlineof redlineof redlineof No. of visits No. of visits Within 500m Within 250m Within 500m Within 250m Redlineof Brent goose1 1,000 1,000 4 1,267 1,311 6 Curlew 0 0 0 56 100 6 Gadwall 0 0 0 2 2 1 Gr. crested 0 0 0 0 2 1 grebe Oystercatcher 16 16 3 84 85 6 Red br. 0 0 0 0 1 1 merganser Teal 0 0 0 0 1 1 Turnstone 0 0 0 0 13 2 Other waterbird species Black-headed 92 112 3 70 70 5 gull Common gull 0 0 0 3 3 3 Gr. Bl.-backed 0 0 0 0 2 1 gull Little egret 0 0 0 1 1 2 Herring gull 10 10 1 1 13 2 Lesser Bl.- 0 0 0 1 1 1 backed gull Mallard 1 1 1 11 13 6 Mute swan 0 0 0 1 1 2 Key: Bold = SPA qualifying species.

4.2.6 Five SPA species were recorded within 500m of the Chilling redline boundary during one or both of the two winter bird surveys (winter 2013-2014 and winter 2014-2015). Brent goose was by far the most numerous SPA species with a peak count of 1,311 being recorded within 500m of the redline boundary in winter 2014- 2015. Brent goose was regularly recorded within a large agricultural field adjacent to Chilling cliff during both winter bird surveys although brent goose did not use this field for nocturnal roosting. Other SPA bird species recorded included curlew, red- breasted merganser, teal and turnstone although only curlew was recorded in moderate numbers; 100 individuals within 500m of the redline boundary in winter 2014-2015. Three other SSSI species were recorded as well as eight other waterbird species.

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Table 4.3. SSSI/SPA species and other waterbird species recorded within the Chilling survey area during the Intertidal bird surveys 2013-2014 and 2014-2015. Winter 2013-14 Winter 2014-15 Species

e

present present of redlineof redlineof redlin of No. of visits No. of visits Within 500m Within 250m Within 500m Within 250m Redlineof Brent goose1 1,150 2,678 5 2,165 3,400 6 Bar-tailed 0 1 1 0 0 0 godwit Black-tailed 0 0 0 26 27 1 godwit Curlew 2 4 4 55 55 4 Gr. crested 15 15 1 105 111 4 grebe Grey plover 3 3 1 1 3 2 Oystercatcher 100 170 6 94 324 6 Redshank 2 9 1 1 3 2 Ringed plover 0 0 0 0 2 1 Sanderling 0 4 1 18 18 2 Turnstone 0 3 2 45 62 4 Other waterbird species Black-headed 65 93 4 * * * gull Gr. Bl.-backed 2 2 1 * * * gull Knot 0 75 1 0 0 0 Lapwing 0 0 0 5 5 1 Little egret 0 0 0 1 3 1 Herring gull 46 126 2 * 1* * Key: Bold = SPA qualifying species. * = gull count not undertaken.

4.2.7 Eight SPA bird species were recorded within 500m of the Chilling redline boundary during one or both of the intertidal bird surveys. Of these, brent goose was by far the most numerous with a peak count of 3,400 individuals being recorded in winter 2014-15. Brent goose was regularly recorded using intertidal habitat or adjacent marine habitat near Chilling cliff. Other SPA species recorded included bar-tailed godwit, black-tailed godwit, curlew, grey plover, redshank, ringed plover, sanderling and turnstone; the second highest peak count concerns turnstone of which 62 individuals were recorded in winter 2014-15. Two other SPA species and six waterbird assemblage species were also recorded.

Daedalus 4.2.8 The SSSI and SPA bird species, as well as other waterbird assemblage species recorded at Daedalus during the 2013-2014, 2014-2015 and 2015–2016 winter bird surveys are presented at Table 4.4. Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

4.2.9 SPA/SSSI species recorded during the 2013-2014, 2014-2015 and 2015-2016 Daedalus intertidal bird surveys are presented at Table 4.5.

Table 4.4. SSSI/SPA species and other waterbird assemblage species recorded within the Daedalus survey area during the winter bird surveys 2013-2014, 2014-2015 and 2015- 2016. Winter 2013-14 Winter 2014-15 Winter 2015-16 Species

redline

present present present of redlineof redlineof redlineof redlineof of No. of visits No. of visits No. of visits Within 500m Within 250m Within 500m Within 250m Within 500m Within 250m Redlineof SPA/SSSI species Ringed plover 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other waterbird assemblage species Black-headed 20 30 4 301 303 2 62 98 6 gull Common gull 71 71 1 1 1 1 8 8 3 Golden plover 0 30 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Herring gull 65 65 3 7 7 3 18 19 6 Lesser 0 0 0 2 2 1 0 0 0 bl.backed gull Key: Bold = SPA qualifying species.

4.2.10 Only one SPA species was recorded within 500m of the Daedalus redline boundary during the three winter bird surveys. A peak count of two ringed plover was recorded within 500m of the Daedalus redline boundary in winter 2013-14 but this species was not recorded on any other occasion during 2013 to 2016. No SSSI species were recorded during 2013 to 2016. Five other waterbird species were noted, predominantly gulls.

Table 4.5. SSSI/SPA species and BoCC/protected species recorded within the Daedalus survey area during the Intertidal bird surveys 2013-2014, 2014-2015 and 2015-2016. Winter 2013-14 Winter 2014-15 Winter 2015-16 Species

m

present present present of redlineof redlineof redlineof redlineof redlineof No. of visits No. of visits No. of visits Within 500 Within 250m Within 500m Within 250m Within 500m Within 250m Redlineof Brent goose1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 1 Dunlin 0 20 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 Gr. crested 0 2 1 0 1 1 1 2 2 grebe Mediterranean 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 gull Oystercatcher 18 37 6 2 27 2 43 81 5 Ringed plover 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 Sanderling 4 6 2 0 9 1 4 4 1 Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Winter 2013-14 Winter 2014-15 Winter 2015-16 Species

m

present present present of redlineof redlineof redlineof redlineof redlineof No. of visits No. of visits No. of visits Within 500 Within 250m Within 500m Within 250m Within 500m Within 250m Redlineof Turnstone 18 21 3 0 34 1 25 33 3 Other waterbird assemblage species Black-headed 86 107 4 1 3 1 57 137 6 gull Common gull 3 3 1 0 0 0 3 3 3 Common scoter 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 Cormorant 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 Gr. Bl.-backed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 gull Knot 0 17 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Herring gull 26 29 3 0 0 0 20 23 6 Little gull 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 Mallard 2 2 1 0 0 0 2 2 1 Yellow-legged 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 gull Key: Bold = SPA qualifying species.

4.2.11 Six SPA bird species were recorded within 500m of the Daedalus redline boundary during the three intertidal bird surveys, of which turnstone was the most numerous with 34 individuals being recorded in this area in winter 2014-15. Other SPA species recorded included brent goose, dunlin, Mediterranean gull, ringed plover and sanderling. Note that a peak count of only two brent geese was recorded in winter 2015-16. Two SSSI species and ten other waterbird assemblage species were recorded.

4.3 Other Survey Work of Relevance 4.3.1 Detailed information on marine and intertidal surveys in relation to the IFA2 project is presented in Chapter 6 (Benthic ecology) of the Offshore Environmental Statement and Appendices 6.1, 6.2 and 6.3. 4.3.2 Phase 1 intertidal ecology walkover surveys of the landfall locations were undertaken for the IFA2 project by RSK marine ecologists in November 2014 (at Chilling) and May 2015 (at Daedalus). The results of these surveys are presented in Appendix 6.3 of the Offshore Environmental Statement.

4.4 Conservation Objectives 4.4.1 Conservation objectives for Natura 2000 sites to be included in the IFA2 Stage 2 report to inform Appropriate Assessments are presented in Table 4.6. 4.4.2 Ramsar sites do not have agreed conservation objectives, but in most instances overlap with SPA site boundaries. However, it should be noted that Ramsar Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

qualifying features can include a range of habitats and non-bird species common to SAC designations, as well as bird species and assemblages and their supporting habitats, which are common to SPAs. 4.4.3 Of the Ramsar sites around Fareham, the Ramsar Convention criteria for the Solent and Southampton Water, Portsmouth Harbour, and Chichester and Langstone Harbours sites overlap substantially with the features of their equivalent SPAs. No additional conservation objectives are defined to assess these features, and those relating to the equivalent SPAs can be used in the assessment.

Table 4.6. Conservation Objectives for Natura 2000 sites included in IFA2 Stage 2 Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment (Scoped out receptors are greyed out) European feature

Solent and Southampton Water SPA Ensure that the integrity of the site is maintained or restored as appropriate, and ensure that the site contributes to achieving the aims of the Wild Birds Directive, by maintaining or restoring;  The extent and distribution of the habitats of the qualifying features  The structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying features  The supporting processes on which the habitats of the qualifying features rely  The population of each of the qualifying features, and,  The distribution of the qualifying features within the site.

Qualifying species Scoped in/out A046a Dark-bellied brent geese Scoped in (operational Other non-breeding SPA bird species: stage scoped A052 Eurasian teal out*) A137 Ringed plover A156 Black-tailed godwit Waterfowl Assemblage SPA breeding bird species: Scoped out A176 Mediterranean gull A191 Sandwich tern A192 Roseate tern

Solent and Southampton Water Ramsar Ramsar Criterion 1: Wetland habitats characteristic of the Scoped in biogeographic region (operational stage scoped Subject to natural change, maintain the internationally important out*) wetland characteristic of the Atlantic biogeographical region in Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

European feature favourable condition, in particular, estuaries, saline lagoons, saltmarsh and intertidal reefs.

Ramsar Criterion 2: Important assemblage of rare plants and Scoped in invertebrates: Zostera noltii (operational stage scoped Subject to natural change, maintain the wetland hosting an out*) assemblage of rare, vulnerable or endangered species in favourable condition, in particular, saline lagoons, saltmarsh, cordgrass swards (Spartinon spp.). Ramsar Criterion 6 - A046a Dark-bellied brent geese Scoped in (operational Ramsar criterion 6 - Other non-breeding SPA bird species: stage scoped A137 Ringed plover out*) A052 Eurasian teal A156 Black-tailed godwit Noteworthy fauna (Birds)

Subject to natural change, maintain the wetland regularly supporting 1% or more of the individuals in a population of waterfowl species in favourable condition, in particular, saltmarshes, sand and shingle, shallow coastal waters, intertidal mudflats and sandflats, and boulder and cobble shores, and mixed sediment shores. Noteworthy flora – Nationally important species occurring on Scoped in the site (Higher Plants) – Zostera marina (operational stage scoped out*) Noteworthy fauna – Species (Invertebrates – 35 species) Scoped out

Portsmouth Harbour SPA

Ensure that the integrity of the site is maintained or restored as appropriate, and ensure that the site contributes to achieving the aims of the Wild Birds Directive, by maintaining or restoring;  The extent and distribution of the habitats of the qualifying features  The structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying features  The supporting processes on which the habitats of the qualifying features rely  The population of each of the qualifying features, and,  The distribution of the qualifying features within the site. Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

European feature

A046a Dark-bellied brent geese Scoped in (operational Other non-breeding SPA bird species: stage scoped A069 Red-breasted merganser out*) A149 Dunlin A156 Black-tailed godwit

Waterfowl Assemblage Portsmouth Harbour Ramsar Ramsar criterion 3: Extensive beds of seagrass, abundance of Scoped out the mud snail Hydrobia ulvae, saltmarsh and saline lagoons supporting nationally important species

A046a Dark-bellied brent geese Scoped in (operational stage scoped out*) Noteworthy fauna – Birds (non-breeding) Species currently Scoped in occurring at levels of national importance: (operational stage scoped out*) Noteworthy fauna - Species Scoped out Nationally important species occurring on the site (Invertebrates) Langstone and Chichester Harbour SPA Ensure that the integrity of the site is maintained or restored as appropriate, and ensure that the site contributes to achieving the aims of the Wild Birds Directive, by maintaining or restoring;  The extent and distribution of the habitats of the qualifying features  The structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying features  The supporting processes on which the habitats of the qualifying features rely  The population of each of the qualifying features, and,  The distribution of the qualifying features within the site. A046a Dark-bellied brent Scoped in geese (operational stage scoped Other non-breeding SPA bird out*) species: A141 Grey plover A048 Common shelduck A144 Sanderling A050 Eurasian wigeon A149 Dunlin A052 Eurasian teal A157 Bar-tailed godwit A054 Northern pintail A160 Eurasian curlew A056 Northern shoveler A162 Common redshank A069 Red-breasted A169 Ruddy turnstone merganser Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

European feature

A137 Ringed plover

Waterfowl Assemblage

SPA breeding bird species: Scoped out A191 Sandwich tern A193 Common tern A195 Little tern

Langstone and Chichester Harbour Ramsar

Ramsar criterion 1: site includes Scoped out intertidal mudflats, saltmarsh, sand and shingle spits and sand dunes Ramsar criterion 5: Assemblages of International Importance – Scoped in Species with peak counts in winter: 76480 waterfowl) (operational stage scoped out*) Ramsar Criterion 6 - Scoped in A046a Dark-bellied brent geese (operational stage scoped out*) Ramsar criterion 6 - Other non-breeding SPA bird species: Scoped in A048 Common shelduck (operational A137 Ringed plover stage scoped A141 Grey plover out*) A149 Dunlin A162 Common redshank

Noteworthy fauna (Birds) Noteworthy Fauna - Species Scoped out - 17 British Red Data Book species - 84 nationally scarce species

River Itchen SAC Annex I habitats – Primary Reason: Scoped out Water courses of plain to montane levels with the Ranunculion fluitantis and Callitricho-Batrachion vegetation Annex II species – Primary Reason: Scoped out - Southern damselfly - Bullhead - White-clawed crayfish - Brook lamprey - Otter Annex II species – Primary Reason: Scoped in Atlantic Salmon Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

European feature

(Operational stage scoped out*) *No operational effects are predicted on Natura 2000 sites once the cable is buried.

4.5 Key Environmental Conditions Supporting Site Integrity The Habitats Regulations require that an Appropriate Assessment is made of the implications for each site in view of the site’s conservation objectives. To make such an assessment, it is necessary to understand in more detail the features of the sites that contribute to their favourable condition or conservation status. Natural England has published detailed Favourable Condition Tables in which various attributes of the habitat and species populations are defined for assessing site condition. These have been developed from the definition of Favourable Conservation Status provided in Article 1 of the Habitats Directive. Drawing on the Favourable Condition tables, a number of key environmental conditions that support site integrity can be identified; these are summarised in Appendix 4.

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

4.6 Potential effects – background research

4.6.1 A literature review has been undertaken to provide background research on the types of potential effects on Natura 2000 sites. There is some emphasis on the effects of noise and visual disturbance on birds. Background information is also provided within regards to the ecology and nature conservation status of the brent goose.

Background 4.6.2 The distance within which many waterbird species have the potential to be affected by noise and visual disturbance effects is 250 metres. 3 4.6.3 Different species of birds have different tolerances to noise and visual disturbance. 4.6.4 Birds are known to habituate, i.e. to become increasingly tolerant of regular noise and visual stimuli over time. Ongoing background or regular noise is more likely to be readily habituated to than sudden loud noises. Also loud noises where there is already background noise is less likely to cause disturbance than where there is no existing background noise. 4.6.5 Disturbance effects of a range of construction activities on waterbirds have been collated from a range of papers, particularly4 . Activities likely to be encountered during the construction period for the proposed works and their associated likely disturbance levels include:  Intermittent plant and personnel – High to moderate disturbance  Long term plant and personnel – Moderate  Irregular noise (50 – 70 dB) – Moderate  Regular noise (50 – 70 dB) – Moderate to Low  Noise below 50 dB - Low

Noise Disturbance 4.6.6 High noise disturbance typically results in a behavioural response from the birds, usually involving the birds moving away from the disturbance source. Those birds

3 Cutts, N.D., Phelps, A., & Burdon, D., 2009. Construction and waterfowl: Defining sensitivity, response, impacts and guidance. Report to Humber INCA. Institute of Estuarine & Coastal Studies, University of Hull; Cutts et al., 2013 Cutts, N., Hemingway, K. and Spencer, J. (2013). Waterbird disturbance mitigation toolkit: Informing estuarine planning and construction Projects. Version 3.2, March 2013

4 Davidson, N.C. & Rothwell, P.I. 1993. Disturbance to waterfowl on estuaries: the conservation and coastal management implications of current knowledge. Wader Study Group Bulletin. 68: 97 – 105) and Cutts & Hemingway (2010) Cutts, N.D., & Hemingway K.L.H., 2012. Bird disturbance from flood and coastal risk management construction activities. Report to Cascade Consulting. Institute of Estuarine & Coastal Studies, University of Hull Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

that remain in the disturbed area may not forage as efficiently. This is characterised by sudden noises over 60 dB (at bird, not noise source), or prolonged noise above 72 dB where birds have not yet habituated. 4.6.7 Moderate noise disturbance is classed as occasional noise above 55 dB at the bird, more persistent noise between 60 – 72dB, or long term regular noise over 72 dB where birds have become habituated. 4.6.8 Low noise disturbance is classed as noise less than 55 dB at the bird or noise between 55 dB and 72 dB in already highly disturbed locations (e.g. industrial areas).

4.6.9 A study on the Humber estuary concluded that birds become habituated to regular noise below 70dB5

Relevance to IFA2 4.6.10 The proposed HDD works are likely to cause continuous noise disturbance at the ‘punch-out’ point where the plant will be located for a period of 6 months. The continuous noise would therefore be expected to generate some noise disturbance when the works commence, but due to the continuous nature of the noise, this effect would reduce to moderate or low disturbance throughout the works period. The maximum noise level generated is estimated to be 58 dB at 100m. Birds more than 100m from the works are therefore not likely to be disturbed by these works. 4.6.11 The open-cut trenching works would involve lower noise levels (noise generated by excavator), however the noise will be more intermittent and so birds would habituate to this less readily. However the estimated noise level at 100m from source is estimated to be about 55 dB and therefore birds are unlikely to be disturbed by the noise generated at more than 100m from the works.

Susceptibility of Wader Species to Noise Disturbance 4.6.12 Certain wader species are known to have greater susceptibility to noise disturbance than other species. High sensitivity species include knot, bar-tailed godwit and redshank in particular Birds. However these birds will habituate to noise levels of up to 70 dB at the bird but behavioural responses can be recorded above 55 dB. 4.6.13 Redshank are also highly susceptible to noise disturbance whilst being less affected by visual disturbance. A noise threshold of 100-105dB at source will flush redshank and caution is advised for activities over 87dB6. 4.6.14 Dunlin, sanderling, ringed plover and turnstone are all low sensitivity species and are tolerant of noise disturbance. 4.6.15 It should be noted that most works related disturbance is unlikely to be assessed as being low level disturbance if there is a line of sight between the source of

5 IECS, (2008). Construction and waterfowl: Defining sensitivity, response, impacts and guidance. University of Hull Institute of Estuarine and Coastal Studies report to Humber INCA. 6 Cutts, N., Hemingway, K. and Spencer, J. (2013). Waterbird disturbance mitigation toolkit: Informing estuarine planning and construction Projects. Version 3.2, March 2013. Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

disturbance and the bird. Where there is no line of sight the disturbance source should be assessed as a noise disturbance. 4.6.16 Deleterious effects of chronic noise exposure have been suggested to begin at levels as low as 55–60dB(A)7. However, impulsive noise levels that cause behavioural responses, such as the shorebirds taking flight, are likely to occur above 70dB(A)8.

7 Dooling, R.J. & Popper, A.N. 2007. The effects of highway noise on birds. Report to California Department of Transportation, Contract No. 43A0139. Environmental Acoustics LLC, Rockville, Maryland, USA.

8 Wright, M.D., Goodman, P & Cameron, T.C. (2010). Exploring behavioural responses of shorebirds to impulsive noise. Wildfowl 60: 150-167. Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Visual Disturbance 4.6.17 Visual disturbance is generally thought to have a greater disturbance effect on waterbirds than noise 9. Visual disturbance is known to be greater if workers move away from plant. High levels of visual disturbance will cause birds to relocate away from the disturbed location. Long term works are considered to be of low visual disturbance as birds will become habituated resulting in no behavioural response exhibited by the bird. 4.6.18 Known visual disturbance distances exhibited by waterbirds are as follows:  0 – 50m: All birds will take to flight away from disturbance unless highly habituated  50 – 250m: All birds show some behavioural response (e.g. Fly, or walk away from disturbance, reduced feeding)  250 – 300m: Certain species may take flight (e.g. curlew), feeding may be reduced in other species.

Susceptibility of Wader Species to Visual Disturbance 4.6.19 Waders that are known to show the greatest response to visual disturbance are curlew, which may take flight up to 275m from the disturbance source and redshank that may take flight at up to 250m. Bar-tailed godwit are slightly less sensitive, with a flight response at 163m. 4.6.20 Less sensitive species include oystercatcher that will take flight at 110m and dunlin at 117m from the visual disturbance source. Redshank are known to be tolerant of visual disturbance and will forage as close as 75m from workers. 4.6.21 It is likely that the proposed works, including both HDD and trenching works would result in disturbance up to 250m from the source of disturbance for the majority of species. Some visual disturbance may occasionally occur up to 300m for certain species. Large behavioural responses such as flight responses will vary depending on species. It is likely that birds will habituate to the visual disturbance of the HDD works over time. Birds are less likely to habituate to visual disturbance generated by the trenching works, particularly as moving machinery and people will be involved, however these works will occur for a reduced period of time. 4.6.22 Limited studies have been undertaken into the artificial illumination of shorebird habitat. One study revealed that intertidal habitat illuminated by streetlights was used more in the night by visual foragers, and to a lesser extent by mixed foragers than non-illuminated areas. Visual foragers increased their foraging effort in illuminated areas and mixed foragers changed to more efficient visual foraging

9 Cutts, N.D., Phelps, A., & Burdon, D., 2009. Construction and waterfowl: Defining sensitivity, response, impacts and guidance. Report to Humber INCA. Institute of Estuarine & Coastal Studies, University of Hull; Cutts, N., Hemingway, K. and Spencer, J. (2013). Waterbird disturbance mitigation toolkit: Informing estuarine planning and construction Projects. Version 3.2, March 2013 Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

strategies. These behavioural shifts led to improved prey intake rates by an average of 83%.10

Interaction of Noise and Visual Effects 4.6.23 Noise and visual disturbance work in conjunction with one another so that for example as curlew are highly sensitive to both noise and visual disturbance, they are not likely to approach to within 100m of the works. Therefore noise levels of less than 107 dB at source would not have an additional impact due to the existing visual effect on this species. 4.6.24 Conversely due to redshank being less sensitive to visual disturbance and therefore will approach closer to works, noise levels above 100 dB at source could result in disturbance to this species.

Brent geese and Disturbance 4.6.25 Brent geese, like all geese, require open space and they are sensitive to prolonged disturbance. Field observations at Chilling-Brownwich Wader Roost SINC recorded in winter 2013 to 2014 indicate that wintering brent geese are tolerant to the regular dog walkers who use the area. However observations of geese being chased by dogs in November 2014 indicate that disturbance can be a problem. 4.6.26 A study into the effects of recreational activities at brent goose spring staging areas in the Wadden Sea found that where tourist pressure was high this could limit the use of the area by the geese. Furthermore no evidence was found to indicate habituation to disturbances.11 4.6.27 Brent geese are extremely sensitive to moderate and high level visual disturbance. Roosting or loafing brent geese are much more sensitive to disturbance than feeding birds. Feeding geese may tolerate disturbance as near at 105 metres.12 4.6.28 Brent geese are sensitive to noise disturbance and the minimum approach distance can be expected to be no less than 100m. At 100m high disturbance would be caused by noise sources of 110-115dB at the source. This increases to 120-125dB if the source is 300m from the geese. 4.6.29 A study into the effects of human disturbance on brent geese wintering in Essex revealed that brent geese avoid disturbed areas with limited openness (topography or terrain features preventing ability of geese to view surroundings) in the early winter. However disturbed areas were used later in the winter when food was depleted elsewhere. Geese became habituated to the proximity of people and to

10 Santos, C.D.; Miranda, A.C.; Grandeiro, J.P.; Lourenco, P.M.; Saraiva, S.; and Palmeirim, J.M., 2009, Effects of artificial illumination on the nocturnal foraging of waders.

11 Stock, M. 1993. Studies on the effects of disturbances on staging Brent Geese: a progress report, Wader Study Group Bull. 68: pp 29-34

12 Cutts, N., Hemingway, K. and Spencer, J. (2013). Waterbird disturbance mitigation toolkit: Informing estuarine planning and construction Projects. Version 3.2, March 2013 Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

some loud noises, but not to small low-flying aircraft. The study showed that Brent geese using disturbed locations at Leigh Marsh and Blackwater Estuary were prevented from feeding up to 11.7% of their time, and caused the time spent in flight to increase up to sevenfold. Due to a shortage of food the effects of disturbance prevented the geese from extended feeding to compensate for the effects of disturbance.13

Birds and Boat Based Disturbance 4.6.30 It is well documented that boat based activities can cause disturbance effects on coastal waterbirds.14 The magnitude of these effects vary in magnitude from a reduction in waterbird feeding efficiency due to increased alertness up to displacement of waterbirds from a zone within a site or even the entire site. Motorised watercraft in particular can cause disturbance at distances of up to 600m whereas kayaks can cause disturbance at distances of at least 100m. 4.6.31 Some sea bird species, for example, divers, are very sensitive to visual disturbance and are displaced by ship traffic.15

Environmental Effects specifically associated with Cable Laying 4.6.32 Natural England published advice in 2015 on operations which have the potential to affect SPA features for the Portsmouth Harbour SPA.16 This guidance identifies a number of potential effects associated with cable laying for the SPA bird species brent geese, black-tailed godwit, dunlin and red-breasted merganser. Table 4.7 lists some of these environmental effects.

13 Owens, N.W., 1977, Responses of wintering Brent Geese to human disturbance, Wildfowl 28: pp 5-14

14 Cutts,N; Phelps, A; and Burdon, D. 2009, Construction and Waterfowl, defining sensitivity

15 Merck, T. & Wasserthal, R. 2009. Assessment of the environmental impacts of cables. Biodiversity series: OSPAR Commission.

16 Natural England, 2015, Portsmouth Harbour Special Protection Area: Advice on Operations Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Table 4.7: Potential environmental effects associated with cable laying on Portsmouth Harbour SPA birds Effect Species

Above water noise 17 BW, BG, DN, RM

Collision with above water structures such as boats BW, BG, DN, RM

Introduction of light / Visual disturbance 18 BW, BG, DN, RM

Collision with below water structures such as boats RM

Changes in suspended solids – a plume will be RM produced during cable laying but will dissipate quickly 19

Underwater noise – during cable laying and from RM shipping 10, 11

Key: BW – Black-tailed godwit; BG – Brent goose; DN – Dunlin; RM – red-breasted merganser

4.6.33 Potential collision effects of buildings and aerial structures on SPA birds have been scoped out within the Stage 1 Assessment of Likely Significant Effects report. 4.6.34 Red-breasted merganser was not recorded within 500 metres of Chilling and Daedalus landfall site locations during TEP surveys 2013 to 2016. Red-breasted merganser is an SPA species for Portsmouth Harbour SPA/Ramsar only. More exposed habitats associated with Chilling and Daedalus are not suitable for this species. Therefore potential collision effects with below water structures such as boats have not been identified as a potential effect of the IFA2 development. Neither has potential effects of underwater noise been considered specifically with regards to red-breasted merganser.

Brent geese Population Trends 4.6.35 Brent geese are a migratory species that breed on the Arctic coasts of central and western Siberia and winter in Western Europe, with over half the population in

17 Merck, T. & Wasserthal, R. 2009. Assessment of the environmental impacts of cables. Biodiversity series: OSPAR Commission. Ware, K. 2009. OPSAR Assessment of the impacts of shipping on the marine environment. Monitoring and Assessment Series: OSPAR Commission.

18 Ware, K. 2009. OPSAR Assessment of the impacts of shipping on the marine environment. Monitoring and Assessment Series: OSPAR Commission.

19 Department for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform 2008. Review of cabling techniques and environmental effects applicable to the offshore wind farm industry. Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

southern England, the rest between northern Germany and northern France. Brent geese are likely to be present in the survey area during their overwintering period, October to March inclusive. 4.6.36 National waterbird counts undertaken by WeBS indicate that the brent goose population in the UK is declining following a period of growth. In the past 25 years (1987/77-2012/13) the population has increased by 5% and over the last 10 years (2002/03-2012/13) the population has increased by 33% but more recently the population has begun to decline.20 4.6.37 According to the WEBS annual report the threshold for identifying nationally important brent goose populations is 910 and the threshold for an internationally important population is 2,400. Therefore nationally important numbers of brent goose regularly use the field to the north of Chilling Cliff for loafing and feeding. Intertidal surveys also confirm that nationally important numbers of brent geese occur on intertidal habitats adjacent to Chilling Cliff and on one occasion internationally important numbers were recorded. 4.6.38 Currently the five-year peak mean for brent geese at Southampton water is 1,770 (09/10 to 13/14). Therefore the brent geese recorded within the survey area potentially represent nearly 100% of the Solent and Southampton Water SPA population.

Brent goose feeding behaviour 4.6.39 Intertidal eel-grass Zostera spp. is the main food plant for brent geese along with some green algaes and saltmarsh grasses. However in the winter brent geese have an increased tendency for terrestrial grassland feeding on farmland and amenity grasslands. Brent geese do not feed on spilt grain associated with stubble fields which are used by other migratory geese such as pink-footed goose. 4.6.40 Brent geese, like all geese, require open space and they are sensitive to prolonged disturbance. Field observations recorded in winter 2013 to 2014 indicate that wintering brent geese are tolerant to the regular dog walkers who use the area. 4.6.41 There is an intertidal and sub-tidal eelgrass bed used by feeding brent offshore from Brownwich Lane. This is an important feeding area for brent geese as well as being an Annex 1 habitat under the Habitats Directive. Adverse effects on this valuable habitat should be avoided during the installation of cables in the intertidal and near shore area.

20 Holt, C.; Austin, G.; Calbrade, N.; Mellan, H.; Hearn, R.; Stroud, D.; Wotton, S.; Musgrove, A., Waterbirds in the UK 2013-14 Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

5. Impact Assessment

5.1 Potential Effects 5.1.1 The following impacts with the potential to affect SPA qualifying features are considered in this Stage 2 Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment.

Bird Disturbance on land at Chilling

5.1.2 As a part of the embedded mitigation for the IFA2 project, activities with the potential to disturb SPA birds will not be undertaken within the Chilling-Brownwich Wader Roost SINC during the winter period October to March. This seasonal restriction on works also applies to the Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) operation at Chilling and cable laying activities within 1km of the Chilling landfall site. This avoidance measure will greatly reduce the potential for disturbance of brent geese and other wintering SPA birds at Chilling. 5.1.3 Development activities with the potential to disturb SPA birds onshore at Chilling that will be avoided from October to March will include:  Grassland/topsoil stripping within Chilling-Brownwich Wader Roost SINC  Trenching works within Chilling-Brownwich Wader Roost SINC  HDD operations within Chilling-Brownwich Wader Roost SINC including site establishment as well as drilling and cable installation  Works associated with the joint bay at the north boundary of the Chilling- Brownwich Wader Roost SINC.

Baseline information 5.1.4 There is some (albeit limited) potential for brent geese to be disturbed in late September. Although the majority of brent geese do not arrive until October it is not usual for some geese to arrive earlier. Goose numbers likely to be present in late September will be influenced by weather conditions but will be a small fraction of the threshold for a nationally important population count (910 for brent geese). 5.1.5 Oystercatchers are also regularly recorded using the Chilling-Brownwich Wader Roost SINC in flocks of up to 85 birds (cross ref Table). Curlew can also be recorded in this location but is more associated with the fields immediately adjacent to Workman’s Lane in numbers up to 100 individuals although flocks are less regular (see Table 4.2). 5.1.6 Oystercatcher and curlew numbers outside the period October to March will be much smaller in numbers although some passage migrants and non-breeding birds are likely to be present particularly in September and April.

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Characterisation of Effects 5.1.7 The duration of the landfall works and cable installation works at Chilling-Brownwich Wader Roost SINC will be 26 weeks, to be undertaken from April to September. 5.1.8 A total of approximately 4 km of trenching works (2 trenches each c.2 km long) is required, predominately within the Chilling-Brownwich Wader Roost SINC. Noise disturbance associated with the trenching works will be intermittent in nature but the visual disturbance will be continuous. It is likely that up to two machines would be undertaking the trenching works at any one time. The trenching works within the Chilling-Brownwich Wader Roost SINC would take up to six weeks to complete including 2 to 3 weeks digging and 2 to 3 weeks reinstatement. 5.1.9 Noise and visual disturbance associated with the HDD transition bay in the southeast corner of the Chilling-Brownwich Wader Roost SINC will be continuous. HDD drilling may be 24 hours a day if the project programme requires this. 5.1.10 Noise predictive modelling was undertaken to determine the likely levels of noise generated by the most significant noise related sources of disturbance at Chilling. Table 5.1 and Figure 5.1 illustrate predicted noise levels onshore at Chilling for different activities.

Table 5.1. Noise predictions at Chilling for different onshore and intertidal works activities Receptor Location Predicted noise levels (dB) Trenching HDD Jointing Pipejacking Bay (Chilling Lane) 1. 100m from HDD transition bay 49-58 58 56 37 2. 150m from HDD transition bay 45-53 54 52 37 3. 250m from HDD transition bay 41-50 50 48 38 4. 100m from proposed HDD 45-54 53 52 36 transition bay within intertidal habitat 5. 250m from proposed HDD 40-49 49 47 37 transition bay within intertidal habitat 6. 100m from jointing bay on north 49-58 43 56 48 field boundary 7 250m from jointing bay on north 41-50 43 48 41 field boundary 8. Centre of small field adjacent to 40-49 34 35 44 Workman’s Lane 9. Centre of large field adjacent to 38-47 33 34 43 Workman’s Lane

5.1.11 Noise predictions for Chilling-Brownwich Wader Roost SINC confirm that noise levels will not exceed 55dB in most parts of the field which are more than 100 metres from the proposed works. According to Cutts et al. (2013)21 noise levels of

21 Cutts, N., Hemingway, K. and Spencer, J. (2013). Waterbird disturbance mitigation toolkit: Informing estuarine planning and construction Projects. Version 3.2, March 2013 Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

55dB or lower are considered to represent a low disturbance impact for waders and wildfowl such as brent geese. 5.1.12 There is some undulation in the topography of the field at Chilling-Brownwich Wader Roost SINC which will sometimes block the line of sight of birds on the ground where those birds are more than 200 to 300 metres from the source of disturbance. However a large crane will be in operation at the HDD transition bay and it is assumed that the top of the crane will be visible from the majority of the SINC. Taking the worst case the machines associated with the trenching works will be no higher than 7 metres at the top of the arm (20 tonne machine). 5.1.13 Foraging curlew favour the small field adjacent to Workman’s Lane immediately west of Solent Breezes Holiday village rather than the Chilling-Brownwich Wader Roost SINC. Noise level predictions for this location are below the level that would trigger any behavioural response in the birds (see Table 5.1 – receptor location 8). Also there is much existing visual screening protecting the curlew feeding site including mature woodland and the Solent Breezes Holiday Village.

Assessment of Effect 5.1.14 When predicted noise disturbance effects are considered in isolation, it is likely that waterbirds will continue to use the majority of the Chilling-Brownwich Wader Roost SINC. However it is unusual for a works related disturbance to cause only a low disturbance effect where the source of disturbance is in the line of sight of the bird receptor. In the absence of mitigation, parts of the works within the Chilling- Brownwich Wader Roost SINC will be visible to birds using the SINC. 5.1.15 Without the use of protective screening it is predicted that brent geese as well as curlew and oystercatcher would be completely displaced from parts of the field within 100 metres of active works areas; although not all works areas will be active at any one time. It is also likely that these birds would occasionally show some behavioural response, such as flying, walking away or reduced feeding at distances of up to 250 metres from active works. The range of this effect could increase to 300m for brent goose, a high sensitivity species. 5.1.16 With the use of protective screening the magnitude of visual disturbance associated with the works would be reduced. It would not be possible to screen all of the works, such as the crane and the machines. Under such circumstances it is likely that the source of the disturbance would primarily be the crane within the HDD transition bay and the location of the diggers associated with the trenching works.

Conclusion 5.1.17 It is predicted that SPA birds would be displaced from parts of the Chilling- Brownwich Wader Roost SINC located within 100 metres of the proposed works. This is equivalent to 12.9 hectares out of a total 44.1 hectares within the Chilling- Brownwich Wader Roost SINC.

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

5.1.18 SPA birds may exhibit behavioural responses up to 250 to 300 metres from specific point sources of disturbance including the crane and the diggers. 5.1.19 The period of disturbance would be restricted to the last two weeks of September for brent goose and the months of September and April for the SPA wader species oystercatcher and curlew. SPA birds would only be present in low numbers during these periods equivalent to a small fraction of the total SPA population and GB thresholds. 5.1.20 There are no predicted disturbance effects on the small triangular field adjacent to Workman’s Lane which is favoured by foraging curlew. 5.1.21 Thus there are no likely significant effects predicted on SPA birds due to proposed IFA2 works onshore at Chilling.

Bird Disturbance on intertidal and marine habitats at Chilling

5.1.22 Embedded mitigation at Chilling includes a seasonal restriction on HDD and cable laying works within 1km of the landfall at Chilling. 5.1.23 Development activities with the potential to disturb SPA birds within intertidal and adjacent marine habitat at Chilling that will be avoided from October to March will include:  HDD operations within Chilling-Brownwich Wader Roost SINC including site establishment as well as drilling and cable installation  HDD works associated with the large shallow draft cable laying vessel;  Shallow water cable laying operations between Chilling landfall and Daedalus landfall with the large shallow draft cable laying vessel and the various installation support vessels.

Baseline Information 5.1.24 Intertidal and marine habitat adjacent to Chilling Cliff is regularly used by brent geese in the winter. This location can occasionally attract internationally important numbers of this species in mid-winter when goose numbers in the region are at their highest. There is some limited potential for brent geese to be disturbed in late September when works will be permitted in this location. 5.1.25 Survey evidence indicates that brent geese associated with Chilling-Brownwich Wader Roost SINC leave the locality at dusk and fly to an alternative site some distance to the west of Chilling to roost. However, the possibility that brent geese occasionally roost on the sea adjacent to Chilling Cliff cannot be entirely discounted. 5.1.26 Eight SPA bird species were recorded within 500 metres of the Chilling redline boundary during one or both of the intertidal bird surveys. Brent goose was by far the most numerous. Other SPA species recorded included bar-tailed godwit, black- tailed godwit, curlew, grey plover, redshank, ringed plover, sanderling and turnstone; the second highest peak count concerns turnstone of which 62 Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

individuals were recorded in winter 2014-15. Six waterbird assemblage species were also recorded (see Table 4.3). 5.1.27 SPA wader numbers at Chilling outside the period October to March will be much smaller compared to the winter months although some passage migrants and non- breeding birds are likely to be present particularly in September and April. 5.1.28 The intertidal habitat at Chilling Cliff is located relatively close to a major shipping lane and small boats are often seen in the distance from the shore. Fewer boats were observed within 1 km at distances where disturbance from boats might influence bird distribution on the shore. 5.1.29 The Chilling shore is used by some walkers including dog walkers at low tide who access the shoreline via a public footpath near Brownwich Stream near the Chilling landfall site. Thus shorebirds do experience a pre-existing level of human disturbance. Bait diggers do not operate in the vicinity of the landfall site.

Characterisation of Effects

5.1.30 There would be little or no noise or visual disturbance effects associated with the onshore HDD transition bay on intertidal birds because this works area would be set back at least 100 metres from the cliff edge. Therefore waterborne vessels and operations will constitute the main source of disturbance of SPA birds using intertidal habitat within the Solent and Southampton Water SPA. The distance of the exit points from the high water mark (at least 500 metres) will also result in little vessel movement in the shallow subtidal zone which has the potential to result in disturbance to geese. 5.1.31 The duration of the landfall works and cable installation works at Chilling-Brownwich Wader Roost SINC would be 26 weeks to be undertaken from April to September. However waterborne vessels would only be present off Chilling Cliff intermittently for the first 16 weeks. 5.1.32 The actual HDD drilling works would take 16 weeks to complete (two weeks for each of the seven drills plus some time to establish the construction base). During each drill a barge is likely to be present at the HDD exit point for 3-4 days, assisting with the installation of the duct in the hole. It is likely that the cable pull-in will only begin once all ducts have been installed. The pull-in will take place from the shallow water installation vessel which may ground itself while the pull-in operation takes place, or it may be designed to jack itself up on seabed legs. So the vessel will be very static during the HDD drilling works reducing its potential to disturb birds. The cable pull-in operation will take 3-4 days per duct. 5.1.33 In addition to this a cable-lay vessel will undertake shallow water cable laying operations between the Chilling Landfall and the Daedalus landfall. Based on typical cable laying rates of 100-400m per hour each AC cable will take around 14 days to install. Shallow water cable installation will require a number of installation support vessels (rigid inflatable boats), anchor handling vessels, a cable burial vessel, guard vessels as well as the shallow draft cable lay vessel. For the HVAC system up to 6 AC cables and one fibre optic cable would be laid; an operation that would take 3 – 4 months. However shallow water cable laying works would only be undertaken for a much shorter period within 1km of the Chilling landfall site and Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

waterborne vessels would again only be present intermittently. Each cable would take 1-2 weeks to install. 5.1.34 Noise predictions for Chilling intertidal area confirm that noise levels will not exceed 55dB on parts of the shore which are more than 100 metres from the proposed works. According to Cutts et al. (2013)22 noise levels of 55dB or lower are considered to represent a low disturbance impact for waders and wildfowl (see Table 5.1 – receptor location 4).

Assessment of Effect 5.1.35 If predicted noise disturbance effects are considered in isolation, it is likely that waterbirds will continue to use the majority of the Chilling intertidal habitat. However it is unusual for a works related disturbance to cause only a low disturbance effect where the source of disturbance is in the line of sight of the bird receptor. The main visual impact will concern the vessels involved in HDD and cable laying. 5.1.36 Taking into account the findings of the literature review and applying a worst case scenario it is predicted that disturbance from boats will completely displace birds within 300 metres of the vessels. Disturbance from the vessels has the potential to cause low to moderate disturbance in birds up to 600 metres away. A low to moderate level of the disturbance could occasionally result in behavioural responses leading to reduced feeding rates within 600m of the vessels. 5.1.37 Vessel related disturbance would affect brent geese loafing on the sea and feeding on the sea-grass bed near to the Chilling landfall site. The HIWWT Seagrass Inventory 2014 provides a distribution map for the sea-grass in this location. It is estimated that approximately 10% of the sea-grass would be within the 300 metres disturbance zone and 60% would be within 600 metres of the disturbance zone. So vessel-disturbance would not completely prevent geese from feeding on the sea- grass in September but the area of sea-grass available to the geese would be reduced. 5.1.38 Visual disturbance from vessels could also affect SPA wader birds using the intertidal habitat. On the basis that the HDD exit location will be 500 metres from Mean High Water it is calculated that around 1km of intertidal habitat within the SPA/Ramsar site would fall within 600 metres of the vessel concerned. This is equivalent to approximately 26 hectares of tidal flats habitat. There is 2,542 hectares of tidal flats within the Solent and Southampton Water Ramsar site (47.9% of 5,307 hectares)23. Therefore approximately 1% of the total tidal flats habitat within the Solent and Southampton Water Ramsar site would be affected by disturbance from waterborne vessels.

22 Cutts, N., Hemingway, K. and Spencer, J. (2013). Waterbird disturbance mitigation toolkit: Informing estuarine planning and construction Projects. Version 3.2, March 2013

23 jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/RIS/UK11063.pdf?Solent and Southampton Water · PDF file Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

5.1.39 Turnstone is the most numerous SPA wader species that uses the stretch of shoreline within 500 metres of the proposed landfall site. Turnstone is extremely tolerant to disturbance and it habituates rapidly. It is not envisaged that this species would be negatively affected by vessel related disturbance. 5.1.40 The Ramsar species oystercatcher can be present in moderate numbers within 500 metres of the Chilling landfall site and was the most abundant wader species in this location. Oystercatcher is a moderate sensitivity species that will also habituate to on-going activity. Reduced feeding rates within intertidal habitat may occur in this species and possibly occasional flight but on-going displacement is unlikely.

Conclusion 5.1.41 It is predicted that up to 1 km of intertidal habitat could be affected by visual disturbance from waterborne vessels, equivalent to approximately 1% of the tidal flats habitat within the Solent and Southampton Water Ramsar site. This impact also has the potential to affect brent goose feeding on the sea-grass bed in this location. In addition to this the same vessels could displace brent geese from marine habitats up to 300 metres from the vessels. Moderate to low disturbance effects are predicted for some wader species using nearby intertidal habitat including the most numerous wader species oystercatcher; full displacement is very unlikely. 5.1.42 There are no likely significant effects predicted on SPA birds due to proposed IFA2 works onshore at Chilling.

Bird Disturbance on land at Daedalus (within the Airfield)

5.1.43 No seasonal restriction has been placed on winter working at Daedalus. This measure was not considered necessary since the Daedalus site is of considerably less importance for SPA birds compared with the Chilling site. 5.1.44 There are three different methods being considered for cable installation at the Daedalus landfall site. These are referred to at Landfall options 1 to 3. The development activities with the potential to disturb SPA birds would vary to some extent for each of the landfall options, however disturbance effects within the Daedalus Airfield will be similar for all three landfall options. 5.1.45 Development activities with the potential to disturb SPA birds onshore at Daedalus (within the airfield) would include:  Trenching works within Daedalus  Pipejack (landfall options 1 and 2) or HDD transition bay (landfall option 3) operations within southwest corner of airfield including site establishment as well as drilling and cable installation  Works associated with the joint bay at the north boundary of the airfield  Construction of converter station.

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Baseline information 5.1.46 Only one SPA species was recorded within 500 metres of the Daedalus airfield works redline boundary during the three winter bird survey years. A peak count of two ringed plover was recorded within 500 metres of the Daedalus redline boundary in winter 2013-14 but this species was not recorded on any other occasion during 2013 to 2016. No SSSI species were recorded during 2013 to 2016. Five other waterbird species being predominately gulls (see Table 4.4). 5.1.47 Small numbers of oystercatcher are occasionally recorded in the vicinity of the Daedalus Airfield control tower during the daily airfield monitoring to inform bird control measures.

Characterisation of Effects 5.1.48 The duration of the cable installation works at Daedalus airfield would be 26 weeks. 5.1.49 A total of approximately 5.4 km of trenching works is required (three trenches alongside each other that are all approximately 1.8 km long), within the Daedalus Airfield. Noise disturbance associated with the trenching works will be intermittent in nature but the visual disturbance will be continuous. It is likely that up to two machines would be undertaking the trenching works at any one time. The trenching works within Daedalus Airfield would take up to 6 weeks to complete including 2 to 3 weeks digging and 2 to 3 weeks reinstatement. 5.1.50 Noise and visual disturbance associated with the HDD or pipejack transition bay in the southwest corner of the Daedalus Airfield would be continuous during the daytime. Night time drilling may be undertaken if project timescales require it. 5.1.51 Noise predictive modelling was undertaken to determine the likely levels of noise generated by the most significant noise related sources of disturbance at Daedalus. Table 5.2 and Figure 5.2 illustrates predicted noise levels onshore at Daedalus for different activities.

Table 5.2. Noise predictions for at Daedalus for different onshore and intertidal works activities Receptor No. and Predicted noise levels (dB) Location Converter Trenching HDD Jointing Pipejacking Station Bay (Chilling Lane) 10 100m from proposed 43-45 49-58 41 56 41 opencut/pipejack cable route near centre of airfield 11 250m from proposed 44-46 41-50 40 48 40 opencut/pipejack cable route near centre of airfield 12 100m from pipejack 37-39 52-61 58 40 58 reception / launch pit (option 1) 12 100m from pipejack 37-39 52-61 58 40 58 reception / launch pit (option 2) 12 100m from transiton joint 37-39 52-61 58 40 58 bay (option 3) Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Receptor No. and Predicted noise levels (dB) Location Converter Trenching HDD Jointing Pipejacking Station Bay (Chilling Lane) 13 250m from pipejack 38-40 44-53 50 42 50 reception / launch pit (option 1) 13 250m from pipejack 38-40 44-53 50 42 50 reception / launch pit (option 2) 13 250m from transiton joint 38-40 44-53 50 42 50 bay (option 3) 14 100m from proposed HDD 34-36 37-46 53 35 53 cable route 15 250m from proposed HDD 34-36 35-44 48 34 48 cable route 5.1.52 Noise predictions for Daedalus Airfield confirm that noise levels would not exceed 55dB in most parts of the airfield which are more than 100 metres from the proposed works. According to Cutts et al. (2013)24 noise levels of 55dB or lower are considered to represent a low disturbance impact for waders and wildfowl species. 5.1.53 The extent of the proposed converter station is 120 metres by 205 metres with a maximum height of 22 metres. The temporary laydown area for the construction would be an additional three hectares. The converter station will be approximately 1.5km from the coast and the Solent and Southampton Water SPA. Lighting for the converter station would be controlled to avoid unnecessary illumination. The converter station will have a 2 year construction period. 5.1.54 Access routes between the site compound and each works area will use existing access, perimeter and internal roads and the new access road to Broom Way. This will minimise disturbance of grassland habitat at the centre of the airfield.

Assessment of effect 5.1.55 If predicted noise disturbance effects are considered in isolation, it is likely that birds would continue to use the majority of the Daedalus Airfield. However it is unusual for a works related disturbance to cause only a low disturbance effect where the source of disturbance is in the line of sight of the bird receptor. In the absence of mitigation, parts of the works within the Daedalus Airfield would be visible to birds using the site. 5.1.56 The Daedalus Airfield is not generally used by SPA bird species. Two ringed plover were recorded on one occasion in a location between 250 metres and 500 metres from the proposed works. This species is a low sensitivity species extremely tolerant to disturbance and able to habituation readily to anthropogenic activities. 5.1.57 The works at Daedalus Airfield would displace small numbers of oystercatcher that are known to occasionally use the southwest part of the site. Oystercatcher is listed

24 Cutts, N., Hemingway, K. and Spencer, J. (2013). Waterbird disturbance mitigation toolkit: Informing estuarine planning and construction Projects. Version 3.2, March 2013

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

under “Noteworthy Fauna” for the Chichester and Langstone Harbour Ramsar site on account of peak counts in the winter. The proposed works at Daedalus Airfield are approximately 10.6km west of this Ramsar site. It is possible that these birds form a part of the Ramsar population as well as contributing to the overall waterfowl assemblage associated with Solent and Southampton SPA/Ramsar.

Conclusion 5.1.58 It is predicted that proposed works onshore associated with Daedalus Airfield would not result in any likely significant effects on SPA birds. 5.1.59 The proposed works within the airfield would result in the temporary displacement of small numbers of oystercatcher that occasionally use the southwest part of the site. Oystercatcher is a Noteworthy Fauna for the Chichester and Langstone Harbour Ramsar site and a waterbird assemble species for all three SPAs including Solent and Southampton Water SPA. 5.1.60 There are no likely significant effects predicted on SPA/Ramsar birds due to proposed IFA2 works onshore at Daedalus.

Bird Disturbance on intertidal and marine habitats at Daedalus 5.1.61 No seasonal restriction has been placed on winter working at Daedalus. This measure was not considered necessary since the Daedalus site is of considerably less importance for SPA and Ramsar birds compared with the Chilling site. 5.1.62 There are three different methods being considered for cable installation at the Daedalus landfall site. These are referred to at landfall options 1 to 3. 5.1.63 Development activities with the potential to disturb SPA birds onshore at Daedalus (within the airfield) will include:

 Trenching works within Daedalus intertidal area (landfall option 1 only)  Pipejack or HDD operations between Monks Hill car park and the southwest corner of airfield including site establishment as well as drilling and cable installation (landfall options 1 and 2)  HDD works associated with the large shallow draft cable laying vessel (landfall option 3 only);  Shallow water cable laying operations between Chilling landfall and Daedalus landfall with the large shallow draft cable laying vessel and the various installation support vessels.

Baseline Information 5.1.64 Six SPA bird species were recorded within 500 metres of the Daedalus redline boundary during the three intertidal bird survey years, of which turnstone was the most numerous with 34 individuals being recorded in this area in winter 2014-15. Other SPA species recorded included brent goose, dunlin, Mediterranean gull, ringed plover and sanderling. Note that a peak count of only two brent geese was Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

recorded in winter 2015-16. Two SSSI species and ten other waterbird assemblage species were recorded (see Table 4.5). 5.1.65 Natural England has advised that small and moderate sized flocks of oystercatcher use this field occasionally for feeding. A single oystercatcher was recorded in this location during a TEP survey on 14th December 2015. It is possible that the field is used mostly in the early morning, rather than the main part of the day, so oystercatcher may have been under recorded during the TEP survey.

Characterisation of Effects

Option 1: Open cut and pipe-jacking 5.1.66 Landfall option 1 will entail employing open cut techniques in the intertidal zone to a Transition Joint Bay (TJB) within the Monks Hill car park. The TJB would be an excavated pit 45 metres by 10 metres by three metres deep. The cable route would be pipe-jacked from the car park to the airfield under option 1A. If the distance between the car park and the airfield was too great it will be necessary to undertake two pipe-jack operations and use land between the car park and the airfield to function as an intermediate pipe-jack reception and launch area (option 1B). Under option 1B the car park would also be used as a temporary laydown area and car park for construction vehicles.

Option 2: HDD and pipe-jacking 5.1.67 Under this option the cable route would be HDD drilled from the sea to land between the Monks Hill car park and Stubbington Lane where a Transition Joint Bay (TJB) would be established. This approach avoids open cut works in the intertidal area. From the TJB the cable would be HDD or pipe-jacked to a reception/launch location in the airfield.

Option 3: HDD 5.1.68 Under this option the subsea cables would be installed using HDD all the way to the airfield. No works would be required in the intertidal area, Monks Hill car park or the land between there and Stubbington Lane. 5.1.69 Under all three options the HVDC and HVAC cables would connect the TJB to the converter station (a distance of 1.7 km). The duration of landfall operations is estimated to be 26 weeks. The subsea HDD exit point for options 1 and 2 would be approximately 300 metres from HWM on the intertidal area.

Assessment of Effect 5.1.70 Noise levels predicted within intertidal habitat 100 metres from the open trench works associated with landfall option 1 and the TJB works within Monks Hill car park associated with landfall options 1 and 2 are likely to be below 55dB (see Table 5.2 – receptor location 14). Based on literature review findings it is unlikely that noise will cause disturbance of shorebirds. However it is unusual for a works related disturbance to cause only a low disturbance effect where the source of Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

disturbance is in the line of sight of the bird receptor. In the absence of mitigation parts of the works within the Daedalus landfall area would be visible to birds using the site. 5.1.71 The open cut works proposed under landfall option 1 would cause both noise and more significantly substantial visual disturbance in the intertidal area on the periphery of the Solent and Southampton Water SPA/Ramsar site. It is predicted that visual disturbance from open cut works in the intertidal area would displace moderate and high sensitivity shorebirds such as oystercatcher from intertidal habitat 100 to 150 metres from the works. For the same species it is predicted that the birds would show some behavioural response up to 300 metres from the works. The duration of the beach closure would be two months. 5.1.72 Works within Monks Hill car park under landfall option 1 would be partially screened from intertidal habitat by the existing row of beach huts. The works in this location would not increase the magnitude of disturbance affecting shorebirds beyond that caused by the open cut works. Works in this location would last two to three months and would be concurrent with proposed open cut works on the intertidal habitat. 5.1.73 Works within the field between Monks Hill car park and Stubbington Lane under landfall options 1 and 2 would displace small flocks of oystercatcher from using the field for the duration of the works. These works would last for four months under landfall option 2 and three months for landfall option 1. 5.1.74 Applying a worst-case scenario, disturbance from boats may completely displace birds within 300 metres of the vessels. Disturbance from the vessels has the potential to cause low to moderate disturbance in birds up to 600 metres away. Behavioural responses might include reduced feeding rates within 600m of the vessels. 5.1.75 Visual disturbance from vessels could affect SPA wader birds using the intertidal habitat. Assuming that vessels approach the shore to within 300 metres of MHWM it is calculated that around 1km of intertidal habitat would fall within 600 metres of the vessel concerned. Approximately 50% of the intertidal habitat affected lies within the Solent and Southampton Water SPA/Ramsar site. 5.1.76 Turnstone is the most numerous SPA wader species that uses the stretch of shoreline within 500 metres of the proposed landfall site. Turnstone is extremely tolerant to disturbance and it habituates rapidly. It is not envisaged that this species would be negatively affected by vessel related disturbance. The Chichester and Langstone Harbours Ramsar species oystercatcher can be present in moderate numbers within 500 metres of the Chilling landfall site. Oystercatcher is a moderate sensitivity species that will also habituate to on-going activity. Reduced feeding rates within intertidal habitat may occur in this species and possibly occasional flight but on-going displacement is unlikely.

Conclusion 5.1.77 It is predicted that up to 1km of intertidal habitat could be affected by visual disturbance from waterborne vessels, 50% of which lies within the Solent and Southampton Water SPA/Ramsar site. 5.1.78 Moderate to low disturbance effects are predicted for some wader species using intertidal habitat including the most numerous wader species, oystercatcher. Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

However oystercatcher numbers are low at Daedalus and the species will habituate the noise and visual disturbance over time. Turnstone, the most numerous SPA species is extremely tolerant to disturbance and will habituate rapidly. 5.1.79 There are no likely significant effects predicted on SPA/Ramsar birds due to proposed IFA2 works onshore at Daedalus.

Potential effects on sea-grass

5.1.80 It should be noted that, as a part of the agreed embedded mitigation for the project, Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) at the Chilling A/C cable landfall will bypass underneath all intertidal habitat and therefore remove any potential for direct disturbance to seagrass.

Baseline Information

5.1.81 Detailed baseline information on seagrass in relation to the IFA2 project is presented in Chapter 6 (Benthic ecology), section 6.4, of the Offshore Environmental Statement. A summary of key information is included here. 5.1.82 The Southern Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Association (Southern IFCA) created a Prohibition of Gathering (Sea Fisheries Resources) in Seagrass Beds byelaw in exercise of its powers under sections 155 and 156 of the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009, to protect seagrass beds in the region. 5.1.83 Seagrass protected area 15, ‘Chilling’, is a rectangular area located along the intertidal and shallow subtidal at the Chilling A/C landfall. 5.1.84 No seagrass protected areas are present at the Daedalus landfall. 5.1.85 Phase 1 intertidal ecology walkover surveys of the landfall locations were undertaken for the IFA2 project by RSK marine ecologists in November 2014 (at Chilling) and May 2015 (at Daedalus). The results of these surveys are presented in Appendix 6.3 of the Offshore ES for IFA2. 5.1.86 Information on the extent of seagrass beds at Chilling was obtained from the Hampshire and Isle of Wight Wildlife Trust (HIoWWT) for years up to 2013. Further data was obtained via Natural England in April 2015, based on surveys in 2014 and 2015. This data was used to map the extent of the seagrass beds and is presented in Chapter 6 (Benthic ecology) of the ES. 5.1.87 The Ramsar information sheet (RIS) for Solent and Southampton Water describes a number of marine, intertidal, coastal (supratidal) and terrestrial habitats present across the entire site and includes reference to Zostera seagrass. 5.1.88 The intertidal walkover survey at the Chilling landfall recorded patchy Zostera¸ the location of which fell entirely within the boundaries of that mapped previously by HIoWWT/NE. 5.1.89 No seagrass was recorded at the Daedalus landfall, and this location is not considered further for seagrass.

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Characterisation of Effects

Direct disturbance 5.1.90 Direct disturbance or damage to seagrass within the IFCA protected seagrass area at Chilling will not be possible, as HDD will bypass this entirely. Sediment deposition 5.1.91 As noted in Chapter 5 (Physical Environment) of the ES, the worst-case scenario for fine sand deposition is at a distance of 167m from the cable installation, with expected seabed level changes >5cm (i.e. beyond changes that may be expected to occur naturally in a short space of time) not being manifested more than 30m from the route centreline. Impacts would be temporary. 5.1.92 There may be potential for impacts to seagrass located within the Chilling protected area from sediment deposition. This may occur as a result of installation activities close to shore, such as deployment and recovery of the HDD barge, and use of vessels in shallow water. The HDD barge and exit point would be located at least 167m seaward of the boundary of the IFCA protected seagrass area to avoid the worst-case prediction for deposition of fine sand material (167m). Release of Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) fluids 5.1.93 The HDD techniques proposed for use during construction works at the Chilling landfall to avoid intertidal sensitivities will involve HDD fluid release events, which will occur when the drilling for each conduit breaks out onto the seabed. For each HDD it is anticipated that there will be 3 discrete discharge periods, which total 250- 350m3 of drilling fluid. As there may be up to 6 conduits at Chilling, the worst-case is that this event occurs 6 times. It is expected that the HDD works are likely to take 4 – 6 months. The release events, which may create a visible plume of sediment at the sea surface and deposition of material onto the seabed, will occur in discrete periods (e.g. periods of hours) over the 4 – 6 month period over which the drilling takes place. The discharged drilling fluid will comprise approximately 10% solids and 90% water. Bentonite is a naturally occurring mineral which is effectively made up of very fine clay particles. Potential impacts from release of the drilling mud will be limited by a number of factors. The drilling mud will be non-toxic, biologically inert, and Cefas-approved, and it will also break down in saline water. Impacts will also be temporary and very limited in extent. In a worst-case, it is predicted that any coarser material resulting from the release event will deposited onto the seabed within a few metres, or a few tens of metres, from the breakout point. It is expected that the majority of the drilling fluid will be dispersed into the water column, and will only settle out in very low energy conditions. The plume of suspended material is expected to be quickly dispersed from the HDD exit point by tidal action with current flows in the Solent ranging from 0.6 – 1.3 m/s. Local tidal information (see Chapter 5, Physical Environment of the ES) indicates that tidal currents run along the shore (NW-SE), with little on-offshore (NE-SW) movement, which would also assist in dispersing fluids away from the seagrass. Temporary increases in suspended sediment 5.1.94 As noted in Chapter 5 (Physical Environment) of the ES, it is predicted that it would take, respectively, tens of minutes, and a few hours, for concentrations of coarse and fine sediment suspended during construction to return to background levels. Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

5.1.95 Temporarily increased suspended sediment could potentially result in impacts to seagrass. However, benthic communities such as seagrass in the region are adapted to natural suspended sediment conditions (wide variation across the year and occasionally high levels, e.g. 3-15mg/l in the Solent/shallow water) see Chapter 5 Physical Environment). It is also important to note that suspended sediment concentrations can increase substantially and rapidly as a result of natural storm conditions, and sediment suspended as a result of cable installation will be of a similar nature.

Assessment of Effect

Direct disturbance 5.1.96 No impacts are possible as HDD will bypass seagrass entirely. Sediment deposition 5.1.97 The HDD barge and exit point would be located at least 167m seaward of the boundary of the IFCA protected seagrass area. As the worst-case distance predicted for sediment deposition is 167m, it will not be possible for sediment (beyond quantities encountered in natural conditions) to be deposited in the IFCA protected seagrass area, and no impacts will therefore occur. Release of Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) fluids 5.1.98 As the HDD exit points will be located at least 167m seaward of the protected seagrass area at Chilling, no impacts to seagrass are anticipated from deposition of HDD fluid onto the seabed. Temporary increases in suspended sediment 5.1.99 Independent assessment of Zostera noltii by the Marine Life Information Network (MarLIN) gives ‘low’ sensitivity and ‘high’ recoverability of this species to this potential impact. Taking into account one-off temporary disturbance within the range of natural variability, overall significance of potential impacts to the protected seagrass bed at Chilling from temporary increases in suspended sediment will therefore be negligible.

Conclusion

5.1.100 No impacts are predicted to seagrass. Specifically, mitigation in the form of the use of HDD, and a minimum distance (167m) for the HDD exit point/barge from the IFCA protected seagrass area boundary, will prevent any impacts from occurring to seagrass at Chilling.

Potential effects on other intertidal habitats

5.1.101 This section addresses intertidal habitats in general. Seagrass is specifically considered in the above section. 5.1.102 It should be noted that, as a part of the agreed embedded mitigation for the project, Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) at the Chilling A/C cable landfall will bypass Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

underneath all intertidal habitat and therefore remove any potential for direct disturbance to intertidal habitats. 5.1.103 It should also be noted that an HDD option may be selected for the Daedalus landfall, which would also remove any potential for direct disturbance to intertidal habitats.

Baseline Information

5.1.104 Detailed baseline information on intertidal habitats in relation to the IFA2 project is presented in Chapter 6 (Benthic ecology), section 6.4, of the Offshore Environmental Statement. A summary of key information is included here. 5.1.105 The Ramsar information sheet (RIS) for Solent and Southampton Water describes a number of marine, intertidal, coastal (supratidal) and terrestrial habitats present across the entire site, of which the landfalls only represent a small part. The habitats of estuaries, intertidal flats (including Zostera seagrass), saline lagoons, saltmarsh, rocky boulder reefs are the only marine and intertidal habitats listed on the RIS. 5.1.106 Phase 1 intertidal ecology walkover surveys of the landfall locations were undertaken for the IFA2 project by RSK marine ecologists in November 2014 (at Chilling) and May 2015 (at Daedalus). The results of these surveys are presented in Appendix 6.3 of the Offshore ES for IFA2. 5.1.107 The intertidal walkover survey at the Chilling landfall found the upper intertidal area to be composed of a steep shingle bank of flint and shell debris. The mid shore is made up of a matrix of sand/shingle/gravel, with a pronounced gravel scar running across the lower section of the mid shore. A large flat expanse of rippled medium / fine sand is found in the lower shore. Isolated patches of sparse Zostera were recorded, although it is acknowledged that the time of year in which the survey was conducted (November) may have coincided with the onset of natural winter die- back of this species. The location of recorded Zostera fell entirely within the boundaries of that mapped previously by HIoWWT. The only other conspicuous fauna recorded was dense beds of the common and widespread sand mason worm Lanice conchilega, which are not currently of any specific nature conservation value. 5.1.108 The intertidal walkover survey at the Daedalus landfall recorded (going seaward from the upper intertidal) barren shingle, a shingle and sand matrix, gravel scar, and then rippled sand flat in the lower shore. Conspicuous fauna included large dense beds of the sand mason worm Lanice conchilega, which were found to be widespread throughout the zone. Other fauna observed included lug worm Arenicola marina casts, and clumps of live slipper limpet Crepidula fornicata. No seagrass was recorded, or is known to occur at this site. 5.1.109 Based on the results of intertidal walkover surveys and other data sources, the RIS- listed habitats of saline lagoons, saltmarsh, and rocky boulder reefs can therefore be excluded from the current assessment, as they are not present at either the Chilling or Daedalus landfalls.

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Characterisation of Effects

Direct disturbance 5.1.110 Direct disturbance or damage to intertidal habitats at Chilling will not be possible, as HDD will bypass this entirely. 5.1.111 If HDD is selected for Daedalus, direct disturbance or damage to intertidal habitats will also not be possible, as HDD will bypass this entirely. 5.1.112 If an open-cut methodology is selected for the intertidal area at Daedalus, this could result in a worst-case impact of eight trenches (two for the DC cable, and six for AC cabling), each 5m wide. The trenches are likely to be constructed using a landbased plant, with removed material being stored temporarily to the sides of the trenches. The land based plant would use a trackway of approximately 5m in width to excavate the trench, a supporting matter (such as bog-matting) would be laid along the trackway. The proposed works will not require the installation of a temporary haul road on intertidal habitat. Sediment deposition 5.1.113 As noted in Chapter 5 (Physical Environment) of the ES, the worst-case scenario for fine sand deposition during construction is at a distance of 167m from the cable installation, with expected seabed level changes >5cm (i.e. beyond changes that may be expected to occur naturally in a short space of time) not being manifested more than 30m from the route centreline. Impacts would be temporary. 5.1.114 If an open-cut methodology is selected for the intertidal at Daedalus, this could result in a temporary worst-case impact of sediment deposition from spoil material deposited from the excavation of the eight trenches. These spoil piles will be an estimated 6m wide. When these spoil piles are tidally inundated, finer material will be winnowed out and deposited elsewhere in the intertidal and shallow subtidal environment. However, this will be limited by the fact that each intertidal trench requiring spoil piles will take a maximum of two days to complete. Release of Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) fluids 5.1.115 As noted above, HDD will occur at Chilling, and may occur at Daedalus. 5.1.116 As noted above, HDD fluid release events will occur when the drilling for each conduit breaks out onto the seabed. As there may be up to 6 conduits at Chilling, and 8 conduits at Daedalus the worst-case is that this event occurs 14 times. It is expected each set of HDD works (i.e. a set of approximately 6 drills at Chilling and possibly a set of 8 conduits at Daedalus) is likely to take 5 and 6 months respectively. The release events, which may create a visible plume of sediment at the sea surface and deposition of material onto the seabed, will occur in discrete periods (e.g. periods of hours) over the 4 – 6 month period over which the drilling takes place. Each event will release between 250-350 m3 of HDD fluid, comprising approximately 10% solids (a combination of bentonite mud and seabed cuttings from the drill) and 90% water. Bentonite is a naturally occurring mineral which is effectively made up of very fine clay particles. Potential impacts from release of the drilling mud will be limited by a number of factors. The drilling mud will be non-toxic, biologically inert, and Cefas-approved, and it will also break down in saline water. Impacts will also be temporary and very limited in extent. In a worst-case, the amount of material deposited onto the seabed will likely extend within a few tens of Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

metres from the breakout point. The plume of suspended material is expected to be quickly dispersed by tidal action with current flows in the Solent ranging from 0.6 – 1.3 m/s. Temporary increases in suspended sediment 5.1.117 As noted in Chapter 5 (Physical Environment) of the ES, it is predicted that it would take, respectively, tens of minutes, and a few hours, for concentrations of coarse and fine sediment suspended during construction to return to background levels. 5.1.118 Temporarily increased suspended sediment could potentially result in impacts to seagrass. However, benthic communities in the region are adapted to natural suspended sediment conditions (wide variation across the year and occasionally high levels, e.g. 3-15mg/l in the Solent/shallow water) see Chapter 5 Physical Environment Offshore Environmental Statement). It is also important to note that suspended sediment concentrations can increase substantially and rapidly as a result of natural storm conditions, and sediment suspended as a result of cable installation will be of a similar nature.

Assessment of Effect

Direct disturbance 5.1.119 No direct disturbance impacts are possible at Chilling as HDD will bypass intertidal habitat entirely. This will also be the case if a HDD option is selected at Daedalus. 5.1.120 For the open cut option at Daedalus, as noted in the ES, independent assessment by MarLIN provides information on the likely impacts to the two main biotopes recorded at the landfall. The biotope ‘LS.LCS.Sh.BarSh – Barren littoral shingle’ is ‘not sensitive’ to this impact. The biotope LS.LSa.MuSa.Lan – 'Lanice conchilega in littoral sand’ has ‘moderate’ sensitivity to this impact, and ‘high’ recoverability. Impacts are therefore predicted as either not occurring, or being of minor significance. Sediment deposition 5.1.121 For the open cut option at Daedalus, as noted in the ES, independent assessment by MarLIN provides information on the likely impacts to the two main biotopes recorded at the landfall. The biotope ‘LS.LCS.Sh.BarSh – Barren littoral shingle’ is ‘not sensitive’ to sediment deposition. The biotope LS.LSa.MuSa.Lan – 'Lanice conchilega in littoral sand’ has ‘low’ sensitivity to this impact, and ‘high’ recoverability. Impacts are therefore predicted as either not occurring, or being of negligible-minor significance. Release of Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) fluids 5.1.122 As the HDD exit points at Chilling will be located at least 167m seaward of the protected seagrass area (which extends into the shallow subtidal), no impacts to intertidal habitats are anticipated from deposition of HDD fluid onto the seabed. 5.1.123 At Daedalus, HDD exit points will be located tens of metres seaward of mean low water, and therefore drilling fluids be unlikely to reach the intertidal. If any HDD fluid were to be deposited onto the intertidal, impacts would be similar to that already discussed above (for sediment deposition) i.e. either not occurring, or being of negligible-minor significance. Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Temporary increases in suspended sediment 5.1.124 Independent assessment by MarLIN provides information on the likely impacts to the two main biotopes recorded at the landfall. The biotope ‘LS.LCS.Sh.BarSh – Barren littoral shingle’ is ‘not sensitive’ to sediment deposition. The biotope LS.LSa.MuSa.Lan – 'Lanice conchilega in littoral sand’ has ‘very low’ sensitivity to this impact, and ‘very high’ recoverability. Impacts are therefore predicted as either not occurring, or being of negligible significance.

Conclusion 5.1.125 Impacts to other intertidal habitats would either not occur, or be temporary and of negligible-minor significance.

Noise and vibration effects on Atlantic salmon

Baseline Information 5.1.126 Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) are present as a qualifying feature (but not a primary reason for site selection) of the River Itchen SAC that discharges to the north of the proposed IFA2 landfall, and would therefore use the Solent/Southampton Water in their upstream and seaward migrations. 5.1.127 The mouth of the Itchen is located approximately 10km upstream of the Chilling landfall. 5.1.128 As noted in Chapter 7 (Fish and Shellfish Ecology) of the Offshore Environmental Statement, downstream (seaward) migration of smolts occurs in April-June, and migration to fully marine environments is thought to be rapid. Upstream (landward) migration to rivers occurs from July-September for grilse (salmon that have spent one winter at sea) and March-October for multi-sea-winter (MSW) fish.

Characterisation of effects

Noise and vibration 5.1.129 No high-impact percussive works (e.g. piling, blasting) will be undertaken as part of the IFA2 development. 5.1.130 Underwater noise and vibration may occur from HDD operation at the Chilling, and (if an HDD option is selected) possibly at the Daedalus, landfalls. As noted above, drilling events may occur up to 6 times (at Chilling) and up to 8 times at Daedalus. The entire period of HDD works, assuming a worst-case of both Chilling and Daedalus, is expected to last 4-6 months (plus associated onshore construction area establishment). However it is expected that actual drilling activity (which could result in underwater noise and vibration emissions) for each drill will only take place for approximately 3-5 days. Sound arising from the drill head will be attenuated by the distance above the head and the sediment surface, and therefore sound levels which do reach the water column will generally be much reduced from their source levels. The relatively shallow depth of water at the proposed exit point will also Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

reduce the transmission of noise between the exit point and other areas of the channel. 5.1.131 No information is readily available specifically regarding noise emissions from HDD and its potential impacts on salmonid fish. However, a study (Nedwell et al., 2003) conducted in Southampton Water on caged brown trout (considered to be analogous to salmon in terms of hearing physiology) monitored in-water noise levels, and behavioural reactions of the fish (by CCTV) in reaction to both impact piling and vibro-piling, both of which are considered to be a likely significantly greater source of underwater noise than HDD. These impacts are therefore used as an extremely conservative assessment of possible HDD noise to salmon. 5.1.132 For impact piling, there was no evidence of gross physical injury, or that trout reacted, at the monitoring range of 400m. 5.1.133 For vibropiling, there was no evidence that trout reacted even at less than 50m from source. Vibropiling noise could not be detected above ambient noise (e.g. from shipping activity) at a distance of 417m from the source.

Temporary increases in suspended sediment 5.1.134 As noted in Chapter 5 (Physical Environment) of the offshore ES, the worst-case scenario for temporary increases in suspended sediment concentrations as a result of construction activity is that they reach a maximum distance of 4km for a few hours. 5.1.135 It is expected that the majority of sediment resuspended into the water column during construction will only settle out in very low energy conditions. The plume of suspended material is expected to be quickly dispersed from the nearshore area by tidal action with current flows in the Solent ranging from 0.6 – 1.3 m/s (see Chapter 5, Physical Environment of the Offshore ES). 5.1.136 Temporarily increased suspended sediment caused by construction activities could potentially result in impacts to fish such as salmon. However salmon will be able to avoid these impacts due to their mobility and adaptation to a wide range of naturally occurring suspended sediment conditions (including occasional high levels, e.g. 3- 15mg/l in the Solent/shallow water) (see Chapter 5 Physical Environment of the Offshore ES). It is also important to note that suspended sediment concentrations can increase substantially and rapidly as a result of natural storm conditions, and sediment suspended as a result of cable installation will be of a similar nature. 5.1.137 Most fish species that use estuaries, such as salmon, will be inherently tolerant of naturally high and variable background levels of suspended sediment. Migratory diadromous fish (notably salmon contributing to the River Itchen SAC) are further adapted to the highly turbid waters of estuaries and rivers in flood conditions.

Assessment of Effect 5.1.138 RSK contacted the EA by email with specific regard to salmon on 14th and 21st April 2016. Natural England requested that potential impacts of sediment, EMF and noise/vibration on migratory fish (especially salmon in the River Itchen SAC) should be addressed in the ES/HRA. However, Natural England advised that they would defer to the EA’s advice and local expertise on migratory fish/salmon. Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

5.1.139 The EA (Rebecca Long - Fisheries, Biodiversity & Geomorphology; Solent Team) responded by email on 22 April 2016 confiming that their main concerns with regards to fish are generally noise, vibration, release of suspended sediment and barriers to migration. The EA also noted that, given the location where the cable is to come ashore, these risks will be minimal, and it is for this reason that the matters were not raised by them during scoping. 5.1.140 The EA further noted that for the purposes of completeness they would recommend that the identification of these risks is included in the environmental assessment and brief justification of why these have not been considered further is included. Finally, the EA noted that should any risks be identified as significant, then this will need to be addressed adequately. In summary it is confirmed that the EA did not have any specific further information or comments in relation to salmon beyond those already noted by NE.

Noise and vibration 5.1.141 Using the above information, it is likely that, using an extremely conservative estimate, salmon may only be able to detect and/or react to HDD noise within approximately 400m of the source. This noise will be limited to a worst case of 14 events (6 at Chilling, 8 at Daedalus, if HDD selected) each of 3-5 days duration. 5.1.142 The narrowest width of Southampton Water, measured from the Chilling landfall, is approximately 2.6km. Using the extremely conservative estimate of 400m, HDD noise would therefore be undetectable by salmon for 85% of the width of the channel, including the entire western part of Southampton Water. 5.1.143 Based on this, it is considered that noise and vibration from HDD works would be extremely unlikely to present an impact to migration of salmon contributing to the River Itchen SAC.

Temporary increases in suspended sediment 5.1.144 Based on the likely high tolerance of salmon to both ambient high levels of, and temporary increases in, suspended sediment; their likely rapid movement through estuaries (en route to either the River Itchen or the sea); and the fact that construction-related suspended sediment will not affect the entire width of Southampton Water, it is not expected that impacts to salmon from temporary increases in suspended sediment will occur.

Conclusion

5.1.145 Based on the above, it is concluded that it is extremely unlikely that will be impacts to salmon (including their migration pathways) contributing to the River Itchen SAC.

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

6. In-Combination Assessment

6.1 Scope of Assessment 6.1.1 SPA/Ramsar bird species can potentially range over a relatively wide area from designated sites. Therefore, the in-combination assessment includes any major largescale developments within a 10km radius of the Solent and Southampton Water SPA/Ramsar site, Portsmouth Harbour SPA/Ramsar site or the Chichester and Langstone Harbours SPA/Ramsar sites. 6.1.2 Projects included in the in-combination effects assessment include renewal energy installations, housing developments exceeding 50 dwellings, large mixed use developments and the demolition of a power station.

Table 6.1 provides details of all projects and plans included within the assessment. No. Planning Ref. Development Status Name/Address APP/14/00364 Solar Park Pending Land north of 1 Manor Farm buildings, Manor Road, Hayling Island APP/15/00122 Retrospective application for Consented 13-14 Langstone 2 installation of 14 solar (30.03.15) High Street, panels. Havant, PO9 1RY APP/14/00547 125 residential units and a Consented Land west of 3 water retention area (29.04.15) Horndean Road and south of Southleigh Road APP/14/00360 53 dwellings with new Consented Coldharbour 4 vehicular access (03.10.14) Farm - Phase 2, Coldharbour Farm Road, Emsworth APP/15/01435 Residential development Pending Land South of 5 (175 dwellings) with Bartons Road, associated infrastructure Havant APP/15/00919 Mixed use development Consented 58-64 Station 6 comprising 76 residential 23.12.15 Road, Hayling unit; and 1000sqm of Island accommodation with parking, access, landscaping and surface water drainage. APP/15/00420 14 apartments, 6 car parking Consented 9-11 St Georges 7 spaces, ground floor office, 17.07.15 Walk, cycle store and refuse stores. Waterlooville, PO7 7TU APP/14/00863 Demolition of existing Consented Land north of 8 buildings and erection of 55 25.02.15 Bartons Road, dwellings; access, Havant landscaping, car parking and open space. Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

No. Planning Ref. Development Status Name/Address APP/14/00767 Erection of 35 dwellings, Consented Land at Nursery 9 community building and 12.06.15 Fields, Denvilles, allotments with associated Havant access, parking, landscaping, open space and works. APP/14/00488 131 dwellings with Consented Development 10 associated residential 29.09.14 Site North of, curtilages, parking and Goldring Close, turning areas, public open Hayling Island space and surface water attenuation features. APP/14/00032 246 residential dwellings. Consented Berewood Phase 11 24.06.14 2 Development Site, London Road, Purbrook, Waterlooville APP/13/00804 288 residential units with new Consented Woodcroft Farm 12 access roads, associated car 05.05.15 Development parking, open space and Site, Woodcroft landscaping. Lane, Waterlooville APP/13/00752 100 dwellings with Consented Proposed 13 associated parking, 02.10.13 Development landscape and public open Site Manor Farm space, relating to and Copseys appearance, landscaping, Nursery, Hallett layout and scale. Road, Havant APP/13/00721 92 dwellings 10.10.13 Land South of 14 Scratchface Lane, adjacent to A3M and West of Brooklands Road and Hillmead Gardens, Havant APP/13/00639 Mixed-use development 23.12.13 Land north of 15 comprising up to 59 Station dwellings and 1,250sqm of Road/East of light-industrial Furniss Way, accommodation West Town, Hayling Island APP/13/00266 Demolition of existing 11.02.14 Havant Retail 16 buildings and construction of Park, Portsdown 86 dwellings with associated Hill Road, parking, landscaping and Havant open space with acoustic fencing and improvements to existing site access. P/15/0260/OA 120 dwellings, with new Pending land north of 17 vehicle access from Cranleigh Road Cranleigh Road, public open and west of space inc. play area, Wicor Primary pedestrian links to public School open space, surface water drainage and landscaping. P/14/1187/FP Demolition of Existing Approved Units 1-4 & 18 18 Buildings and Erection of Lidl 11.11.15 Castle Trading Estate Fareham Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

No. Planning Ref. Development Status Name/Address Food Store with 70 car Hampshire Po16 parking spaces 9sf N/A Welborne Plan: major new Approved N/A 19 community planned for the 12.05.15 north of Fareham including up to 6,000 homes, workplaces, schools, green space, shops and local community services. New roads and utilities infrastructure also required. P/14/0081/FP Two storey office block, Approved Daedalus - 20 single storey workshop 02.05.14 Innovation blocks and associated Centre - Hangars external works. East Lee On The Solent N/A Improvements to the A27 Approved N/A 21 09.09.14 P/15/1279/OA Mixed use development. Up Pending Longfield Avenue 22 to 1,100 residential - Land To South dwellings; 80 bed care home; - health centre; primary school, public house/ restaurant and retail units; plus open space. Sustainable Drainage Systems, meadow creation and pedestrian access along with woodland planting and allotments. Includes new access routes via new Stubbington Bypass. 16/00142/FUL 23 storey student halls of Pending Number One 8 23 residence comprising 520 Surrey Street study/bedrooms, communal Portsmouth PO1 facilities, cycle store, bin 1EJ store, landscaping and shop. 15/01912/FUL Three-storey school building Pending King Richard 24 including playing field space, School Allaway demolition of existing Avenue buildings, associated Portsmouth PO6 landscape, access and 4QP ancillary works 15/00821/FUL Extension to form 595-bed Unknown Zurich House 25 student accommodation; car Decision: Stanhope Road parking and pedestrian link conditional Portsmouth PO1 from Stanhope Road to permission 1DU Victoria Park & other associated landscaping 14/00128/FUL Retail Store, Petrol Filling Unknown Tesco Fratton 26 Station, new access/egress Decision: Way Southsea arrangements, car parking, conditional PO4 8FA service yard, highway and permission footpath works, landscaping, and other associated works after demolition of existing structures. 13/00993/OUT Mixed use development of up Pending Trafalgar Wharf 27 to 163 dwellings and one 10 Hamilton Road Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

No. Planning Ref. Development Status Name/Address storey building with related Portsmouth PO6 landscaping areas and 4PX parking; a flood defence barrier; following demolition of existing buildings 13/00853/FUL Park and Ride facility, Pending Land East Of 28 together with access, Decision: M275 Tipner landscaping, boundary Conditional Lane Portsmouth treatment and associated Permission works, including maintenance access route. 13/00525/FUL 16-18 storey 228-bedroom Pending 8 Surrey Street 29 hotel Decision: Portsmouth PO1 Condition 1AZ permission 23.09.13 15/00313/VOC Amend parking and open Consented 154 Fareham 30 storage in yard areas. 03.09.15 Road Gosport Hampshire 13/00538/FUL Alterations to building Consented 154 Fareham 31 L elevation and alterations to 07.02.14 Road Gosport existing access from Lederle Hampshire Lane. 14/00491/DET EIA Outline application. Consented Royal Hospital 32 S Mixed use development: 23.10.15 Haslar, Haslar demolition and erection of Road Gosport 286 residential units; Hampshire community facilities Inc. retirement units; offices and business units; a health centre together with road links and car space. 12/00343/FUL 175 residential units together Consented Grange Road, 33 L with parking and open space. 21.12.12 Howe Road And Nimrod Drive Rowner Gosport Hampshire 15/00154/FUL Car parking strategy. Consented Royal Clarence 34 L 16.10.15 Yard Weevil Lane Gosport Hampshire EIA –Outline application for Consented Land At HMS 35 11/00282/OUT employment and led mixed (28/01/16) Daedalus Chark use scheme; Retail Units; Lane Lee-On- 200 Residential units; 32 The-Solent Units of Care; car parking, Hampshire PO13 upgraded vehicular and 9FL pedestrian access routes and, open space provisions. 13/10347 Installation of new hexane Decided Block 39b 36 tank (Screening opinion) (EIA Fawley Refinery, required) Fawley 10.04.13 13/10346 Installation of new storage Decided Block 116, 37 unit (EIA Fawley Refinery, (Screening opinion) required) Fawley 10.04.13 Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

No. Planning Ref. Development Status Name/Address 13/10092 Demolition of substation 2A Decided Sub Station 2a & 38 & 4B (Screening Opinion) (EIA 4b Exxonmobil required) Chemical Limited, Cadland 11.02.13 Road, Hardley, Fawley SO45 3NP 12/99306 Demolition of 16 storage Decided Fawley Refinery, 39 tanks (Screening Opinion) (EIA Cadland Road, required) Hardley, Fawley 11.12.12 So45 1tx 15/10953 Solar farm (Screening Decided Land south of 40 Opinion) (EIA not Bury Road, Approx 9.3ha required) Marchwood

13/10383 Replacement care home Decided Forresters 41 (Screening Opinion) (EIA not Respite Centre, required) 2 Southampton 11/04/13 Road, Hythe SO45 5GQ 14/10248 Demotion of power station Decided Sub Station 2a & 42 (Habitat Screening Opinion) (EIA not 4b Exxonmobil required) Chemical 29/05/2014 Limited, Cadland Road, Hardley, Fawley SO45 3NP

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

6.2 Assessment

6.2.1 For each of the identified projects or plans, the relevant Environmental Statement (ES) (where available) was reviewed to see if any impacts had been identified on relevant bird species or groups that could potentially lead to an in-combination effect with the proposed IFA2 development. The species/bird groups included in the assessment were:  Brent goose;  SPA/Ramsar wader spe cies;  Any other waterbird species (including gulls).

6.2.2 All impacts taken from each relevant ES are based on the assessment of the impact after mitigation. It is assumed that any relevant mitigation is successful and will reduce the level of impact to that predicted in the ES. 6.2.3 The findings from this review are shown in Table 6.2. If the species was recorded as present within the ES but no conclusion of residual impact was made then this is shown as “Not Reported” (NR). A number of projects did not contain ES chapters or other sufficient information to assess the ecological impact. For these projects the cells in Table 6.2 are greyed out.

Table 6.2. In-combination effects assessment 6.2.4 6.2.5No. Development Impacts identified Brent Goose Wader Species Other wintering waterbirds Solar Park NR. NR. 1 Solar Park 2 Residential 3 development Residential Recreational Recreational 4 development measures to measures to reduce increases reduce increases in recreational in recreational disturbance. No disturbance. No significant significant impacts following impacts following mitigation mitigation identified. identified. Residual impact = Residual impact = NR NR

Residential 5 development Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

6.2.4 6.2.5No. Development Impacts identified Brent Goose Wader Species Other wintering waterbirds Mixed use Avoidance/compe Avoidance/compe 6 development nsation strategy nsation strategy produced to produced to ensure that no net ensure that no net loss of Brent loss of wader goose foraging foraging habitat habitat from from development. development. A S106 A S106 agreement also agreement also put in place to put in place to mitigate for any mitigate for any recreational recreational disturbance disturbance impact. impact. Residual impact = Residual impact = NR NR Residential 7 development Residential 8 development Residential 9 development. Residential Brent geese Mitigation to Mitigation to 10 development identified on avoid/minimise avoid/minimise adjacent field. noise disturbance noise disturbance Mitigation to on wintering birds on wintering birds avoid/minimise and monitoring, and monitoring, noise disturbance resulting in no sig. resulting in no sig. on wintering birds effect. effect. and monitoring, Residual impact = Residual impact = resulting in no sig. NR NR effect. Residual impact = NR Residential 11 development Residential Only considered to 12 development be of site value for wintering birds Residential * * * 13 development Residential 14 development Residential Measures to Measures to 15 development enhance habitat enhance habitat for Brent geese for waders implemented to implemented to compensate for compensate for habitat losses. No habitat losses. No residual effect. residual effect. Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

6.2.4 6.2.5No. Development Impacts identified Brent Goose Wader Species Other wintering waterbirds Residential Without Without 16 development mitigation, mitigation, increase in visitor increase in visitor pressure likely to pressure likely to have significant have significant effect on SPA, effect on SPA, therefore therefore contribution made contribution made to NE mitigation to NE mitigation scheme to reduce scheme to reduce visitor pressure. visitor pressure. No overall impact. No overall impact. Residential No Brent geese No SPA birds Mitigation provided 17 development recorded on site recorded on site to reduce visitor or adjacent land or adjacent land pressure. No during winter bird during winter bird overall impact surveys. surveys. Mitigation Mitigation provided to provided to reduce visitor reduce visitor pressure. No pressure. No overall impact. overall impact. Retail Store 18 Welborne * * * 19 Plan: Residentia l and community services. Office blocks. 20 Improvements * * * 21 to A27. Mixed use Negligible visitor Negligible visitor Minor beneficial 22 development. pressure effects pressure effects long term effects predicted for wintering birds. Student 23 accommodation Replacement 24 school building Student 25 accommodation Retail Store 26 Residential Negligible Negligible Negligible residual 27 development. residual impact residual impact on impact on red- black-tailed breasted godwit merganser Park and Ride No impacts No impacts No impacts 28 facility following following following implementation of implementation of implementation of conditions conditions conditions Hotel 29 Car parking 30 alterations Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

6.2.4 6.2.5No. Development Impacts identified Brent Goose Wader Species Other wintering waterbirds Building 31 elevation alterations Mixed use Contribution to Contribution to Contribution to 32 development mitigation scheme mitigation scheme mitigation scheme to reduce visitor to reduce visitor to reduce visitor pressure pressure pressure assumed. assumed. No assumed. No No residual impact. residual impact. residual impact. Residential 33 development Car parking 34 strategy. Mixed use Neutral residual Neutral residual Neutral residual 35 development impacts impacts impacts New hexane * * * 36 tank Installation of * * * 37 storage unit

Demolition of * * * 38 substations Demolition of 16 * * * 39 storage tanks Solar farm * * * 40

Replacement * * * 41 care home

Demolition of * * * 42 power station

Greyed out cells = no impacts identified; * = insufficient information available to make assessment.

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Summary of In-Combination Impacts 6.2.6 A total of 11 projects assessed identified potential impacts on target species/groups including brent goose or SPA/Ramsar waders. It is assumed that these 11 projects will be carried out at the same time as the proposed IFA2 project. Many of these schemes included mitigation to reduce impacts on these species. Mitigation measures included providing visual screening, habitat enhancement for these species, or contributing to a centralised scheme to reduce the impacts of increased visitor pressure in the area. It is unknown whether this centralised scheme is yet in operation. 6.2.7 All of the projects for which sufficient information was available which identified any residual impact on any SPA/Ramsar birds following mitigation assessed the impact as negligible or neutral. It is assumed that the four projects which did not state their residual impacts, but stated that mitigation would be put in place, would result in a negligible residual impact on SPA/Ramsar bird species. 6.2.8 Two projects stated that negligible residual impacts on SPA/Ramsar birds would arise from the development and it is assumed that the four other projects which did not state their residual impacts would also result in negligible impacts. The remaining five projects where potential impacts on SPA/Ramsar species could occur were predicted to have neutral residual impacts. 6.2.9 The mixed use development at location 35 concerns the redevelopment of the Daedalus Aerodrome site. The red line for this development overlaps with components of the IFA2 project within the Airfield site. The EIA for this development confirms that there will be neutral residual impacts on SPA birds. 6.2.10 It can therefore be concluded that there will be no significant impact on the Solent and Southampton Water SPA/Ramsar, Portsmouth Harbour SPA/Ramsar or the Chichester and Langstone Harbours SPA/Ramsar either alone or in-combination with other plans or projects.

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

7. Conclusions on Site Integrity

7.1.1 An Assessment of Likely Significant Effects (ALSE) Report (TEP Report Ref: 3221.20.05) was submitted to Natural England in March 2016. A number of Natura 2000 sites were scoped out from further assessment including the Solent and Dorset Coast pSPA and a number of other maritime and terrestrial sites. 7.1.2 The ALSE Report identified potential effects on the following Natura 2000 sites:

 Solent and Southampton Water SPA (Site code: UK9011061)  Solent and Southampton Water Ramsar (Site code: UK11063)  Portsmouth Harbour SPA (Site code: UK9011051)  Portsmouth Harbour Ramsar (Site code: UK11055)  Chichester and Langstone Harbours SPA (Site code: UK9011011)  Chichester and Langstone Harbours Ramsar (Site code: UK11013)  River Itchen SAC (Site code: UK0012599)

Effects on wintering birds 7.1.3 As a part of the embedded mitigation for the IFA2 project, activities with the potential to disturb SPA birds will not be undertaken within the Chilling-Brownwich Wader Roost SINC during the winter period October to March. This seasonal restriction on works also applies to the HDD operation and cable laying activities within 1 km of the Chilling landfall site. This avoidance measure will greatly reduce the potential for disturbance of brent geese and other wintering SPA birds at Chilling. 7.1.4 SPA birds would be displaced from parts of the Chilling-Brownwich Wader Roost SINC located within 100 metres of the proposed works. This is equivalent to 12.9 hectares out of a total 44.1 hectares within the Chilling-Brownwich Wader Roost SINC. SPA birds may exhibit behavioural responses up to 250 to 300 metres from specific point sources of disturbance. 7.1.5 The period of disturbance would be restricted to the last two weeks of September for brent goose and the months of September and April for the SPA wader species oystercatcher and curlew. SPA birds would only be present in low numbers during these periods. 7.1.6 There are no predicted disturbance effects on the small triangular field adjacent to Workman’s Lane which is favoured by foraging curlew. 7.1.7 It is predicted that up to 1 km of intertidal habitat could be affected by visual disturbance from waterborne vessels, equivalent to approximately 1% of the tidal flats habitat within the Solent and Southampton Water Ramsar site. This impact also has the potential to affect brent goose feeding on the nearest parts of the sea- grass bed in this location and completely displace brent geese from marine habitats up to 300 metres from the vessels. Moderate to low disturbance effects are predicted for some wader species using nearby intertidal habitat but full displacement is very unlikely. Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

7.1.8 The Daedalus airfield site is of negligible interest for SPA and Ramsar bird species. The proposed works within the airfield would result in the temporary displacement of small numbers of oystercatcher that occasionally use the southwest part of the site. Oystercatcher is a Noteworthy Fauna for the Chichester and Langstone Harbour Ramsar site. 7.1.9 It is predicted that up to 1 km of intertidal habitat at Daedalus could be affected by visual disturbance from waterborne vessels, 50% of which lies within the Solent and Southampton Water SPA/Ramsar site. 7.1.10 Moderate to low disturbance effects are predicted for some wader species using intertidal habitat including the most numerous wader species, oystercatcher. However these birds are likely to habituate. 7.1.11 There will be no adverse effects on the integrity of any of the Natura 2000 sites included in the assessment with respect to their bird populations.

Effects on sea grass and other Intertidal Habitats 7.1.12 No impacts are predicted to seagrass. Specifically, mitigation in the form of the use of HDD, and a minimum distance (167m) for the HDD exit point/barge from the IFCA protected seagrass area boundary, will prevent any impacts from occurring to seagrass at Chilling. 7.1.13 No direct disturbance impacts are possible at Chilling as HDD will bypass all intertidal habitat entirely. This will also be the case if a HDD option is selected at Daedalus. If open cut trenching techniques are used at Daedalus landfall site this would cause some localised sediment deposition which would be temporary and of negligible-minor significance. This will not result in an adverse effect on the integrity of the Solent and Southampton Water SPA/Ramsar site.

Effects on Atlantic Salmon 7.1.14 The narrowest width of Southampton Water, measured from the Chilling landfall, is approximately 2.6km. Using the extremely conservative estimate of 400m, HDD noise would be undetectable by salmon for 85% of the width of the channel, including the entire western part of Southampton Water. 7.1.15 Based on this, it is considered that noise and vibration from HDD works would be extremely unlikely to present an impact to migration of salmon contributing to the River Itchen SAC. 7.1.16 Based on the likely high tolerance of salmon to both ambient high levels of, and temporary increases in, suspended sediment; their likely rapid movement through estuaries (en route to either the River Itchen or the sea); and the fact that construction-related suspended sediment will not affect the entire width of Southampton Water, it is not expected that impacts to salmon from temporary increases in suspended sediment will occur. 7.1.17 Based on the above, it is concluded that it is extremely unlikely that will be impacts to salmon (including their migration pathways) contributing to the River Itchen SAC.

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Overall Conclusion 7.1.18 There are no adverse effects on the integrity of the following Natura 2000 sites as a result of the proposed IFA2 Interconnecter project, both alone, and in- combination with other projects:

 Solent and Southampton Water SPA (Site code: UK9011061)  Solent and Southampton Water Ramsar (Site code: UK11063)  Portsmouth Harbour SPA (Site code: UK9011051)  Portsmouth Harbour Ramsar (Site code: UK11055)  Chichester and Langstone Harbours SPA (Site code: UK9011011)  Chichester and Langstone Harbours Ramsar (Site code: UK11013)  River Itchen SAC (Site code: UK0012599)

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

APPENDICES

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Appendix 1: Detailed Project Description – Onshore and Offshore

1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Background IFA2 would comprise HVDC subsea cables passing through UK and French waters with onshore infrastructure at each end of the link; a typical design of an interconnector is illustrated in the schematic diagram at Inset 1 below

Inset1: Schematic Diagram of the main elements of an HVDC Interconnector

The proposed location of the converter station for the IFA2 development in England is at Daedalus Airfield near Lee-on-the-Solent, Hampshire. A predominantly offshore HVAC cable system would connect the IFA2 converter station to the GB Transmission Network via a proposed new 400kV substation at Chilling. The onshore Environmental Statement (ES) assesses the likely significant effects of the UK onshore elements of IFA2, referred to as the Proposed Development, and described in this appendix.

French Onshore Components of IFA2 The onshore infrastructure to be installed in the UK i.e. onshore HVDC and HVAC cables plus converter station would also be required in France. This infrastructure would be separately consented in France. Components would include:  HVDC subsea cables which would make landfall at Merville-Franceville-Plage to the east of built development;  From the landfall 28km of underground HVDC cables which would be laid through roads and agricultural land between the landfall and a converter station at Tourbe near La Hogue to the south east of Caen; and  A HVDC converter station adjacent the existing 400kV substation at Tourbe which would provide a HVAC connection directly to and from the existing grid system in France.

These components are subject to a separate EIA and consenting process in France.

Subsea Cables in UK and French Waters The subsea cables route is approximately 205km long between landfalls in France and England. The proposed HVDC cable route enters UK waters at the UK-France median line (Lat 50o 9' 33.64283" N; Long = 0 o 24' 30.21727" W) in the centre of the English Channel, approximately due south of the coastal town of Worthing, Sussex. After initially following an approximately northerly route, the cable would then proceed NNW, turning more sharply to a NW course in the region of the Owers light buoy. The cable then proceeds on a NW/WNW course up the Solent, approaching approximately equidistant between the Isle of Wight and the Hampshire coast. The route then approaches the Hampshire coastline, making landfall at Monks Hill Beach. Following conversion to AC at the proposed converter station at Daedalus Airfield, a short offshore AC section of the cable system would run between Monks Hill Beach and Chilling. The total length of the DC cable route in English waters is 105.9 km, from MHWS at Monks Hill Beach to the UK-France Median line. The total length of the AC cable route from MHWS at Chilling to MHWS at Monks Hill Beach is 5.3km. The subsea cables would be installed using large specialist vessels which are able to transport and lay long sections of cable on the seabed. The exact configuration of the subsea cables will be subject to detailed design, however, the HVDC would comprise two cables, probably laid in a paired bundle. There would be up to six HVAC cables, separated from each other by a maximum of 25m. The subsea cables would be either mass impregnated (MI) or Cross Linked Polyethylene (XLPE). These ‘offshore’ components are assessed in the IFA2 Offshore EIA. . A Water Framework Directive Assessment has been produced which include both offshore and onshore aspects of the IFA2 project within the UK.

UK Terrestrial Elements of IFA2 (the Proposed Development) The main UK components of the onshore and offshore elements of IFA2 are described below. The Proposed Development has been separated into three key elements: Daedalus Landfalls and Cables; the Converter Station and Chilling Landfall and Cables. The Proposed Development within each of these elements would comprise:

Daedalus Landfalls and Cables  Subsea HVDC cables between the Mean Low Water Springs (MLWS) and landfall at Monks Hill Beach;  Onshore HVDC cables between the landfall at Monks Hill Beach and the converter station to the north east of Daedalus Airfield;  Landfall at Monks Hill Beach to be via one of three options: o 1: Open cut and pipe-jacking o 2: HDD and pipe-jacking o 3: HDD only  Onshore HVAC cables between the converter station and the landfall at Monks Hill Beach; and  Subsea HVAC cables between Monk Hills Beach and the MLWS.

Converter Station  A converter station in the north east of Daedalus Airfield which would convert the HVDC to HVAC and vice versa.

Chilling Landfall and Cables  Subsea HVAC cables between the MLWS and landfall at Chilling;  Onshore HVAC cables between the landfall at Chilling and the proposed NGET substation at Chilling Lane.

As noted above, the new NGET substation required at the CSE compound is not part of the Proposed Development and will not be part of the planning application submitted to FBC. However the NGET substation has been included in the assessments of potential effects.

Cable Design and Installation Techniques

Cable Design There are two standard types of insulation used in high voltage cables that are under consideration for use in IFA2: cross linked polyethylene (XLPE), and mass impregnated (MI), comprising of oil-impregnated paper. Both XLPE and MI are proven technologies that have been used for existing UK interconnectors such as England-France (IFA), UK – Ireland (EirGrid EW1) and the UK-Netherlands (BritNed). MI and XLPE cables contain no free oil and in the event of severe mechanical damage such as rupture, no liquids or gases are released.

The HVAC cables would be XLPE; the HVDC cables could be either XLPE or MI; this would be decided prior to construction commencing. Both HVDC and HVAC onshore cables would be the same type as their respective subsea counterparts to minimise the complexity of the joint at the Transition Joint Bay (TJB). The subsea cables would be designed to withstand mechanical forces during installation and repair or recovery operations and would have an additional layer of galvanised steel wire armour which is not required for the onshore cables. As with other electrical equipment, the rating of cables is typically limited by the maximum operating temperature of the insulation surrounding the conductors The high voltage applied to a cable causes heat to be generated in the insulation material, in addition to the heating of the conductor by the current. In the case of cables, the temperature of the cable is determined by:  Four sources of heat generation: o Electrical current passing through the electrical resistance of the conductor(s); o Induced currents generated in the metallic screen of the cable o Direct heating of the electrical insulation caused by the alternating voltage, this is only significant in higher voltage cables; and o Other external sources of heat in the ground such as other adjacent cables.

 The ability to conduct heat away from a buried cable: o The way cables are laid is a factor, cables laid in ducts are usually less able to dissipate the heat than those buried directly in the ground; o The thermal resistivity of the ground surrounding the cable or duct. Thermal resistivity itself is affected by the type of soil and the level of moisture it contains; and o The temperature of the surrounding soil, which is itself affected by ambient air temperature.

In addition to this, the electrical insulation also acts as a thermal insulator, slowing the escape of heat into the ground. At higher voltages, more electrical insulation is required, making heat escape more difficult. The cable conductor therefore has to be made larger to prevent it from overheating. When cables are buried in the ground they must be deep enough to provide clearance for activities on the ground surface, typically around one metre deep, and they must be kept a certain distance apart to limit mutual heating. As set out above, the temperature of the soil is an important factor in determining cable ratings; at deeper levels, soil temperature is less affected by ambient air temperature and is likely to be warmer than at the surface. As a result, when cables are buried more deeply than the usual one metre, for example two to three metres, as is in the case

in Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD), they must be spaced further apart. These factors determine the width of the permanent cable swathe (easement).

Fibre Optics A fibre-optic cable (FOC), or cables would be installed within the same swathe in the same trench or in a duct in close proximity to the HVDC and HVAC power cables, alternatively it may be integrated into the DC and AC cables. They would be installed at the same time, in the same corridor and would not create an additional environmental disturbance. They would not require a separate drill at the landfall as they will be installed with the main cables as part of their drill.

Installation Techniques

Open Cut - Onshore For open cut installation, the surface of the temporary easement would be cleared of vegetation prior to a trench being mechanically excavated, except where there is any risk to existing services or environmental constraints, where digging by hand would be used. For the onshore HVDC cables there would be two cables side by side in a trench approximately 1.5m deep and 1.5m wide. For the onshore HVAC cables for IFA2 it is anticipated there would two trenches, approximately 1.5m deep and 3m wide, separated by 3m; there would be three cables, side by side in each trench. A layer of cement bound sand (CBS) would be placed in the bottom of the trench and surrounding the cables to help dissipate heat generated when the cables are in operation. Concrete slabs would be installed approximately 60cm above the top of each cable and plastic warning tape would be laid directly over the slabs. The material excavated from the trench would be used to complete backfilling of the trench with topsoil replaced to ensure that the upper profile of the backfilled trench is restored to the previous condition.

Open Cut - Intertidal In the UK, the proposed HVDC cable route makes landfall close to Daedalus airfield in Hampshire. The landfall area forms the transition between the onshore and offshore environments, and is where the marine and land cables (which are of different thicknesses due to additional armour on the marine cable) are joined together in the TJB. Installation of the cable systems through the intertidal zone at Daedalus may be carried out using either an “open-cut” technique or by horizontal directional drilling (HDD).

If open-cut is selected, this will involve the construction of trenches from above the high water mark (of spring tides) through the intertidal zone to the mean low water mark (Daedalus Landfall Option 1). There are a number of options for laying the AC cables through the intertidal zone. They will be:  laid in individual trenches, the excavation of which will take place to coincide with each arrival of the AC lay vessel. The excavated material will be placed alongside the trench and then backfilled once the cable is laid. Time permitting; the backfilling operation would ideally be carried out during the same tidal period as excavation, however, it is more likely that from the commencement of intertidal excavation through to the completion of backfilling would take place over a two day period. The operation would involve several excavators; or  laid onto the surface of the beach, then excavators working in pairs will be used to excavate trenches either side of the cable to a depth of around 2m, the cable will then sink under its own weight. Again excavation and backfilling would ideally be completed within a two day period; or  ducts will be laid into trenches for later installation of the cables. Land based excavators would excavate the trenches and the ducts will be installed using means of land based equipment to a depth of approximately 2m a continuous operation, either in groups of three or individually in separate trenches, such that work is completed quickly on the intertidal zone. Beyond the MLWM the ducts would be installed using an open cut method by means of an excavator barge. The ducts may need to be weighted in order to assist the lowering of them into the trench, concrete or steel is commonly used for this. The ducts would probably be sunk with a ‘float and sink’ method, which involves pumping water into the ducts to sink them into the trench. The trench is then backfilled. It is possible to complete the excavation, duct installation and backfilling in close duration in order to shorten the overall installation time, ideally directly after each other as part of the same operation. Once ducts are installed access is only required to the seaward and landward ends of them to enable the cables to be pulled through when the lay vessel arrives. Installation of the AC and DC cables through the intertidal zone will be separate operations, however, if the use of ducts is planned for both AC and DC cables, the ducts for all cables may be laid sequentially. The base of each trench will be approximately 1m in width, around 2m deep and have a width at ground level of approximately 5m. The trenches will probably be constructed using land based plant, with removed material being stored temporarily to the side of the trenches (estimated pile width of 6m). The land based plant would use a trackway of approximately 5m in width to excavate the trench, a supporting material (such as bog-matting) would be laid on the shore along the trackway. A 25m to 30m working corridor will be required for installation of the DC cable system in the intertidal area and a 80m working corridor will be required for installation of AC cables (requiring up to six trenches), with each working corridor

narrowing up the point of the beach car park at Daedalus. The intertidal construction works area would be fenced off for safety reasons. It is expected that the total period for works on the intertidal area at Daedalus associated with an open-cut installation would be approximately 16 weeks, with excavation and reinstatement of each trench taking a maximum of 2 days. The timing of construction of the trenches will be scheduled to coincide with the arrival of the cable-lay vessels. The period over which the individual trenches are opened will be minimized as far as possible to prevent dispersal of excavated sediment. Disturbance of the sediment on the surface of the beach will result in some material being remobilized upon the next period of tidal inundation, however levels of remobilized sediment are expected to be relatively low and comparable to naturally occurring levels in the area. Once the trenches were constructed, the cable-lay vessel would ground itself at the end of the trench and the cables would be pulled through the trench and into the TJB by a temporary winch located behind the TJB. Buoyancy may be added to the cables to assist in the pull-in. Once the cables have been pulled into the trench the excavated material will be replaced and it is expected that subsequent tidal movements will naturally re-profile the area affected by construction work. If ducts have been pre-installed (wither using open cut or via HDD), the cables will be winched into these using messenger wires laid within the ducts. The open cut method may be used for the installation of both the DC and AC cables in the intertidal areas at Daedalus. There are rock and wooden groynes present in this area at the Daedalus landfall which form part of the sea defences. The rock groynes are present to the south east of the proposed landfall and are unlikely to be affected by the construction, whereas an open cut technique in the intertidal area would require two or three timber groynes to be removed during the works. The works would be timed to avoid stormy conditions and full reinstatement of the groynes would be undertaken following installation using an agreed specification. The groynes would be unaffected if the HDD technique is used at the landfall. The HDD technique is described in the following section on trenchless techniques. However, the landfall at Chilling is characterised by engineering constraints (eroding cliffs) and environmental sensitivities in the intertidal zone (e.g. seagrass beds). These factors require a construction method that installs ducts beneath these constraints, through which the cables can be drawn. It is therefore proposed to use HDD techniques to install the ducts (approximately 15” diameter and constructed from polyethelene) from the onshore works area out to a point in the subtidal zone, thus avoiding direct effects on the cliffs and intertidal area. The coastal erosion has been considered in proposing a location for the HDD drilling entry point (100m onshore from the current cliff position), and the transition joint pits will also be sited well enough back from the cliffs to be unaffected by any possible erosion problems. The HDD technique is described in the following section on trenchless techniques.

Trenchless Installation Methods Some cables route sections may be installed in ducts if required to navigate constraints or to provide increased installation flexibility. These are known as ‘Trenchless’ techniques or methods. Ducts can be installed prior to the installation of the cables, and reduce the length of time required for installation at specific times, for example if there are seasonal constraints. For IFA2, two different types of trenchless installation may be employed: pipe- jacking and HDD. The method(s) to be employed would be determined during the detailed design stage; one or both may be used. The main differences between the two methods are the depth and subsequent width of the installation swathe. Pipe- jacking is typically carried out approximately 1m below ground; HDD can be much deeper; for Chilling, up to 15m at its deepest part; for Daedalus up to 25m depth. HDD would typically be used to avoid (by going under) significant individual local constraints, such as intertidal areas, whole woodlands, large rivers or internationally designated sites.

Pipe-jacking ‘Pipe jacking’ is a technique where a prefabricated pipe, of equal diameter to the cable duct, is pushed through the soil to allow the duct to be installed in the ground. Surplus soil (equal to the volume of the pipe) is then removed from the ground. This technique is useful to avoid disruption, for example to roads, and in this case also runways, taxiways and some environmental constraints.

Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) HDD is a technique which uses a drilling machine, which would be placed in an excavated launch pit, and has a drilling head which can be steered to control the depth and direction to emerge in a reception pit at the other end of the section to be drilled. Prior to the arrival of HDD equipment, the vehicle access, drilling pad and working area at the entry site would be prepared. Any uneven ground would be made level, and topsoil would be removed and stockpiled for reinstatement after completion of the works. Following this, the launch pit would be excavated, which has the dual purpose of containing drilling fluid (such as bentonite or similar) returns and ensuring any buried services are exposed prior to drilling commencing. A pump would be installed in the TJB to transfer any fluid returns to a mud recycling unit. The first stage of the HDD process would be the creation of a pilot hole. The exact technique for drilling the pilot hole would be determined following detailed ground investigation works.

The pilot hole would be stopped short of the exit point. This ensures that the drilling fluid is not accidentally discharged into the surrounding environment. Once the pilot hole is completed, the drill may undertake a number of passes to make the hole wider and would then pull ducts through. Thrust boring would use a hydraulic technique to push a pipe through the ground from the excavated pit to the receptor pit and then a duct would be installed through each hole created. A draw wire would be installed in each duct to be used to pull the cables through the ducts. Inset2 below shows a schematic diagram of an example of a cable landfall using HDD.

Inset2: HDD Cable Landfall Diagram (exaggerated vertical scale)

Jointing The onshore cables joints would be made using a container or similar enclosure around the area where the cables joints are required. The jointing process involves stripping back the material surrounding the conducting parts of the cables, making the joint and sealing this in a rigid casing to ensure that it is completely insulated and water tight. Once the joint is made, it would be buried and the land reinstated with no visible sign of the joint on the land surface.

Daedalus Landfall and Cables Detailed Project Description Inset3 Daedalus Landfall

The exact location of each of the cables at the landfall is to be finally selected and would depend upon the method of installation of the cables through the intertidal zone and onward into the Airfield. There are three options under consideration, each will be included in the planning application and each is considered in the topic assessments. They are:

Option 1: Open Cut and Pipe-jacking Subsea cables would be installed using open cut techniques through the Intertidal Zone and across the beach to a Transition Joint Bay (TJB) located in the Monks Hill car park, approximately 40m back from the beach. The TJB would be an excavated pit approximately 45m long by 10m wide by 3m deep. Here, the subsea cables would be jointed to onshore cables and once this is undertaken, the excavation would be backfilled to original ground levels. To route the cables from the TJB to the airfield, pipe-jacking would be used with a reception and launch pit at the southern end of the runway; the exact location of this is still to be determined.

Option 1A From the TJB, the cables would be ‘pipe-jacked’ directly into Daedalus Airfield, being ducted under the seawall, located immediately behind Monks Hill Car Park and Stubbington Lane. To carry out this installation, an area of the car park would be excavated to 2m and then a duct installed from there in to the field, passing under the seawall; which would give coverage from becoming exposed. It is anticipated that 1-2m would be maintained at all times, protecting the integrity of the seawall.

Option 1B If a direct route from the Monks Hill Beach car park into the airfield is not feasible from a single pipe-jacking operation, an additional area will be utilised for two separate pipe jacking and/or drilling operations at the land between Stubbington Lane and Monks Hill car park. Again, the TJB would be an excavated pit up to 45m long by 10m wide by 3m deep. This area will need to accommodate the pipe-jack launch and reception ‘pit’ for both operations. Under this option, Monks Hill Car Park would be used for the TJB (as per Option 1A) and also be used as a temporary laydown area and car park for construction vehicles. From the additional pipe-jack launch and reception pit, the cables would be pipe- jacked across Stubbington Lane and into Daedalus Airfield.

Option 2: HDD and Pipe-jacking Under this option, the subsea cables would be installed using Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) and would be routed to a TJB in the land between Monks Hill Car Park and Stubbington Lane. The TJB would be an excavated pit up to 45m long by 10m wide by 3m deep. Using HDD, the cables would pass under the Intertidal zone, the beach, Monks Hill car park, and the sea defences to reach the TJB. From the TJB, the cables would continue to be installed using trenchless techniques but this could be either HDD or Pipe-jacking. Again, the cables would be pipe-jacked or drilled to a reception and launch pit at the southern end of the runway; the exact location of this is still to be determined.

Option 3: HDD Under this option, the subsea cables would be installed using HDD all the way into the airfield, at a location to be determined in conjunction with the airfield operators. The cables would pass under the Intertidal zone; the beach; Monks Hill car park; the seawall; the land south of Stubbington Way; and Stubbington Way to reach the TJB. The exact location of the TJB here is still to be determined.

Onshore Underground Cables through Daedalus Airfield Both HVDC and HVAC onshore underground cables would connect from the TJB to the converter station (a distance of approximately 1.7km). From their landfall, the cables would run northeast, crossing the cark park and National Cycle Route 2 which are immediately northeast of the beach, as set out above. They would continue northeast towards the Airfield, crossing rough grassland and scrub, fields used for grazing, and Crofton Lane and Stubbington Lane before entering the Airfield. From the southern end of the runway, the cables would be installed using either an open cut or ducted technique. They would be installed immediately west of the ‘Runway Strip’ - a defined area, measuring 150m width in total (75m horizontally from the centre point of the runway) and including the runway stop-way (a length of 60m at the end of the runway, which is intended firstly to reduce the risk of damage to aircraft running off a runway, and secondly, to protect aircraft flying over it during take-off or landing operations (ICAO1). Along this length, the cables would cross two taxiways; the most southerly of these may be crossed either by open cut or by pipe jacking; the most northerly taxiway would be crossed by pipe jacking, to allow it to remain open throughout the construction phase. Once north of the Runway Strip the cables would then turn east to connect to the Converter Station For both sets of cables, where possible open cut trench installation techniques would be used. The cables would be laid in sections up to 1km long with each section connected using cables joints. For HVDC cable there would only be one joint per cable required at some point along the airfield, but for the HVAC cables there could be the need for two joints depending on system design and earthing configuration. This would give a maximum of fourteen joints in total at three locations. Link boxes for these cable joints would be underground and once the land is reinstated, there would be no visible signs of the cables route. The HVDC and HVAC cables would be laid within the same swathe. A typical example of such a combined swathe which is likely to be used in Daedalus Airfield, is illustrated in Inset4.

1 ICAO http://www.icao.int/Pages/default.aspx

Inset4 DC and AC Combined Cable Swathe and Easements

During construction a temporary working width of 28m would be required. This would allow for a temporary haul route along the length of the cables, stockpiled top soil and excavated material, and space for security fencing, as shown in Inset4. A permanent easement of up to 22m would be required although there would be no visible surface remains following reinstatement. This is required to allow National Grid IFA2 Ltd to access the cables for any future maintenance. There would be a maximum of three joint bays within Daedalus after the initial entry TJB depending on system design. The exact location of these are to be decided in consultation with the Airfield operator.

Converter Station The proposed site for the converter station is a mixture of semi-improved grassland and arable field to the north east of Daedalus Airfield. The proposed site is approximately 750m to the north of Lee-on-the-Solent, 1km to the east of Stubbington, approximately 1.5km inland from Southampton Water. It is approximately 6.5km to the east of the CSE compound at Chilling. A new permanent access would be provided to the east of the site, from the B3385 Broom Way; this would be used primarily during construction, however it would continue to be required for occasional use during operation, for example if a replacement transformer is needed. Regular, permanent access to the site during its operation would be via the new access road into the Hangars East development area.

Converter Station Design A converter station includes equipment similar to a typical substation, as well as converter transformers, a valve hall which houses electronic devices that converts the AC waveform to DC and vice versa and a control room. It typically comprises a collection of steel-framed buildings with cladding and outdoor equipment, however it is likely that for the Proposed Development that the majority of electrical equipment would be housed indoors to protect the equipment from exposure and

to reduce noise and visual effects. It would all be contained within a securely fenced compound. The detailed design of the converter station would be undertaken by an appointed converter station manufacturer taking account of technical specification and site specific requirements. The detailed design would be approved by FBC through a reserved matter application. An indicative layout is shown in the Design and Access Statement which accompanies the planning application. The proposed converter station would occupy a broadly rectangular site, approximately 3.5ha in size. This would comprise a collection of buildings up to 22m in height. The Valve Hall would be the largest building 120m by 40m, with a maximum height of 22m, and will be adjoined by an AC Filters Hall building 60m by 50m, and a series of smaller structures measuring 40m by 15m. An additional laydown and a temporary construction area measuring approximately 3ha, would be required, which would be fully reinstated following construction. The converter station would be designed for a 40 year lifespan, with control equipment and a valve expected to require replacement during that time.

Lighting Lighting would be controlled to avoid the unnecessary illumination of areas beyond the converter station and immediate surrounds. Glare and the spread of upward light would be kept to a minimum to reduce sky glow and minimise visual intrusion within the landscape. The entrance, emergency exits and walkways for access and egress would likely be illuminated for safety reasons. The following measures would be implemented during construction and operation of the converter station:  Lights installed would be of minimum brightness and/or power rating capable of performing the desired function;  Light fittings would be used that reduce the amount of light emitted above the horizontal;  Light fittings would be positioned correctly and directed downwards;  The direction of lights would seek to avoid spillage onto neighbouring properties;  Passive Infra-Red (PIR) controlled lights would be considered for use where appropriate as these may be more acceptable to neighbours than those which are controlled by a time switch or are on all the time; and  Unnecessary lights would be switched off.

During construction, winter working may require site-specific lighting due to the short day lengths when lighting will be required at the beginning and end of the day. Lighting would be used only when required during core working hours, unless

otherwise stated and will comprise lighting of work areas and access and egress with low level directional lighting. Construction compounds would not be lit at night outside core working hours, except for welfare and site security cabins that would include low level lighting. Motion sensor lighting would be used in areas of high security risk.

Security Security for the converter station would be integrated into its design and include the following key features:  Perimeter Security: designed to demarcate the facility and deter, detect and delay unauthorised access to the site. The elements comprising of: 3m fence with 0.5m barbed wire topping, 5m clear zone from the Secure Perimeter fence, to be vegetation free; (Microphonic Perimeter Intruder Detection (MPID); and vehicle and pedestrian gates.  Closed Circuit Television (CCTV): this would be mounted on a short post, of similar to height to a lamppost, as is illustrated in Inset 5.

Inset 5 Illustration of CCTV and Security Lighting

 Security Lighting: providing adequate lighting during night and low levels of daylight, as required and include:  Perimeter lighting: this would activate on alarm or in the hours of darkness/low light conditions dependant on operational requirements; and  Motion sensor lighting: this would activate on personnel entering and leaving Daedalus Convertor Station and light the route to and from the Control building during hours of darkness, when staff are on site.

Access and Vehicle Movements Regular, permanent access to the site during its operation would be via the new access road into the Hangars East development area. The access, perimeter and internal roads would be used to provide access for the delivery of materials to site during construction and for maintenance activities during operation A new permanent access would be provided to the east of the site, from the B3385 Broom Way; this would be used primarily during construction, however it would be constructed so that could accommodate the delivery of transformers, which would be required occasionally during operation. A small number of car parking spaces would be provided for operations staff required to monitor and maintain electrical equipment and plant at the converter station. Similar schemes have required up to sixteen car parking spaces and two additional disabled spaces.

Construction of the Converter Station The construction of the converter station would be undertaken over a period of approximately three years, and it would be commissioned in 2020. Construction would include the activities summarised below.

Preliminary Works and Site Establishment Preliminary works may include vegetation clearance, the development of internal site access and the establishment of temporary facilities (including site offices, storage areas, welfare facilities, installation of site electricity and water supplies and the erection of security fencing or hoarding). A temporary laydown area would be established adjacent to the Site.

Earthworks Cut and fill works would be used as required to create a level site. Materials excavated on higher parts of the site would be used to fill lower levels and for landscaping in order to minimise material movement off site.

Civil Engineering Works The construction of building platforms, the development of the site’s permanent drainage system and the construction of permanent access, internal roads and car parking arrangements would be completed prior to the construction of buildings on site.

Buildings Construction Construction of the buildings including erection of steel frames and cladding would be undertaken following Site establishment. This would be followed by the installation of HVAC and HVDC electrical equipment within the Converter Station buildings. On completion of all of the construction and installation works there would

be a period of commissioning and testing followed by Site reinstatement where temporary facilities would be removed and reinstatement and landscape works would be completed.

Landscaping and Open Space Provision The north of the airfield, comprising the land beyond the taxiways and south of the B334 Gosport Road, currently comprises grassed areas and land in arable agriculture. There is no public access to this land. Part of this land is safeguarded by FBC policy (DSP12) for the provision of public open space. FBC has subsequently published the Daedalus Vision[1], document which sets out a different proposal for land to be used as open space for the benefit of the local community. The document on which FBC based its consultation on the Daedalus Vision states:

‘The Council’s vision for Daedalus North is to become an attractive and accessible area of natural green space, which provides a strong and safe link between the community of Stubbington and the Alver Valley. This large area will be carefully designed to provide a rich habitat, balanced with facilities that will be attractive and encourage local people to enjoy the natural environment, for example through provision of play facilities, natural features or outdoor furniture, etc. The area will also offer more formal park space and will be well landscaped to help mitigate the visual impact of the development elsewhere at Daedalus.’

The proposed converter station is adjacent Daedalus North proposed as open space in the Daedalus Vision. To assist in screening the converter station, landscaping would take the form of mounding and native perimeter planting; there would also be native planting along the western edge of Broom Way up to Peel Hall roundabout and along the southern edge of Gosport Road for approximately 250m. The remainder of the existing green space to the north of the proposed site would remain grassland, hedges, scattered trees and tree groups as the converter station is built. The final design of the Open Space will be determined at a later date in consultation with landowners, the Airfield operator, FBC, Natural England and other key stakeholders. However it can be confidently anticipated that the native planting described along the western edge of Broom Way and the southern edge of Gosport Road would be compatible with proposals for Open Space as this would screen the roads and roundabout junction from the Open Space. The mechanisms through which the Open Space will be delivered are currently subject to discussion and agreement with FBC.

The works for the Open Space would involve earth works for mounding and creating footpaths and cycleways, grassland planting and some tree planting. No soil would be transported to or from the site in the earth works. For the purposes of the

[1] Daedalus: A Vision and Outline Strategy, Fareham Borough Council, 2015

assessment, a ‘reasonable worst-case’ scenario is assumed for the Open Space, as follows. When considering potential adverse effects of the open space, for example the amount of construction traffic which may be present, it has been assumed that all of the Open Space will be delivered. When considering potential beneficial effects such as screening of parts of the development by planting, it has been assumed that only the mounding and planting immediately north and west of the proposed converter station and the planting described immediately west of Broom Way and south of Gosport Road would be delivered.

Chilling Site – Detailed Project Description From Monks Hill beach, the subsea HVAC cables would be installed initially in a southerly direction, then turn west before turning again to the north to make landfall at to the west of Brownwich Stream. As in the Daedalus Section, the HVAC cables would be bidirectional, enabling the flow of electricity in either direction (i.e. UK to France or France to UK), depending on demand.

HVAC Cables in the Intertidal Area at Chilling The proposed landfall is illustrated in Inset 6. The HVAC subsea cables would be joined to the HVAC onshore underground cables in a TJB, which it is anticipated would be set back between 50m and 100m from the cliff edge. The installation of the HVAC subsea cables from the sea beyond the MLWS to the TJB at Chilling would be via horizontal directional drilling (HDD). This technique would minimise disturbance to the cliff structure and would ensure the cables are installed beyond the limits of predicted erosion for the life of the Proposed Development. It would also minimise disturbance of the intertidal area which is internationally designated for its high ecological value and also contains a recorded bed of seagrass. The seagrass bed is protected by a Southern Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority byelaw, and is a Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) habitat. The HVAC cables would be installed in a swathe which would be contained within a trapezium shaped area, the northern edge of which, at the southern boundary of the TJB would be 35m wide and the southern edge, at the MLWS, 70m wide. These are reasonable worst case dimensions; it is likely that they will be less when installation takes place. The landing operation including landfall preparation and the HDD operations are expected to take approximately 26 weeks.

Inset 6 Chilling Landfall

HVAC Underground Cables (between landfall and Chilling CSE Compound) The TJB would be installed using the same techniques as proposed at the Monks Hill Beach landfall, as described above. The construction working area for the TJB in this location would be up to 90m long by 50m wide; this would reduce to a permanent easement of 40m long by 35m wide during operation. Once the joint is made, it would be buried and the land would be reinstated; a link box would be required; it would be underground and not visible form the surface. From the Chilling landfall, approximately 2km of onshore cables would be required to connect to the proposed new substation at Chilling Lane. Up to two joints would be required; link boxes for these joints would also be underground. The proposed new substation, to be constructed and operated by NGET, would be to the north of the Solent Breeze Holiday Park adjacent to the existing CSE compound. It is currently proposed that the HVAC cables would be laid in sections up to 1km long with each section connected using cable joints. In a reasonable worst case the HVAC cable joints would be up to 45m long and 20m wide by 3m deep. Once the joint is made, it would be buried and the land would be reinstated, with no visible

signs. The cables would be laid in a maximum of three cables per trench, with one cable per HVAC phase. This will be used for the basis of the EIA. Inset 7 provides an illustration of a typical HVAC cable installation. The HVAC cables require a working width of 22m, comprising cable trench, haul road and stockpiles of topsoil and excavated materials. It is likely to comprise two trenches. The permanent easement for the HVAC cables would be 16m.

Inset 7: Diagram of Typical HVAC Cables Installation

The ‘working width’, as shown above, would accommodate a temporary haul route along the length of the cable, provide sufficient operating space around the works, areas for stockpiling top soil and excavated material, and space for drainage and temporary security fencing.

General Construction Information

Environmental Management Prior to the commencement of any construction activities, the contractor will be required to produce a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) which will include the commitments for construction phase mitigation set out in the ES; both those described as ‘embedded’ mitigation and those under ‘additional’ mitigation. The CEMP will also include control measures to prevent pollution, manage waste and materials storage and include details of any permits that may be required to carry out these activities.

Pollution Incident Control Plan In addition, contractors will be required to develop and implement a detailed Pollution Incident Control Plan (PICP) which will describe their response in the event of any incident on site. All incidents associated with the construction of the Proposed Development, including environmental incidents and non-conformance

with the CEMP, will be reported and investigated using the PICP. The PICP will include the following measures, as a minimum:  the procedure to be followed in the event of an incident (in accordance with the ‘Incident Response’ procedure below);  procedures for the notification of appropriate emergency services, authorities and personnel on the construction site;  procedures for the notification of relevant statutory bodies, environmental regulatory bodies, local authorities and local water and sewer providers;  maps showing the locations of local emergency services facilities such as police stations, fire authorities, medical facilities, other relevant authorities, such as the EA and also the address and contact details for each service and authority;  contact details for the persons responsible on the construction site for pollution incident response;  contact details of a competent spill response company which can be contacted at short notice for an immediate response.  ensure that site drainage plans and flood risk management plans are available on site and are kept up-to date; and  ensure staff competence and awareness in implementing plans and using pollution response kit.

Incident Response All incidents associated with the construction of the Proposed Development, including environmental incidents and non-conformance with the CEMP, will be reported and investigated using the PICP. The following procedure will be followed in the event of an incident and will be detailed further in the PICP:  works will stop;  the Site Manager will be contacted;  the size of the incident will be assessed;  if the incident is controllable by staff on site, remedial action will be taken immediately in accordance with the Pollution Incident Control Plan.  if the incident cannot be controlled by the staff on site, emergency assistance will be sought.  the appropriate enforcing authority will be contacted and informed, including:  the EA for incidents affecting rivers, groundwater and major emissions to atmosphere;  the local sewerage undertaker for incidents affecting sewers.

 the Local Authority Environmental Health Department for incidents that could affect the public.  the Site Manager will investigate the incident;  the findings will be sent to the appropriate enforcing authority where necessary; and  an action plan will be prepared to determine why the incident occurred and whether any modifications to working practices are required to prevent a recurrence. If necessary, the CEMP and SHE Plan will be updated (and any other plans as appropriate) and all workers will be notified.

Contractor Responsibilities and Communication Contractors will be required to conform to all relevant legislative and statutory requirements and to comply with British Standards and relevant codes of good practice during construction works. Contractors will also be required to set out and implement an engagement strategy to facilitate communication with local residents and communities which may be affected by or interested in the works. Through this, potential causes for complaints or disturbance would be avoided where possible; if any issues of concern were to arise, stakeholders will have an established means of communicating with the contractor in question.

Construction Programme Table1 provides an indicative construction programme for the Proposed Development. Table1 Indicative Construction Programme 2017 2018 2019 2020 Task Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 Daedalus Converter Site Establishment Civils

Installation Testing and Commissioning Route Cable Site Establishment Civils Installation Cable Route Chilling Site Establishment Civils Equipment

Installation

Further details to note are:  There is no planned installation along the beach at Daedalus during the winter months; the only works would be reinstatement of the car park or possibly the drilling works. All landfall work would be completed by Q3.  The cable installation at the beach in Daedalus would take approximately 2 months.  The TJB works would happen at the same time and take up to 3 months.  At Chilling there is no winter working, this includes installation work. All work would be stopped by the end of September. Construction Phase Staffing and Employment The number of staff across the Proposed Development would vary according to the construction phase and activities being undertaken. Staff levels would be at their highest during the earthworks and civil engineering works phases and then generally decrease as construction is progressed through to the commissioning phase. The appointed contractors will employ a Site Environmental Manager (SEM) or Environmental Clerk of Works (ECoW) who would be responsible for the preparation and implementation of the CEMP to ensure that mitigation measures identified in the ES and any relevant planning conditions are implemented. The SEM or ECoW would be supported by environmental specialists such as ecologists or archaeologists as required.

Hours of Working Construction activities would usually be undertaken during daytime periods. There would be some activities, such as cables jointing and HDD where 24 hours working could be required.

Construction Waste and Spoil Subject to geotechnical testing, all excavated materials would be re-used on site wherever possible. Where waste materials are to be disposed of off-site, this would be at licensed waste disposal facilities.

General Operation and Maintenance The converter station would be in operation 24/7 and have a 24/7 manpower requirement; it is anticipated this would be up to ten during the day, up to five at night. In addition, the converter station would be subject to infrequent inspections and maintenance visits. National Grid IFA2 Ltd would be responsible for on-going

maintenance and upkeep of the converter station. This would include regular inspection of the site and equipment as well as safety checks. In total, it is anticipated that up to six personnel would be onsite per day. From time to time during refurbishments, detailed inspections and replacement of some components, there may be larger numbers of personnel on site.

Decommissioning The design life of the interconnector is 40 years. In accordance with Ofgem’s regulatory regime, it would be reviewed at the 25 year period. This could however be extended dependent on the operation of the component parts and will be assessed during the operation of the link. The decommissioning of the interconnector would result in the following:

Converter Station  Dismantling and removal offsite of the converter station buildings;  Removal offsite of converter station equipment;  Hardstanding to be left in situ;  Utilities to be capped and left in-situ;  Fencing to be removed; and  Landscaping to be left in-situ.

Cables  All cables at a 1m depth to be removed and ground reinstated;  Cables at lower depths (via HDD) to be left in situ; and  TJBs to be removed and ground reinstated.

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Appendix 2: Summary of Stage 1 Assessment of Likely Significant Effect

Appendix 2. Screening of Potential Effects on Natura 2000 sites to be assessed in Stage 2 Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

European feature Potential Effect Phase Scoped in/out Solent and Southampton Water SPA

A046a Dark-bellied Brent geese Effect 1 = Disturbance / Displacement from terrestrial feeding areas Construction Scoped in Effect 2 = Disturbance / Displacement from intertidal feeding areas and (operationa (including roosting on the sea at high tide Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Decommission l scoped Effect 6 = Habitat loss (terrestrial foraging habitat – temporary) phases out) Cumulative Assessment Other non-breeding SPA bird Effect 1 = Disturbance / Displacement from terrestrial feeding areas Construction Scoped in species: Effect 2 = Disturbance / Displacement from intertidal feeding areas and (operationa Effect 4 = Habitat degradation A052 Eurasian teal Decommission l scoped Cumulative Assessment A137 Ringed plover phases out) A156 Black-tailed godwit Waterfowl Assemblage SPA breeding bird species: Effect 1 = Disturbance / Displacement from terrestrial feeding areas Construction, Scoped out A176 Mediterranean gull Effect 2 = Disturbance / Displacement from intertidal feeding areas Operational and Effect 3 = Disturbance / Displacement from offshore feeding areas A191 Sandwich tern Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Decommission A192 Roseate tern Effect 5 = Reduction in offshore prey availability phases Cumulative Assessment

European feature Potential Effect Phase Scoped in/out Solent and Southampton Water Ramsar

Ramsar Criterion 1: Wetland Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Construction, Scoped in habitats characteristic of the Effect 6 = Habitat loss Operational and (operationa biogeographic region Decommission l scoped phases out)

Ramsar Criterion 2: Important Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Construction, Scoped in assemblage of rare plants and Effect 6 = Habitat loss Operational and Cumulative Assessment invertebrates: Decommission (operationa Zostera noltii phases l scoped out) Ramsar Criterion 6 - Effect 1 = Disturbance / Displacement from terrestrial feeding areas Construction, Scoped in A046a Dark-bellied Brent geese Effect 2 = Disturbance / Displacement from intertidal feeding areas Operational and (operationa (including roosting on the sea at high tide Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Decommission l scoped Cumulative Assessment phases out)

Ramsar criterion 6 - Other non- Effect 2 = Disturbance / Displacement from intertidal feeding areas Construction, Scoped in breeding SPA bird species: Cumulative Assessment Operational and (operationa A137 Ringed plover Decommission l scoped A052 Eurasian teal phases out) A156 Black-tailed godwit

Noteworthy fauna (Birds)

European feature Potential Effect Phase Scoped in/out

Noteworthy flora – Nationally Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Construction, Scoped in important species occurring on Effect 6 = Habitat loss Operational and (operationa Cumulative Assessment the site (Higher Plants) – Decommission l scoped Zostera marina phases out) Noteworthy fauna – Species Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Construction, Scoped out (Invertebrates – 35 species) Effect 6 = Habitat loss Operational and Cumulative Assessment Decommission phases Portsmouth Harbour SPA

A046a Dark-bellied Brent geese Effect 1 = Disturbance / Displacement from terrestrial feeding areas Construction, Scoped in Effect 2 = Disturbance / Displacement from intertidal feeding areas Operational and (operationa (including roosting on the sea at high tide Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Decommission l scoped Effect 6 = Habitat loss (terrestrial foraging habitat – temporary) phases out) Cumulative Assessment Other non-breeding SPA bird Effect 1 = Disturbance / Displacement from terrestrial feeding areas Construction, Scoped in species: Effect 2 = Disturbance / Displacement from intertidal feeding areas Operational and (operationa (including roosting on the sea at high tide A069 Red-breasted merganser Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Decommission l scoped A149 Dunlin Cumulative Assessment phases out) A156 Black-tailed godwit

Waterfowl Assemblage

European feature Potential Effect Phase Scoped in/out Portsmouth Harbour Ramsar

Ramsar criterion 3: Extensive beds Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Construction, Scoped out of seagrass, abundance of the mud snail Effect 6 = Habitat loss Operational and Cumulative Assessment Hydrobia ulvae, saltmarsh and saline Decommission lagoons supporting nationally important phases species A046a Dark-bellied Brent geese Effect 1 = Disturbance / Displacement from terrestrial feeding areas Construction, Scoped in Effect 2 = Disturbance / Displacement from intertidal feeding areas Operational and (operationa (including roosting on the sea at high tide Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Decommission l scoped Cumulative Assessment phases out)

Noteworthy fauna – Birds (non- Effect 1 = Disturbance / Displacement from terrestrial feeding areas Construction, Scoped in breeding) Species currently Effect 2 = Disturbance / Displacement from intertidal feeding areas Operational and (operationa occurring at levels of national (including roosting on the sea at high tide importance: Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Decommission l scoped Cumulative Assessment phases out) Noteworthy fauna - Species Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Construction, Scoped out Cumulative Assessment Nationally important species Operational and occurring on the site (Invertebrates) Decommission phases Langstone and Chichester Harbour SPA

A046a Dark-bellied Brent geese Effect 1 = Disturbance / Displacement from terrestrial feeding areas Construction Scoped in Effect 2 = Disturbance / Displacement from intertidal feeding areas and (operationa (including roosting on the sea at high tide Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Decommission l scoped Effect 6 = Habitat loss (terrestrial foraging habitat – temporary) phases out) Cumulative Assessment

European feature Potential Effect Phase Scoped in/out

Other non-breeding SPA bird Effect 1 = Disturbance / Displacement from terrestrial feeding areas Construction, Scoped in species: Effect 2 = Disturbance / Displacement from intertidal feeding areas Operational and (operationa (including roosting on the sea at high tide A048 Common shelduck Effect 4 = Habitat degradation (supporting habitat outside the SPA) Decommission l scoped A050 Eurasian wigeon Cumulative Assessment phases out) A052 Eurasian teal A054 Northern pintail A056 Northern shoveler A069 Red-breasted merganser A137 Ringed plover A141 Grey plover A144 Sanderling A149 Dunlin A157 Bar-tailed godwit A160 Eurasian curlew A162 Common redshank A169 Ruddy turnstone

Waterfowl Assemblage SPA breeding bird species: Effect 1 = Disturbance / Displacement from terrestrial feeding areas Construction, Scoped out A191 Sandwich tern Effect 2 = Disturbance / Displacement from intertidal feeding areas Operational and Effect 3 = Disturbance / Displacement from offshore feeding areas A193 Common tern Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Decommission A195 Little tern Effect 5 = Reduction in offshore prey availability phases Cumulative Assessment Langstone and Chichester Harbour Ramsar

Ramsar criterion 1: site includes Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Construction, Scoped out intertidal mudflats, saltmarsh, sand Cumulative Assessment Operational and and shingle spits and sand dunes Decommission phases Ramsar criterion 5: Assemblages of Effect 1 = Disturbance / Displacement from terrestrial feeding areas Construction, Scoped in International Importance – Species Operational and

European feature Potential Effect Phase Scoped in/out with peak counts in winter: 76480 Effect 2 = Disturbance / Displacement from intertidal feeding areas Decommission (operationa waterfowl) (including roosting on the sea at high tide phases l scoped Effect 4 = Habitat degradation (supporting habitat outside the SPA) out) Cumulative Assessment Ramsar Criterion 6 - Effect 1 = Disturbance / Displacement from terrestrial feeding areas Construction, Scoped in A046a Dark-bellied Brent geese Effect 2 = Disturbance / Displacement from intertidal feeding areas Operational and (operationa (including roosting on the sea at high tide Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Decommission l scoped Cumulative Assessment phases out) Ramsar criterion 6 - Other non- Effect 1 = Disturbance / Displacement from terrestrial feeding areas Construction, Scoped in breeding SPA bird species: Effect 2 = Disturbance / Displacement from intertidal feeding areas Operational and (operationa (including roosting on the sea at high tide A048 Common shelduck Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Decommission l scoped A137 Ringed plover Cumulative Assessment phases out) A141 Grey plover A149 Dunlin A162 Common redshank

Noteworthy fauna (Birds) Noteworthy Fauna - Species Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Construction, Scoped out - 17 British Red Data Book species Cumulative Assessment Operational and - 84 nationally scarce species Decommission phases Solent and Dorset Coast pSPA

SPA breeding bird species: Effect 1 = Disturbance / Displacement from terrestrial feeding areas Construction, Scoped out A191 Sandwich tern Effect 2 = Disturbance / Displacement from intertidal feeding areas Operational and Effect 3 = Disturbance / Displacement from offshore feeding areas A193 Common tern Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Decommission A195 Little tern Effect 5 = Reduction in offshore prey availability phases Cumulative Assessment New Forest Ramsar

Effect 1 = Disturbance / Displacement from terrestrial feeding areas Ramsar criterion 1: Valley mires Construction, Scoped out Effect 4 = Habitat degradation and wet heaths Operational and Effect 6 = Habitat loss

European feature Potential Effect Phase Scoped in/out

Ramsar criterion 2: diverse Effect 9 = Deterioration in water quality Decommission assemblage of wetland plants and Effect 11 = Loss of protected species roosting/resting habitat phases animals Effect 12 = Risk of death/injury to protected species Cumulative Assessment Ramsar criterion 3: mire habitats of high ecological quality and diversity with undisturbed transition zones Noteworthy Flora Noteworthy Fauna New Forest SPA

SPA breeding bird species: Effect 1 = Disturbance / Displacement from terrestrial feeding areas Construction, Scoped out A314 Wood warbler Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Operational and A246 Woodlark Effect 6 = Habitat loss A302 Dartford warbler Effect 7 = Collision during nocturnal flights Decommission A099 Hobby Effect 11 = Loss of protected species roosting/resting habitat phases A224 European nightjar Effect 12 = Risk of death/injury to protected species A072 European honey buzzard Cumulative Assessment

New Forest SAC

Annex I habitats – Primary Reason: Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Construction, Scoped out - Oligotrophic waters containing very few Effect 6 = Habitat loss Operational and minerals of sandy plains (Littorelletalia Effect 8 = Deterioration in water quality uniflorae) Cumulative Assessment Decommission - Oligotrophic to mesotrophic standing phases waters with vegetation of the Littorelletea uniflorae and/or of the Isoëto-Nanojuncetea - Northern Atlantic wet heaths with Erica tetralix - European dry heaths - Molinia meadows on calcareous, peaty or clayey-silt-laden soils - Depressions on peat substrates of the Rhynchosporion

European feature Potential Effect Phase Scoped in/out

- Atlantic acidophilous beech forests with Ilex and sometimes also Taxus in the shrub layer - Asperulo-Fagetum beech forests Old acidophilous oak woods with Quercus robur on sandy plains Bog Woodland - Alluvial forests with Alnus glutinosa and Fraxinus excelsior (Alno-Padion, Alnion incanae, Salicion albae) - Transition mires and quaking bogs - Alkaline fens Annex II species – Primary Reason: Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Construction, Scoped out Southern damselfly Effect 6 = Habitat loss Operational and Stag beetle Effect 8 = Deterioration in water quality Great crested newt Effect 10 = Loss of protected species roosting/resting habitat Decommission Effect 11 = Risk of death/injury to protected species phases Cumulative Assessment Solent Maritime SAC

Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Annex I Habitats – Primary Reason: Construction, Scoped out Effect 6 = Habitat loss - Estuaries Operational and Effect 8 = Deterioration in water quality - Spartina swards Decommission - Atlantic salt meadows - Sandbanks Cumulative Assessment which are slightly covered by sea water phases all the time - Mudflats and sandflats not covered by seawater at low tide - Coastal lagoons - Annual vegetation of drift lines - Perennial vegetation of stony banks - Salicornia and other annuals colonizing mud and sand - Shifting dunes along the shoreline with Ammophila arenaria (white dunes) Annex II Species – Qualifying Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Construction, Scoped out Reason: Effect 6 = Habitat loss Operational and Desmoulin’s whorl snail Effect 8 = Deterioration in water quality Cumulative Assessment Decommission phases

European feature Potential Effect Phase Scoped in/out

South Wight Maritime SAC

Annex I Habitats – Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Construction, Scoped out - Reefs Effect 6 = Habitat loss Operational and - Vegetated sea cliffs of the Atlantic and Effect 8 = Deterioration in water quality Baltic coasts Cumulative Assessment Decommission - Submerged or partially submerged phases sea caves Solent and Isle of Wight Lagoons SAC

Annex I Habitats – Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Construction, Scoped out 1150 Coastal lagoons Effect 6 = Habitat loss Operational and Effect 8 = Deterioration in water quality Cumulative Assessment Decommission phases Briddlesford Copses SAC

Annex II Species – Primary Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Construction, Scoped out Reason: Effect 6 = Habitat loss Operational and Bechstein’s bat Effect 11 = Loss of protected species roosting/resting habitat Effect 12 = Risk of death/injury to protected species Decommission Cumulative Assessment phases River Itchen SAC

Annex I habitats – Primary Reason: Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Construction, Scoped out Water courses of plain to montane Effect 6 = Habitat loss Operational and levels with the Ranunculion fluitantis Effect 8 = Deterioration in water quality and Callitricho-Batrachion vegetation Cumulative Assessment Decommission phases Annex II species – Primary Reason: Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Construction, Scoped out - Southern damselfly Effect 6 = Habitat loss Operational and - Bullhead Effect 8 = Deterioration in water quality - White-clawed crayfish Effect 10 = Loss of protected species roosting/resting habitat Decommission - Brook lamprey Effect 11 = Loss/disturbance of protected species foraging and phases - Otter commuting routes Cumulative Assessment Annex II species – Primary Reason: Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Construction, Scoped in Atlantic Salmon Effect 6 = Habitat loss Operational and Effect 8 = Deterioration in water quality

European feature Potential Effect Phase Scoped in/out

Effect 10 = Loss of protected species roosting/resting habitat Decommission (Operational Effect 11 = Loss/disturbance of protected species foraging and phases scoped out) commuting routes Cumulative Assessment Emer Bog SAC

Annex I habitats – Primary Reason: Effect 4 = Habitat degradation Construction, Scoped out Water courses of plain to montane Effect 6 = Habitat loss Operational and levels with the Ranunculion fluitantis Effect 9 = Deterioration in water quality and Callitricho-Batrachion vegetation Decommission phases

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Appendix 3: Natura 2000 sites citation sheets

Page 95

European Site Conservation Objectives for Solent and Southampton Water Special Protection Area Site Code: UK9011061

With regard to the individual species and/or assemblage of species for which the site has been classified („the Qualifying Features‟ listed below);

Avoid the deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying features, and the significant disturbance of the qualifying features, ensuring the integrity of the site is maintained and the site makes a full contribution to achieving the aims of the Birds Directive.

Subject to natural change, to maintain or restore:

 The extent and distribution of the habitats of the qualifying features;  The structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying features;  The supporting processes on which the habitats of the qualifying features rely;  The populations of the qualifying features;  The distribution of the qualifying features within the site.

Qualifying Features:

A046a Branta bernicla bernicla; Dark-bellied brent goose (Non-breeding) A052 Anas crecca; Eurasian teal (Non-breeding) A137 Charadrius hiaticula; Ringed plover (Non-breeding) A156 Limosa limosa islandica; Black-tailed godwit (Non-breeding) A176 Larus melanocephalus; Mediterranean gull (Breeding) A191 Sterna sandvicensis; Sandwich tern (Breeding) A192 Sterna dougallii; Roseate tern (Breeding) A193 Sterna hirundo; Common tern (Breeding) A195 Sterna albifrons; Little tern (Breeding) Waterbird assemblage

This is a European Marine Site This site is a part of the Solent Maritime European Marine Site. These conservation objectives should be used in conjunction with the Regulation 35 Conservation Advice Package, for further details please contact Natural England‟s enquiry service at [email protected], or by phone on 0845 600 3078, or visit the Natural England website at: http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/marine/protectandmanage/mpa/europeansites.aspx

Explanatory Notes: European Site Conservation Objectives

European Site Conservation Objectives are those referred to in the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (the “Habitats Regulations”) and Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive 1992. They are for use when either the appropriate nature conservation body or competent authority is required to make an Appropriate Assessment under the relevant parts of the respective legislation.

These conservation objectives are set for each bird feature for a Special Protection Area (SPA). Where the objectives are met, the site can be said to demonstrate a high degree of integrity and the site itself makes a full contribution to achieving the aims of the Birds Directive for those features. On the first page of this document there may be a list of „Additional Qualifying Features identified by the 2001 UK SPA Review‟. These are additional features identified by the UK SPA Review published in 2001 and, although not yet legally classified, are as a matter of Government policy treated in the same way as classified features.

This document is also intended for those who are preparing information to be used for an appropriate assessment by either the appropriate nature conservation body or a competent authority. As such this document cannot be definitive in how the impacts of a project can be determined. Links to selected sources of information, data and guidance which may be helpful can be found on Natural England‟s website. This list is far from exhaustive.

European Site Conservation Objectives for Portsmouth Harbour Special Protection Area Site Code: UK9011051

With regard to the individual species and/or assemblage of species for which the site has been classified („the Qualifying Features‟ listed below);

Avoid the deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying features, and the significant disturbance of the qualifying features, ensuring the integrity of the site is maintained and the site makes a full contribution to achieving the aims of the Birds Directive.

Subject to natural change, to maintain or restore:

 The extent and distribution of the habitats of the qualifying features;  The structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying features;  The supporting processes on which the habitats of the qualifying features rely;  The populations of the qualifying features;  The distribution of the qualifying features within the site.

Qualifying Features:

A046a Branta bernicla bernicla; Dark-bellied brent goose (Non-breeding) A069 Mergus serrator; Red-breasted merganser (Non-breeding) A149 Calidris alpina alpina; Dunlin (Non-breeding) A156 Limosa limosa islandica; Black-tailed godwit (Non-breeding)

This is a European Marine Site This site is a part of the Solent Maritime European Marine Site. These conservation objectives should be used in conjunction with the Regulation 35 Conservation Advice Package, for further details please contact Natural England‟s enquiry service at [email protected], or by phone on 0845 600 3078, or visit the Natural England website at: http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/marine/protectandmanage/mpa/europeansites.aspx

Explanatory Notes: European Site Conservation Objectives

European Site Conservation Objectives are those referred to in the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (the “Habitats Regulations”) and Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive 1992. They are for use when either the appropriate nature conservation body or competent authority is required to make an Appropriate Assessment under the relevant parts of the respective legislation.

These conservation objectives are set for each bird feature for a Special Protection Area (SPA). Where the objectives are met, the site can be said to demonstrate a high degree of integrity and the site itself makes a full contribution to achieving the aims of the Birds Directive for those features. On the first page of this document there may be a list of „Additional Qualifying Features identified by the 2001 UK SPA Review‟. These are additional features identified by the UK SPA Review published in 2001 and, although not yet legally classified, are as a matter of Government policy treated in the same way as classified features.

This document is also intended for those who are preparing information to be used for an appropriate assessment by either the appropriate nature conservation body or a competent authority. As such this document cannot be definitive in how the impacts of a project can be determined. Links to selected sources of information, data and guidance which may be helpful can be found on Natural England‟s website. This list is far from exhaustive.

European Site Conservation Objectives for Chichester and Langstone Harbours Special Protection Area Site Code: UK9011011

With regard to the individual species and/or assemblage of species for which the site has been classified („the Qualifying Features‟ listed below);

Avoid the deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying features, and the significant disturbance of the qualifying features, ensuring the integrity of the site is maintained and the site makes a full contribution to achieving the aims of the Birds Directive.

Subject to natural change, to maintain or restore:

 The extent and distribution of the habitats of the qualifying features;  The structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying features;  The supporting processes on which the habitats of the qualifying features rely;  The populations of the qualifying features;  The distribution of the qualifying features within the site.

Qualifying Features: A046a Branta bernicla bernicla; Dark-bellied brent goose (Non-breeding) A048 Tadorna tadorna; Common shelduck (Non-breeding) A050 Anas penelope; Eurasian wigeon (Non-breeding) A052 Anas crecca; Eurasian teal (Non-breeding) A054 Anas acuta; Northern pintail (Non-breeding) A056 Anas clypeata; Northern shoveler (Non-breeding) A069 Mergus serrator; Red-breasted merganser (Non-breeding) A137 Charadrius hiaticula; Ringed plover (Non-breeding) A141 Pluvialis squatarola; Grey plover (Non-breeding) A144 Calidris alba; Sanderling (Non-breeding) A149 Calidris alpina alpina; Dunlin (Non-breeding) A157 Limosa lapponica; Bar-tailed godwit (Non-breeding) A160 Numenius arquata; Eurasian curlew (Non-breeding) A162 Tringa totanus; Common redshank (Non-breeding) A169 Arenaria interpres; Ruddy turnstone (Non-breeding) A191 Sterna sandvicensis; Sandwich tern (Breeding) A193 Sterna hirundo; Common tern (Breeding) A195 Sterna albifrons; Little tern (Breeding) Waterbird assemblage

Additional Qualifying Features Identified by the 2001 UK SPA Review: A026 Egretta garzetta; Little egret (Non-breeding) A156 Limosa limosa islandica; Black-tailed godwit (Non-breeding)

This is a European Marine Site This site is a part of the Solent Maritime European Marine Site. These conservation objectives should be used in conjunction with the Regulation 35 Conservation Advice Package, for further details please contact Natural England‟s enquiry service at [email protected], or by phone on 0845 600 3078, or visit the Natural England website at: http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/marine/protectandmanage/mpa/europeansites.aspx

Explanatory Notes: European Site Conservation Objectives

European Site Conservation Objectives are those referred to in the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (the “Habitats Regulations”) and Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive 1992. They are for use when either the appropriate nature conservation body or competent authority is required to make an Appropriate Assessment under the relevant parts of the respective legislation.

These conservation objectives are set for each bird feature for a Special Protection Area (SPA). Where the objectives are met, the site can be said to demonstrate a high degree of integrity and the site itself makes a full contribution to achieving the aims of the Birds Directive for those features. On the first page of this document there may be a list of „Additional Qualifying Features identified by the 2001 UK SPA Review‟. These are additional features identified by the UK SPA Review published in 2001 and, although not yet legally classified, are as a matter of Government policy treated in the same way as classified features.

This document is also intended for those who are preparing information to be used for an appropriate assessment by either the appropriate nature conservation body or a competent authority. As such this document cannot be definitive in how the impacts of a project can be determined. Links to selected sources of information, data and guidance which may be helpful can be found on Natural England‟s website. This list is far from exhaustive.

European Site Conservation Objectives for River Itchen Special Area of Conservation Site Code: UK0012599

With regard to the SAC and the natural habitats and/or species for which the site has been designated (the ‘Qualifying Features’ listed below), and subject to natural change;

Ensure that the integrity of the site is maintained or restored as appropriate, and ensure that the site contributes to achieving the Favourable Conservation Status of its Qualifying Features, by maintaining or restoring;

 The extent and distribution of qualifying natural habitats and habitats of qualifying species  The structure and function (including typical species) of qualifying natural habitats  The structure and function of the habitats of qualifying species  The supporting processes on which qualifying natural habitats and the habitats of qualifying species rely  The populations of qualifying species, and,  The distribution of qualifying species within the site.

This document should be read in conjunction with the accompanying Supplementary Advice document, which provides more detailed advice and information to enable the application and achievement of the Objectives set out above.

Qualifying Features:

H3260. Water courses of plain to montane levels with the Ranunculion fluitantis and Callitricho- Batrachion vegetation; Rivers with floating vegetation often dominated by water-crowfoot S1044. Coenagrion mercuriale; Southern damselfly S1092. Austropotamobius pallipes; White-clawed (or Atlantic stream) crayfish S1096. Lampetra planeri; Brook lamprey S1106. Salmo salar; Atlantic salmon S1163. Cottus gobio; Bullhead S1355. Lutra lutra; Otter

Explanatory Notes: European Site Conservation Objectives

These Conservation Objectives are those referred to in the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (the “Habitats Regulations”) and Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive. They must be considered when a competent authority is required to make a ‘Habitats Regulations Assessment’, including an Appropriate Assessment, under the relevant parts of this legislation.

These Conservation Objectives and the accompanying Supplementary Advice (where available) will also provide a framework to inform the measures needed to conserve or restore the European Site and the prevention of deterioration or significant disturbance of its qualifying features as required by the provisions of Article 6(1) and 6(2) of the Directive.

These Conservation Objectives are set for each habitat or species of a Special Area of Conservation (SAC). Where the objectives are met, the site will be considered to exhibit a high degree of integrity and to be contributing to achieving Favourable Conservation Status for that species or habitat type at a UK level. The term ‘favourable conservation status’ is defined in Article 1 of the Habitats Directive.

Publication date: 30 June 2014 – version 2. This document updates and replaces an earlier version dated 29 May 2012 to reflect Natural England’s Strategic Standard on European Site Conservation Objectives 2014.

Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS) Categories approved by Recommendation 4.7 (1990), as amended by Resolution VIII.13 of the 8th Conference of the Contracting Parties (2002) and Resolutions IX.1 Annex B, IX.6, IX.21 and IX. 22 of the 9th Conference of the Contracting Parties (2005).

Notes for compilers: 1. The RIS should be completed in accordance with the attached Explanatory Notes and Guidelines for completing the Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands. Compilers are strongly advised to read this guidance before filling in the RIS.

2. Further information and guidance in support of Ramsar site designations are provided in the Strategic Framework for the future development of the List of Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar Wise Use Handbook 7, 2nd edition, as amended by COP9 Resolution IX.1 Annex B). A 3rd edition of the Handbook, incorporating these amendments, is in preparation and will be available in 2006.

3. Once completed, the RIS (and accompanying map(s)) should be submitted to the Ramsar Secretariat. Compilers should provide an electronic (MS Word) copy of the RIS and, where possible, digital copies of all maps.

1. Name and address of the compiler of this form: FOR OFFICE USE ONLY. DD MM YY

Joint Nature Conservation Committee Monkstone House City Road Designation date Site Reference Number Peterborough Cambridgeshire PE1 1JY UK Telephone/Fax: +44 (0)1733 – 562 626 / +44 (0)1733 – 555 948 Email: [email protected]

2. Date this sheet was completed/updated: Designated: 01 October 1998 3. Country: UK (England) 4. Name of the Ramsar site: Solent and Southampton Water

5. Designation of new Ramsar site or update of existing site:

This RIS is for: Updated information on an existing Ramsar site

6. For RIS updates only, changes to the site since its designation or earlier update: a) Site boundary and area:

** Important note: If the boundary and/or area of the designated site is being restricted/reduced, the Contracting Party should have followed the procedures established by the Conference of the Parties in the Annex to COP9 Resolution IX.6 and provided a report in line with paragraph 28 of that Annex, prior to the submission of an updated RIS. b) Describe briefly any major changes to the ecological character of the Ramsar site, including in the application of the Criteria, since the previous RIS for the site:

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11063 Page 1 of 13 Solent and Southampton Water

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 2

7. Map of site included: Refer to Annex III of the Explanatory Notes and Guidelines, for detailed guidance on provision of suitable maps, including digital maps. a) A map of the site, with clearly delineated boundaries, is included as: i) hard copy (required for inclusion of site in the Ramsar List): yes 9 -or- no ; ii) an electronic format (e.g. a JPEG or ArcView image) Yes iii) a GIS file providing geo-referenced site boundary vectors and attribute tables yes 9 -or- no ; b) Describe briefly the type of boundary delineation applied: e.g. the boundary is the same as an existing protected area (nature reserve, national park etc.), or follows a catchment boundary, or follows a geopolitical boundary such as a local government jurisdiction, follows physical boundaries such as roads, follows the shoreline of a waterbody, etc. The site boundary is the same as, or falls within, an existing protected area.

For precise boundary details, please refer to paper map provided at designation 8. Geographical coordinates (latitude/longitude): 50 44 25 N 01 31 32 W 9. General location: Include in which part of the country and which large administrative region(s), and the location of the nearest large town. Nearest town/city: Southampton Solent and Southampton Water lies on the central south coast of England. Administrative region: City of Portsmouth; City of Southampton; Hampshire; Isle of Wight

10. Elevation (average and/or max. & min.) (metres): 11. Area (hectares): 5346.44 Min. -1 Max. 9 Mean 1 12. General overview of the site: Provide a short paragraph giving a summary description of the principal ecological characteristics and importance of the wetland. The area covered extends from Hurst Spit to Gilkicker Point along the south coast of Hampshire and along the north coast of the Isle of Wight. The site comprises of estuaries and adjacent coastal habitats including intertidal flats, saline lagoons, shingle beaches, saltmarsh, reedbeds, damp woodland, and grazing marsh. The diversity of habitats support internationally important numbers of wintering waterfowl, important breeding gull and tern populations and an important assemblage of rare invertebrates and plants.

13. Ramsar Criteria: Circle or underline each Criterion applied to the designation of the Ramsar site. See Annex II of the Explanatory Notes and Guidelines for the Criteria and guidelines for their application (adopted by Resolution VII.11). 1, 2, 5, 6

14. Justification for the application of each Criterion listed in 13 above: Provide justification for each Criterion in turn, clearly identifying to which Criterion the justification applies (see Annex II for guidance on acceptable forms of justification). Ramsar criterion 1 The site is one of the few major sheltered channels between a substantial island and mainland in European waters, exhibiting an unusual strong double tidal flow and has long periods of slack water at high and low tide. It includes many wetland habitats characteristic of the biogeographic region: saline

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11063 Page 2 of 13 Solent and Southampton Water

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 3 lagoons, saltmarshes, estuaries, intertidal flats, shallow coastal waters, grazing marshes, reedbeds, coastal woodland and rocky boulder reefs.

Ramsar criterion 2 The site supports an important assemblage of rare plants and invertebrates. At least 33 British Red Data Book invertebrates and at least eight British Red Data Book plants are represented on site.

Ramsar criterion 5

Assemblages of international importance:

Species with peak counts in winter: 51343 waterfowl (5 year peak mean 1998/99-2002/2003)

Ramsar criterion 6 – species/populations occurring at levels of international importance.

Qualifying Species/populations (as identified at designation): Species with peak counts in spring/autumn: Ringed plover , Charadrius hiaticula, 397 individuals, representing an average of 1.2% Europe/Northwest Africa of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Species with peak counts in winter: Dark-bellied brent goose, Branta bernicla 6456 individuals, representing an average of 3% bernicla, of the population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Eurasian teal , Anas crecca, NW Europe 5514 individuals, representing an average of 1.3% of the population (5 year peak mean 1998/9-2002/3) Black-tailed godwit , Limosa limosa islandica, 1240 individuals, representing an average of Iceland/W Europe 3.5% of the population (5 year peak mean 1998/9-2002/3) Contemporary data and information on waterbird trends at this site and their regional (sub-national) and national contexts can be found in the Wetland Bird Survey report, which is updated annually. See www.bto.org/survey/webs/webs-alerts-index.htm. Details of bird species occuring at levels of National importance are given in Section 22

15. Biogeography (required when Criteria 1 and/or 3 and /or certain applications of Criterion 2 are applied to the designation): Name the relevant biogeographic region that includes the Ramsar site, and identify the biogeographic regionalisation system that has been applied. a) biogeographic region: Atlantic b) biogeographic regionalisation scheme (include reference citation): Council Directive 92/43/EEC

16. Physical features of the site: Describe, as appropriate, the geology, geomorphology; origins - natural or artificial; hydrology; soil type; water quality; water depth, water permanence; fluctuations in water level; tidal variations; downstream area; general climate, etc.

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11063 Page 3 of 13 Solent and Southampton Water

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 4

Soil & geology acidic, neutral, shingle, sand, mud, alluvium, sedimentary Geomorphology and landscape lowland, island, coastal, floodplain, shingle bar, subtidal sediments (including sandbank/mudbank), intertidal sediments (including sandflat/mudflat), open coast (including bay), enclosed coast (including embayment), estuary, lagoon, intertidal rock Nutrient status eutrophic pH no information Salinity brackish / mixosaline, fresh, saline / euhaline Soil mainly mineral Water permanence usually permanent Summary of main climatic features Annual averages (Everton, 1971–2000) (www.metoffice.com/climate/uk/averages/19712000/sites /everton.html) Max. daily temperature: 14.0° C Min. daily temperature: 7.0° C Days of air frost: 32.5 Rainfall: 763.7 mm Hrs. of sunshine: 1750.7

General description of the Physical Features: The Solent and Southampton Water comprises a series of estuaries and harbours with extensive mudflats and saltmarshes together with adjacent coastal habitats including saline lagoons, shingle beaches, reedbeds, damp woodland and grazing marsh.

17. Physical features of the catchment area: Describe the surface area, general geology and geomorphological features, general soil types, general land use, and climate (including climate type). The Solent encompasses a major estuarine system on the south coast of England with four coastal plain estuaries (Yar, Medina, King’s Quay Shore, Hamble) and four bar-built estuaries (Newtown Harbour, Beaulieu, Langstone Harbour, Chichester Harbour). The Solent and its inlets are unique in Britain and Europe for their hydrographic regime of four tides each day, and for the complexity of the marine and estuarine habitats present within the area. Sediment habitats within the estuaries include extensive estuarine flats, often with intertidal areas supporting eelgrass Zostera spp. and green algae, sand and shingle spits, and natural shoreline transitions. The mudflats range from low and variable salinity in the upper reaches of the estuaries to very sheltered almost fully marine muds in Chichester and Langstone Harbours.

18. Hydrological values: Describe the functions and values of the wetland in groundwater recharge, flood control, sediment trapping, shoreline stabilization, etc. Shoreline stabilisation and dissipation of erosive forces, Sediment trapping 19. Wetland types: Marine/coastal wetland Code Name % Area G Tidal flats 47.9 H Salt marshes 18.5 Sp Saline / brackish marshes: permanent 14.9 E Sand / shingle shores (including dune systems) 12.1 Tp Freshwater marshes / pools: permanent 3.7 D Rocky shores 1.5

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11063 Page 4 of 13 Solent and Southampton Water

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 5

J Coastal brackish / saline lagoons 0.7 Xf Freshwater, tree-dominated wetlands 0.7

20. General ecological features: Provide further description, as appropriate, of the main habitats, vegetation types, plant and animal communities present in the Ramsar site, and the ecosystem services of the site and the benefits derived from them. The estuaries and harbours of the Solent are particularly sheltered and form the largest number and tightest cluster of small estuaries anywhere in Great Britain. The Solent and Isle of Wight system is notable for its large range and extent of different habitats.

The intertidal area is predominantly sedimentary in nature with extensive intertidal mud and sandflats within the sheltered harbours and areas of gravel and pebble sediments on more exposed beaches. These conditions combine to favour an abundant benthic fauna and green algae which support high densities of migrant and over-wintering wildfowl and waders. Eelgrass Zostera beds occur discontinuously along the north shore of the Isle of Wight and in a few places along the northern shore of The Solent.

The Solent system supports a wide range of saltmarsh communities. Upper saltmarshes are dominated by sea purslane Atriplex portulacoides, sea plantain Plantago maritima, sea meadow grass Puccinellia maritima and sea lavender Limonium vulgare; locally thrift Armeria maritima and the nationally scarce golden samphire Inula crithmoides are abundant. Lower saltmarsh vegetation tends to be dominated by sea purslane, cord grass Spartina spp., glasswort Salicornia spp. and sea-blite Suaeda maritima. Cord-grasses dominate much of the saltmarsh in Southampton Water and in parts of the Solent and it was the original location of the introduction of Spartina alterniflora and subsequent hybridisation with the native species.

There are several shingle spits including Hurst spit, Needs Ore Point, Calshot spit and Newtown Harbour spits which support a characteristic shingle flora.

A range of grassland types lie inshore of the intertidal zone including unimproved species-rich neutral and calcareous grasslands, brackish grazing marsh systems and reed dominated freshwater marshes.

The brackish water lagoons associated with grazing marsh systems behind the seawalls, e.g. Keyhaven-Lymington, Gilkicker lagoon, and at Brading Marshes contain internationally important communities of rare and endangered invertebrates and plants. Ecosystem services

21. Noteworthy flora: Provide additional information on particular species and why they are noteworthy (expanding as necessary on information provided in 12. Justification for the application of the Criteria) indicating, e.g. which species/communities are unique, rare, endangered or biogeographically important, etc. Do not include here taxonomic lists of species present – these may be supplied as supplementary information to the RIS. Nationally important species occurring on the site. Higher Plants.

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11063 Page 5 of 13 Solent and Southampton Water

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 6

Eleocharis parvula, Geranium purpureum forsteri, Lotus angustissimus, Ludwigia palustris, Orobanche purpurea, Lamprothamnium papulosum, Spartina maritima Zostera marina 22. Noteworthy fauna: Provide additional information on particular species and why they are noteworthy (expanding as necessary on information provided in 12. Justification for the application of the Criteria) indicating, e.g. which species/communities are unique, rare, endangered or biogeographically important, etc., including count data. Do not include here taxonomic lists of species present – these may be supplied as supplementary information to the RIS. Birds Species currently occurring at levels of national importance: Species regularly supported during the breeding season: Mediterranean gull , Larus melanocephalus, 11 apparently occupied nests, representing an Europe average of 10.1% of the GB population (Seabird 2000 Census) Black-headed gull , Larus ridibundus, N & C 6911 apparently occupied nests, representing an Europe average of 5.4% of the GB population (Seabird 2000 Census) Sandwich tern , Sterna 268 apparently occupied nests, representing an average of 2.5% of the GB population (Seabird (Thalasseus) sandvicensis sandvicensis, W 2000 Census) Europe Roseate tern , Sterna dougallii dougallii, W 1 apparently occupied nests, representing an Europe average of 1.9% of the GB population (Seabird 2000 Census) Common tern , Sterna hirundo hirundo, N & E 192 apparently occupied nests, representing an Europe average of 1.8% of the GB population (Seabird 2000 Census) Little tern , Sterna albifrons albifrons, W Europe 22 apparently occupied nests, representing an average of 1.1% of the GB population (Seabird 2000 Census) Species with peak counts in spring/autumn: Little egret , Egretta garzetta, West 115 individuals, representing an average of 6.9% Mediterranean of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Spotted redshank , Tringa erythropus, Europe/W 13 individuals, representing an average of 9.5% Africa of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Common greenshank , Tringa nebularia, 58 individuals, representing an average of 9.7% Europe/W Africa of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Species with peak counts in winter: Little grebe , Tachybaptus ruficollis ruficollis, 105 individuals, representing an average of 1.3% Europe to E Urals, NW Africa of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Slavonian grebe , Podiceps auritus, Northwest 12 individuals, representing an average of 1.6% Europe of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Black-necked grebe , Podiceps nigricollis 3 individuals, representing an average of 2.5% of nigricollis, Europe, N Africa the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Great cormorant , Phalacrocorax carbo carbo, 247 individuals, representing an average of 1% of NW Europe the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3)

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11063 Page 6 of 13 Solent and Southampton Water

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 7

Common shelduck , Tadorna tadorna, NW 964 individuals, representing an average of 1.2% Europe of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Eurasian wigeon , Anas penelope, NW Europe 7907 individuals, representing an average of 1.9% of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Northern pintail , Anas acuta, NW Europe 359 individuals, representing an average of 1.2% of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Northern shoveler , Anas clypeata, NW & C 267 individuals, representing an average of 1.8% Europe of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Red-breasted merganser , Mergus serrator, NW 142 individuals, representing an average of 1.4% & C Europe of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Water rail , Rallus aquaticus, Europe 17 individuals, representing an average of 3.7% of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Grey plover , Pluvialis squatarola, E Atlantic/W 1171 individuals, representing an average of 2.2% Africa -wintering of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Dunlin , Calidris alpina alpina, W Siberia/W 10417 individuals, representing an average of Europe 1.8% of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9-2002/3) Eurasian curlew , Numenius arquata arquata, N. 1766 individuals, representing an average of 1.2% a. arquata Europe of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) (breeding)

Species Information Nationally important species occurring on the site. Invertebrates. Allomelita pellucida, Gammarus insensibilis, Nematostella vectensis, Arctosa fulvolineata, Aulonia albimana, Anisodactylus poeciloides, Anthonomus rufus, Baris analis, Berosus spinosus, Cantharis fusca, Drypta dentata, Leptura fulva, Meligethes bidentatus, Paracymus aeneus, Staphylinus caesareus, Aphrosylus mitis, Atylotus latistriatus, Dorycera graminum, Haematopoda grandis, Hippobosca equina, Linnaemya comta, Stratiomys longicornis, Syntormon mikii, Tetanocera freyi, Villa circumdata, Trachysphaera lobata, Paludinella littorina, Truncatellina cylindrica, Andrena alfkenella, Acleris lorquiniana, Elachista littoricola, Melissoblaptes zelleri, Platytes alpinella, Psamathrocrita argentella, Armandia cirrhosa

23. Social and cultural values: Describe if the site has any general social and/or cultural values e.g. fisheries production, forestry, religious importance, archaeological sites, social relations with the wetland, etc. Distinguish between historical/archaeological/religious significance and current socio-economic values. Aesthetic Aquatic vegetation (e.g. reeds, willows, seaweed) Archaeological/historical site Environmental education/ interpretation Fisheries production Livestock grazing Non-consumptive recreation Scientific research

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11063 Page 7 of 13 Solent and Southampton Water

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 8

Sport fishing Sport hunting Tourism Traditional cultural Transportation/navigation b) Is the site considered of international importance for holding, in addition to relevant ecological values, examples of significant cultural values, whether material or non-material, linked to its origin, conservation and/or ecological functioning? No

If Yes, describe this importance under one or more of the following categories: i) sites which provide a model of wetland wise use, demonstrating the application of traditional knowledge and methods of management and use that maintain the ecological character of the wetland: ii) sites which have exceptional cultural traditions or records of former civilizations that have influenced the ecological character of the wetland: iii) sites where the ecological character of the wetland depends on the interaction with local communities or indigenous peoples: iv) sites where relevant non-material values such as sacred sites are present and their existence is strongly linked with the maintenance of the ecological character of the wetland:

24. Land tenure/ownership: Ownership category On-site Off-site Non-governmental organisation + + (NGO) Local authority, municipality etc. + + National/Crown Estate + + Private + + Public/communal + + Other + +

25. Current land (including water) use: Activity On-site Off-site Nature conservation + Tourism + Recreation + Current scientific research + Collection of non-timber natural + products: (unspecified) Commercial forestry + Cutting/coppicing for + firewood/fuel Fishing: (unspecified) + Fishing: commercial + Fishing: recreational/sport + Marine/saltwater aquaculture + Gathering of shellfish + Bait collection +

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11063 Page 8 of 13 Solent and Southampton Water

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 9

Arable agriculture (unspecified) + Permanent arable agriculture + Permanent pastoral agriculture + Hay meadows + Hunting: recreational/sport + Industry + Sewage treatment/disposal + Harbour/port + Flood control + Irrigation (incl. agricultural water + supply) Mineral exploration (excl. + hydrocarbons) Oil/gas exploration + Oil/gas production + Transport route + Domestic water supply + Urban development + Non-urbanised settlements + Military activities + +

26. Factors (past, present or potential) adversely affecting the site’s ecological character, including changes in land (including water) use and development projects:

Explanation of reporting category: 1. Those factors that are still operating, but it is unclear if they are under control, as there is a lag in showing the management or regulatory regime to be successful. 2. Those factors that are not currently being managed, or where the regulatory regime appears to have been ineffective so far.

NA = Not Applicable because no factors have been reported. Adverse Factor Category Description of the problem (Newly reported Factors only) Reporting Category On-Site Off-Site Major Impact? Erosion 2 + +

For category 2 factors only. What measures have been taken / are planned / regulatory processes invoked, to mitigate the effect of these factors? Erosion - Coastal Defence Strategies, regulation of private coastal defences, shoreline management plans, ChAMPs are in place or are being developed.

Is the site subject to adverse ecological change? YES

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11063 Page 9 of 13 Solent and Southampton Water

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 10

27. Conservation measures taken: List national category and legal status of protected areas, including boundary relationships with the Ramsar site; management practices; whether an officially approved management plan exists and whether it is being implemented.

Conservation measure On-site Off-site Site/ Area of Special Scientific Interest + (SSSI/ASSI) National Nature Reserve (NNR) + + Special Protection Area (SPA) + Land owned by a non-governmental organisation + + for nature conservation Management agreement + + Special Area of Conservation (SAC) + Management plan in preparation + b) Describe any other current management practices: The management of Ramsar sites in the UK is determined by either a formal management plan or through other management planning processes, and is overseen by the relevant statutory conservation agency. Details of the precise management practises are given in these documents. 28. Conservation measures proposed but not yet implemented: e.g. management plan in preparation; official proposal as a legally protected area, etc. No information available 29. Current scientific research and facilities: e.g. details of current research projects, including biodiversity monitoring; existence of a field research station, etc. Contemporary. Numbers of migratory and wintering waterfowl are monitored annually as part of the national Wetland Birds Survey (WeBS) organised by the British Trust for Ornithology, Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee. Bird Ringing by Solent Shorebirds Study Group. Environment. Coastal Sediment (SCOPAC) Water Quality (EA/Southern Water) Various research and educational establishments carry out ongoing research into a number of different aspects of the environment. Flora. Saltmarsh Monitoring (EN project). Spartina survey (EN project). Completed. Flora. Sand dune and saltmarsh NVC survey. Habitats. Habitat surveys (various local individual surveys). Species surveys (various local individual surveys). 30. Current communications, education and public awareness (CEPA) activities related to or benefiting the site: e.g. visitor centre, observation hides and nature trails, information booklets, facilities for school visits, etc. Various educational programmes exist within the voluntary conservation organisations, research institutes, education centres and also Local Authorities e.g. Newtown National Nature Reserve managed by National Trust, Medina Valley Centre, and Southampton Oceanography Centre.

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11063 Page 10 of 13 Solent and Southampton Water

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 11

There are a number of interpretation facilities present and proposed in the area e.g. National Nature Reserve & Local Nature Reserve and proposed centre of coastal management on Isle of Wight. 31. Current recreation and tourism: State if the wetland is used for recreation/tourism; indicate type(s) and their frequency/intensity. Activities, Facilities provided and Seasonality. Almost all the estuaries in the Ramsar site are used extensively for a wide range of leisure and recreational activities, particularly water-based recreation. Land based recreation: Walking including dog-walking is popular along large stretches of the coast and estuaries. The presence of country parks, NNR and LNRs on the coast also attract large numbers of people to certain locations. Bait-digging and collection of shellfish occurs in a number of locations. Birdwatching is also a popular activity with a number of favoured locations with easy access. Some golf courses are also present. Water-based recreation: The Solent is an internationally important centre for yachting, dinghy sailing and power-boating and national important for canoeing, and water-skiing. A small amount of hovercraft racing sometimes occurs. Wildfowling and egg collection: Private, syndicate and club wildfowling operate on the marshes. Small-scale egg-collecting also occurs. Bait-digging and angling also occur. Air Recreation: There is a proposed microlighting centre within the area. The high degree of recreation in the Solent is accompanied by a high degree of supporting developments e.g. marinas, boatyards, clubs, holiday centres occur throughout the area. 32. Jurisdiction: Include territorial, e.g. state/region, and functional/sectoral, e.g. Dept. of Agriculture/Dept. of Environment, etc. Head, Natura 2000 and Ramsar Team, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, European Wildlife Division, Zone 1/07, Temple Quay House, 2 The Square, Temple Quay, Bristol, BS1 6EB 33. Management authority: Provide the name and address of the local office(s) of the agency(ies) or organisation(s) directly responsible for managing the wetland. Wherever possible provide also the title and/or name of the person or persons in this office with responsibility for the wetland. Site Designations Manager, English Nature, Sites and Surveillance Team, Northminster House, Northminster Road, Peterborough, PE1 1UA, UK 34. Bibliographical references: Scientific/technical references only. If biogeographic regionalisation scheme applied (see 15 above), list full reference citation for the scheme. Site-relevant references

Anon. (1995) Biodiversity: The UK Steering Group Report. Volume 2: Action plans. HMSO, London Anon. (2003) The Solent Coastal Habitat Management Plan: Executive summary. English Nature, Peterborough (Living with the Sea LIFE Project) www.english- nature.org.uk/livingwiththesea/project_details/good_practice_guide/HabitatCRR/ENRestore/CHaMPs/Solent/SolentCHa MP.pdf Aspinall, S & Tasker, ML (1990) Coastal birds of east Dorset. Nature Conservancy Council, Peterborough (Seabirds at Sea Team) Barne, JH, Robson, CF, Kaznowska, SS, Doody, JP & Davidson, NC (eds.) (1998) Coasts and seas of the United Kingdom. Region 9 Southern England: Hayling Island to Lyme Regis. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough. (Coastal Directories Series.)

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11063 Page 11 of 13 Solent and Southampton Water

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 12

Bratton, JH (ed.) (1991) British Red Data Books: 3. Invertebrates other than insects. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough Buck, AL (ed.) (1997) An inventory of UK estuaries. Volume 6. Southern England. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough Burd, F (1989) The saltmarsh survey of Great Britain. An inventory of British saltmarshes. Nature Conservancy Council, Peterborough (Research & Survey in Nature Conservation, No. 17) Council of the European Communities (1992) Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora. Official Journal of the European Communities, Series L, 206, 7-50 [The ‘Habitats Directive’] http://europa.eu.int/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexapi!prod!CELEXnumdoc Clark, M & Gurnell, A (1987) The Solent estuary: environmental background. Southampton University, GeoData Unit, Southampton Covey, R (1998) Chapter 7. Eastern Channel (Folkestone to Durlston Head) (MNCR Sector 7). In: Benthic marine ecosystems of Great Britain and the north-east Atlantic, ed. by K. Hiscock, 199-218. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough. (Coasts and Seas of the United Kingdom. MNCR series) Cranswick, PA, Waters, RJ, Musgrove, AJ & Pollitt, MS (1997) The Wetland Bird Survey 1995–96: wildfowl and wader counts. British Trust for Ornithology, Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds & Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Slimbridge Davidson, NC, Laffoley, D d’A, Doody, JP, Way, LS, Gordon, J, Key, R, Pienkowski, MW, Mitchell, R & Duff, KL (1991) Nature conservation and estuaries in Great Britain. Nature Conservancy Council, Peterborough Doody, JP, Johnston, C & Smith, B (1993) Directory of the North Sea coastal margin. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough Downie, AJ (1996) Saline lagoons and lagoon-like saline ponds in England. English Nature Science, No. 29 English Nature (1995) Departmental Brief: Solent and Southampton Water proposed Special Protection Area and Ramsar site, April 1995. English Nature, Peterborough English Nature (1994) Important areas for marine wildlife around England. English Nature, Peterborough Fowler, SL (1995) Review of nature conservation features and information within the Solent & Isle of Wight Sensitive Marine Area. Report to the Solent Forum Strategic Guidance Subgroup [Includes extensive bibliography] Holme, NA & Bishop, GM (1980) Survey of the littoral zone of the coast of Great Britain. 5. Report of the sediment shores of Dorset, Hampshire & Isle of Wight. Nature Conservancy Council, CSD Report, No. 280 May, VJ & Hansom, JD (eds.) (2003) Coastal geomorphology of Great Britain. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough (Geological Conservation Review Series, No. 28) McLeod, CR, Yeo, M, Brown, AE, Burn, AJ, Hopkins, JJ & Way, SF (eds.) (2004) The Habitats Directive: selection of Special Areas of Conservation in the UK. 2nd edn. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough. www.jncc.gov.uk/SACselection Musgrove, AJ, Langston, RHW, Baker, H & Ward, RM (eds.) (2003) Estuarine waterbirds at low tide. The WeBS Low Tide Counts 1992–93 to 1998–99. WSG/BTO/WWT/RSPB/JNCC, Thetford (International Wader Studies, No. 16) Musgrove, AJ, Pollitt, MS, Hall, C, Hearn, RD, Holloway, SJ, Marshall, PE, Robinson, JA & Cranswick, PA (2001) The Wetland Bird Survey 1999–2000: wildfowl and wader counts. British Trust for Ornithology, Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds & Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Slimbridge. www.wwt.org.uk/publications/default.asp?PubID=14 Nicholas Pearson Associates (1996) Portsmouth Harbour Plan Review: draft for working group. July 1996. Centre for Coastal Zone Management, University of Portsmouth Ratcliffe, DA (ed.) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review. The selection of biological sites of national importance to nature conservation in Britain. Cambridge University Press (for the Natural Environment Research Council and the Nature Conservancy Council), Cambridge (2 vols.) Rodwell, JS (ed.) (2000) British plant communities. Volume 5. Maritime communities and vegetation of open habitats. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Shirt, DB (ed.) (1987) British Red Data Books: 2. Insects. Nature Conservancy Council, Peterborough Smith, BP & Laffoley, D (1992) A directory of saline lagoons and lagoon-like habitats in England. English Nature Science, No. 6 Sneddon, P & Randall, RE (1994) Coastal vegetated shingle structures of Great Britain: Appendix 3. Shingle sites in England. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough Stewart, A, Pearman, DA & Preston, CD (eds.) (1994) Scarce plants in Britain. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough Stroud, DA, Chambers, D, Cook, S, Buxton, N, Fraser, B, Clement, P, Lewis, P, McLean, I, Baker, H & Whitehead, S (eds.) (2001) The UK SPA network: its scope and content. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough (3 vols.) www.jncc.gov.uk/UKSPA/default.htm

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11063 Page 12 of 13 Solent and Southampton Water

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 13

Tubbs, C (1991) The Solent: a changing wildlife heritage. Hampshire and Isle of Wight Wildlife Trust, Romsey Tubbs, CR (1991) The population history of grey plovers Pluvialis squatarola in the Solent, southern England. Wader Study Group Bulletin, 61, 15-21 Tubbs, CR (1995) Sea level change and estuaries. British Wildlife, 6(3), 168-176 Wiggington, M (1999) British Red Data Books. 1. Vascular plants. 3rd edn. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough

Please return to: Ramsar Secretariat, Rue Mauverney 28, CH-1196 Gland, Switzerland Telephone: +41 22 999 0170 • Fax: +41 22 999 0169 • email: [email protected]

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11063 Page 13 of 13 Solent and Southampton Water

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008

Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS) Categories approved by Recommendation 4.7 (1990), as amended by Resolution VIII.13 of the 8th Conference of the Contracting Parties (2002) and Resolutions IX.1 Annex B, IX.6, IX.21 and IX. 22 of the 9th Conference of the Contracting Parties (2005).

Notes for compilers: 1. The RIS should be completed in accordance with the attached Explanatory Notes and Guidelines for completing the Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands. Compilers are strongly advised to read this guidance before filling in the RIS.

2. Further information and guidance in support of Ramsar site designations are provided in the Strategic Framework for the future development of the List of Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar Wise Use Handbook 7, 2nd edition, as amended by COP9 Resolution IX.1 Annex B). A 3rd edition of the Handbook, incorporating these amendments, is in preparation and will be available in 2006.

3. Once completed, the RIS (and accompanying map(s)) should be submitted to the Ramsar Secretariat. Compilers should provide an electronic (MS Word) copy of the RIS and, where possible, digital copies of all maps.

1. Name and address of the compiler of this form: FOR OFFICE USE ONLY. DD MM YY

Joint Nature Conservation Committee Monkstone House City Road Designation date Site Reference Number Peterborough Cambridgeshire PE1 1JY UK Telephone/Fax: +44 (0)1733 – 562 626 / +44 (0)1733 – 555 948 Email: [email protected]

2. Date this sheet was completed/updated: Designated: 28 February 1995 3. Country: UK (England) 4. Name of the Ramsar site: Portsmouth Harbour

5. Designation of new Ramsar site or update of existing site:

This RIS is for: Updated information on an existing Ramsar site

6. For RIS updates only, changes to the site since its designation or earlier update: a) Site boundary and area:

** Important note: If the boundary and/or area of the designated site is being restricted/reduced, the Contracting Party should have followed the procedures established by the Conference of the Parties in the Annex to COP9 Resolution IX.6 and provided a report in line with paragraph 28 of that Annex, prior to the submission of an updated RIS. b) Describe briefly any major changes to the ecological character of the Ramsar site, including in the application of the Criteria, since the previous RIS for the site:

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11055 Page 1 of 9 Portsmouth Harbour

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 2

7. Map of site included: Refer to Annex III of the Explanatory Notes and Guidelines, for detailed guidance on provision of suitable maps, including digital maps. a) A map of the site, with clearly delineated boundaries, is included as: i) hard copy (required for inclusion of site in the Ramsar List): yes 9 -or- no ; ii) an electronic format (e.g. a JPEG or ArcView image) Yes iii) a GIS file providing geo-referenced site boundary vectors and attribute tables yes 9 -or- no ; b) Describe briefly the type of boundary delineation applied: e.g. the boundary is the same as an existing protected area (nature reserve, national park etc.), or follows a catchment boundary, or follows a geopolitical boundary such as a local government jurisdiction, follows physical boundaries such as roads, follows the shoreline of a waterbody, etc. The site boundary is the same as, or falls within, an existing protected area.

For precise boundary details, please refer to paper map provided at designation 8. Geographical coordinates (latitude/longitude): 50 49 41 N 01 07 32 W 9. General location: Include in which part of the country and which large administrative region(s), and the location of the nearest large town. Nearest town/city: Portsmouth Portsmouth Harbour lies on the central south coast of mainland England, to the west of Portsmouth City.

Administrative region: Hampshire

10. Elevation (average and/or max. & min.) (metres): 11. Area (hectares): 1248.77 Min. -1 Max. 1 Mean 0 12. General overview of the site: Provide a short paragraph giving a summary description of the principal ecological characteristics and importance of the wetland. Portsmouth Harbour is a large industrialised estuary and includes one of the four largest expanses of mudflats and tidal creeks on the south coast of Britain. The mudflats support large beds of narrow- leaved and dwarf eelgrass, extensive green alga and sea lettuce. The harbour has only a narrow connection to the sea via the Solent, and receives comparatively little freshwater, thus giving it an unusual hydrology. The site supports internationally important numbers of wintering dark-bellied brent geese and nationally important numbers of grey plover, dunlin and black-tailed godwit.

13. Ramsar Criteria: Circle or underline each Criterion applied to the designation of the Ramsar site. See Annex II of the Explanatory Notes and Guidelines for the Criteria and guidelines for their application (adopted by Resolution VII.11). 3, 6

14. Justification for the application of each Criterion listed in 13 above: Provide justification for each Criterion in turn, clearly identifying to which Criterion the justification applies (see Annex II for guidance on acceptable forms of justification). Ramsar criterion 3 The intertidal mudflat areas possess extensive beds of eelgrass Zostera angustifolia and Zostera noltei which support the grazing dark-bellied brent geese populations. The mud-snail Hydrobia ulvae is

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11055 Page 2 of 9 Portsmouth Harbour

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 3 found at extremely high densities, which helps to support the wading bird interest of the site. Common cord-grass Spartina anglica dominates large areas of the saltmarsh and there are also extensive areas of green algae Enteromorpha spp. and sea lettuce Ulva lactuca. More locally the saltmarsh is dominated by sea purslane Halimione portulacoides which gradates to more varied communities at the higher shore levels. The site also includes a number of saline lagoons hosting nationally important species.

Ramsar criterion 6 – species/populations occurring at levels of international importance.

Qualifying Species/populations (as identified at designation): Species with peak counts in winter: Dark-bellied brent goose, Branta bernicla 2105 individuals, representing an average of bernicla, 2.1% of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9-2002/3) Contemporary data and information on waterbird trends at this site and their regional (sub-national) and national contexts can be found in the Wetland Bird Survey report, which is updated annually. See www.bto.org/survey/webs/webs-alerts-index.htm. See Sections 21/22 for details of noteworthy species

15. Biogeography (required when Criteria 1 and/or 3 and /or certain applications of Criterion 2 are applied to the designation): Name the relevant biogeographic region that includes the Ramsar site, and identify the biogeographic regionalisation system that has been applied. a) biogeographic region: Atlantic b) biogeographic regionalisation scheme (include reference citation): Council Directive 92/43/EEC

16. Physical features of the site: Describe, as appropriate, the geology, geomorphology; origins - natural or artificial; hydrology; soil type; water quality; water depth, water permanence; fluctuations in water level; tidal variations; downstream area; general climate, etc.

Soil & geology acidic, neutral, mud, alluvium, nutrient-rich, sedimentary, gravel Geomorphology and landscape lowland, island, coastal, subtidal sediments (including sandbank/mudbank), intertidal sediments (including sandflat/mudflat), enclosed coast (including embayment), estuary, islands, lagoon Nutrient status eutrophic, mesotrophic pH circumneutral Salinity saline / euhaline Soil mainly mineral Water permanence usually permanent

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11055 Page 3 of 9 Portsmouth Harbour

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 4

Summary of main climatic features Annual averages (Bognor Regis, 1971–2000) (www.metoffice.com/climate/uk/averages/19712000/sites /bognor_regis.html) Max. daily temperature: 13.7° C Min. daily temperature: 7.7° C Days of air frost: 24.0 Rainfall: 717.4 mm Hrs. of sunshine: 1902.9

General description of the Physical Features: Portsmouth Harbour is a large industrialised estuary and includes one of the four largest expanses of mudflats and tidal creeks on the south coast of Britain. Portsmouth Harbour has only a narrow connection to the sea via the Solent, and receives comparatively little fresh water, thus giving it an unusual hydrology.

17. Physical features of the catchment area: Describe the surface area, general geology and geomorphological features, general soil types, general land use, and climate (including climate type). Portsmouth Harbour is a large industrialised estuary and includes one of the four largest expanses of mudflats and tidal creeks on the south coast of Britain. Portsmouth Harbour has only a narrow connection to the sea via the Solent, and receives comparatively little fresh water, thus giving it an unusual hydrology.

18. Hydrological values: Describe the functions and values of the wetland in groundwater recharge, flood control, sediment trapping, shoreline stabilization, etc. Shoreline stabilisation and dissipation of erosive forces 19. Wetland types: Marine/coastal wetland Code Name % Area G Tidal flats 59.3 F Estuarine waters 21.2 H Salt marshes 14 B Marine beds (e.g. sea grass beds) 4.8 Other Other 0.3 J Coastal brackish / saline lagoons 0.3 E Sand / shingle shores (including dune systems) 0.08

20. General ecological features: Provide further description, as appropriate, of the main habitats, vegetation types, plant and animal communities present in the Ramsar site, and the ecosystem services of the site and the benefits derived from them. Portsmouth Harbour comprises a large, sheltered estuarine basins supporting extensive intertidal mudflats with Zostera beds and significant areas of mainly Spartina saltmarsh. The site also includes small, isolated shingle islands supporting scrub and broad-leaved woodland and two saline lagoon habitats. The site supports important overwintering populations of migratory waterfowl. A number of off-site areas of grassland are particularly important feeding sites for overwintering dark-bellied brent geese and as roosting areas for waders. Ecosystem services

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11055 Page 4 of 9 Portsmouth Harbour

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 5

21. Noteworthy flora: Provide additional information on particular species and why they are noteworthy (expanding as necessary on information provided in 12. Justification for the application of the Criteria) indicating, e.g. which species/communities are unique, rare, endangered or biogeographically important, etc. Do not include here taxonomic lists of species present – these may be supplied as supplementary information to the RIS. Nationally important species occurring on the site. Higher Plants. Zostera noltei, Zostera angustifolia, Zostera marina, Inula crithmoides 22. Noteworthy fauna: Provide additional information on particular species and why they are noteworthy (expanding as necessary on information provided in 12. Justification for the application of the Criteria) indicating, e.g. which species/communities are unique, rare, endangered or biogeographically important, etc., including count data. Do not include here taxonomic lists of species present – these may be supplied as supplementary information to the RIS. Birds Species currently occurring at levels of national importance: Species with peak counts in spring/autumn: Little egret , Egretta garzetta, West 47 individuals, representing an average of 2.8% Mediterranean of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Black-tailed godwit , Limosa limosa islandica, 343 individuals, representing an average of 2.2% Iceland/W Europe of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Species Information Nationally important species occurring on the site: Lagoon sand shrimp Gammarus insensibilis (nationally scarce) Starlet sea anemone Nematostella vectensis (RDB vulnerable)

23. Social and cultural values: Describe if the site has any general social and/or cultural values e.g. fisheries production, forestry, religious importance, archaeological sites, social relations with the wetland, etc. Distinguish between historical/archaeological/religious significance and current socio-economic values. Aesthetic Archaeological/historical site Environmental education/ interpretation Fisheries production Non-consumptive recreation Scientific research Sport fishing Subsistence fishing Tourism Traditional cultural Transportation/navigation b) Is the site considered of international importance for holding, in addition to relevant ecological values, examples of significant cultural values, whether material or non-material, linked to its origin, conservation and/or ecological functioning? No

If Yes, describe this importance under one or more of the following categories: i) sites which provide a model of wetland wise use, demonstrating the application of traditional knowledge and methods of management and use that maintain the ecological character of the wetland:

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11055 Page 5 of 9 Portsmouth Harbour

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 6 ii) sites which have exceptional cultural traditions or records of former civilizations that have influenced the ecological character of the wetland: iii) sites where the ecological character of the wetland depends on the interaction with local communities or indigenous peoples: iv) sites where relevant non-material values such as sacred sites are present and their existence is strongly linked with the maintenance of the ecological character of the wetland:

24. Land tenure/ownership: Ownership category On-site Off-site Non-governmental organisation + + (NGO) Local authority, municipality etc. + + National/Crown Estate + Private + + Public/communal + Other + +

25. Current land (including water) use: Activity On-site Off-site Nature conservation + + Tourism + + Recreation + + Current scientific research + Fishing: (unspecified) + + Fishing: commercial + + Fishing: recreational/sport + + Gathering of shellfish + Bait collection + Industry + + Sewage treatment/disposal + + Harbour/port + + Flood control + Mineral exploration (excl. + hydrocarbons) Oil/gas exploration + Transport route + + Urban development + + Military activities + +

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11055 Page 6 of 9 Portsmouth Harbour

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 7

26. Factors (past, present or potential) adversely affecting the site’s ecological character, including changes in land (including water) use and development projects:

Explanation of reporting category: 1. Those factors that are still operating, but it is unclear if they are under control, as there is a lag in showing the management or regulatory regime to be successful. 2. Those factors that are not currently being managed, or where the regulatory regime appears to have been ineffective so far.

NA = Not Applicable because no factors have been reported. Adverse Factor Category Description of the problem (Newly reported Factors only) Reporting Category On-Site Off-Site Major Impact? Eutrophication 1 + + Unspecified 1 Disturbance and land-take pressures (on and off-site) + + development: urban use from urban and industrial development. Coastal engineering, e.g. 2 Coastal squeeze arising from coastal defences + + construction of sea defences for coastal protection

For category 2 factors only. What measures have been taken / are planned / regulatory processes invoked, to mitigate the effect of these factors? Coastal engineering, e.g. construction of sea defences for coastal protection - Shoreline management plan should identify areas to offset losses from coastal squeeze when in place.

Is the site subject to adverse ecological change? YES

27. Conservation measures taken: List national category and legal status of protected areas, including boundary relationships with the Ramsar site; management practices; whether an officially approved management plan exists and whether it is being implemented.

Conservation measure On-site Off-site Site/ Area of Special Scientific Interest + (SSSI/ASSI) Special Protection Area (SPA) + Land owned by a non-governmental organisation + + for nature conservation Management agreement + Site management statement/plan implemented +

b) Describe any other current management practices:

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11055 Page 7 of 9 Portsmouth Harbour

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 8

The management of Ramsar sites in the UK is determined by either a formal management plan or through other management planning processes, and is overseen by the relevant statutory conservation agency. Details of the precise management practises are given in these documents. 28. Conservation measures proposed but not yet implemented: e.g. management plan in preparation; official proposal as a legally protected area, etc. No information available 29. Current scientific research and facilities: e.g. details of current research projects, including biodiversity monitoring; existence of a field research station, etc. Contemporary. Fauna. Numbers of migratory and wintering wildfowl and waders are monitored annually as part of the national Wetland Birds Survey (WeBS) organised by the British Trust for Ornithology, Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee. Bird Ringing by Solent Shorebirds Study Group. Environment. Coastal Sediment (SCOPAC) Various research and educational establishments carry out ongoing research into a number of different aspects of the environment. Proposed: Intertidal Habitat Monitoring (EN/EA project)I Completed. Fauna. Benthic surveys of Haslar, Forton & Tipner Lakes Lagoon survey - Cockle Pond, Alver Lake Site-specific Environmental Assessments eg Priddys Hard, Cold Harbour, Tipner, Continental Ferry Port. 30. Current communications, education and public awareness (CEPA) activities related to or benefiting the site: e.g. visitor centre, observation hides and nature trails, information booklets, facilities for school visits, etc. Little at present, however there is scope for interpretation through implementation of the Harbour Plan, and Gosport and Portsmouth Millennium projects. 31. Current recreation and tourism: State if the wetland is used for recreation/tourism; indicate type(s) and their frequency/intensity. Activities, Facilities provided and Seasonality. Land-based recreation: Walking including dog-walking - All year. Bait-digging - All year - mainly winter Birdwatching - Autumn-Spring. Water-based recreation: Sailing, power-boating, windsurfing, canoeing - Mainly Spring-Autumn

32. Jurisdiction: Include territorial, e.g. state/region, and functional/sectoral, e.g. Dept. of Agriculture/Dept. of Environment, etc. Head, Natura 2000 and Ramsar Team, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, European Wildlife Division, Zone 1/07, Temple Quay House, 2 The Square, Temple Quay, Bristol, BS1 6EB

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11055 Page 8 of 9 Portsmouth Harbour

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 9

33. Management authority: Provide the name and address of the local office(s) of the agency(ies) or organisation(s) directly responsible for managing the wetland. Wherever possible provide also the title and/or name of the person or persons in this office with responsibility for the wetland. Site Designations Manager, English Nature, Sites and Surveillance Team, Northminster House, Northminster Road, Peterborough, PE1 1UA, UK 34. Bibliographical references: Scientific/technical references only. If biogeographic regionalisation scheme applied (see 15 above), list full reference citation for the scheme. Site-relevant references

Barne, JH, Robson, CF, Kaznowska, SS, Doody, JP & Davidson, NC (eds.) (1998) Coasts and seas of the United Kingdom. Region 9 Southern England: Hayling Island to Lyme Regis. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough. (Coastal Directories Series.) Buck, AL (ed.) (1997) An inventory of UK estuaries. Volume 6. Southern England. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough Burd, F (1989) The saltmarsh survey of Great Britain. An inventory of British saltmarshes. Nature Conservancy Council, Peterborough (Research & Survey in Nature Conservation, No. 17) Clark, M & Gurnell, A (1987) The Solent estuary: environmental background. Southampton University, GeoData Unit, Southampton Covey, R (1998) Chapter 7. Eastern Channel (Folkestone to Durlston Head) (MNCR Sector 7). In: Benthic marine ecosystems of Great Britain and the north-east Atlantic, ed. by K. Hiscock, 199-218. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough. (Coasts and Seas of the United Kingdom. MNCR series) Cranswick, PA, Waters, RJ, Musgrove, AJ & Pollitt, MS (1997) The Wetland Bird Survey 1995–96: wildfowl and wader counts. British Trust for Ornithology, Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds & Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Slimbridge Doody, JP, Johnston, C & Smith, B (1993) Directory of the North Sea coastal margin. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough Fowler, SL (1995) Review of nature conservation features and information within the Solent & Isle of Wight Sensitive Marine Area. Report to the Solent Forum Strategic Guidance Subgroup [Includes extensive bibliography] Musgrove, AJ, Langston, RHW, Baker, H & Ward, RM (eds.) (2003) Estuarine waterbirds at low tide. The WeBS Low Tide Counts 1992–93 to 1998–99. WSG/BTO/WWT/RSPB/JNCC, Thetford (International Wader Studies, No. 16) Musgrove, AJ, Pollitt, MS, Hall, C, Hearn, RD, Holloway, SJ, Marshall, PE, Robinson, JA & Cranswick, PA (2001) The Wetland Bird Survey 1999–2000: wildfowl and wader counts. British Trust for Ornithology, Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds & Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Slimbridge. www.wwt.org.uk/publications/default.asp?PubID=14 Nicholas Pearson Associates (1996) Portsmouth Harbour Plan Review: draft for working group. July 1996. Centre for Coastal Zone Management, University of Portsmouth Sneddon, P & Randall, RE (1994) Coastal vegetated shingle structures of Great Britain: Appendix 3. Shingle sites in England. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough Stroud, DA, Chambers, D, Cook, S, Buxton, N, Fraser, B, Clement, P, Lewis, P, McLean, I, Baker, H & Whitehead, S (eds.) (2001) The UK SPA network: its scope and content. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough (3 vols.) www.jncc.gov.uk/UKSPA/default.htm Tubbs, C (1991) The Solent: a changing wildlife heritage. Hampshire and Isle of Wight Wildlife Trust, Romsey

Please return to: Ramsar Secretariat, Rue Mauverney 28, CH-1196 Gland, Switzerland Telephone: +41 22 999 0170 • Fax: +41 22 999 0169 • email: [email protected]

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11055 Page 9 of 9 Portsmouth Harbour

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008

Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS) Categories approved by Recommendation 4.7 (1990), as amended by Resolution VIII.13 of the 8th Conference of the Contracting Parties (2002) and Resolutions IX.1 Annex B, IX.6, IX.21 and IX. 22 of the 9th Conference of the Contracting Parties (2005).

Notes for compilers: 1. The RIS should be completed in accordance with the attached Explanatory Notes and Guidelines for completing the Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands. Compilers are strongly advised to read this guidance before filling in the RIS.

2. Further information and guidance in support of Ramsar site designations are provided in the Strategic Framework for the future development of the List of Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar Wise Use Handbook 7, 2nd edition, as amended by COP9 Resolution IX.1 Annex B). A 3rd edition of the Handbook, incorporating these amendments, is in preparation and will be available in 2006.

3. Once completed, the RIS (and accompanying map(s)) should be submitted to the Ramsar Secretariat. Compilers should provide an electronic (MS Word) copy of the RIS and, where possible, digital copies of all maps.

1. Name and address of the compiler of this form: FOR OFFICE USE ONLY. DD MM YY

Joint Nature Conservation Committee Monkstone House City Road Designation date Site Reference Number Peterborough Cambridgeshire PE1 1JY UK Telephone/Fax: +44 (0)1733 – 562 626 / +44 (0)1733 – 555 948 Email: [email protected]

2. Date this sheet was completed/updated: Designated: 28 October 1987 3. Country: UK (England) 4. Name of the Ramsar site: Chichester and Langstone Harbours

5. Designation of new Ramsar site or update of existing site:

This RIS is for: Updated information on an existing Ramsar site

6. For RIS updates only, changes to the site since its designation or earlier update: a) Site boundary and area:

** Important note: If the boundary and/or area of the designated site is being restricted/reduced, the Contracting Party should have followed the procedures established by the Conference of the Parties in the Annex to COP9 Resolution IX.6 and provided a report in line with paragraph 28 of that Annex, prior to the submission of an updated RIS. b) Describe briefly any major changes to the ecological character of the Ramsar site, including in the application of the Criteria, since the previous RIS for the site:

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11013 Page 1 of 11 Chichester and Langstone Harbours

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 2

7. Map of site included: Refer to Annex III of the Explanatory Notes and Guidelines, for detailed guidance on provision of suitable maps, including digital maps. a) A map of the site, with clearly delineated boundaries, is included as: i) hard copy (required for inclusion of site in the Ramsar List): yes 9 -or- no ; ii) an electronic format (e.g. a JPEG or ArcView image) Yes iii) a GIS file providing geo-referenced site boundary vectors and attribute tables yes 9 -or- no ; b) Describe briefly the type of boundary delineation applied: e.g. the boundary is the same as an existing protected area (nature reserve, national park etc.), or follows a catchment boundary, or follows a geopolitical boundary such as a local government jurisdiction, follows physical boundaries such as roads, follows the shoreline of a waterbody, etc. The site boundary is the same as, or falls within, an existing protected area.

For precise boundary details, please refer to paper map provided at designation 8. Geographical coordinates (latitude/longitude): 50 48 23 N 00 55 12 W 9. General location: Include in which part of the country and which large administrative region(s), and the location of the nearest large town. Nearest town/city: Portsmouth The site lies on the central south coast of mainland England, approximately 1 km east of Portsmouth. Administrative region: Hampshire; West Sussex

10. Elevation (average and/or max. & min.) (metres): 11. Area (hectares): 5810.03 Min. -2 Max. 4 Mean 0 12. General overview of the site: Provide a short paragraph giving a summary description of the principal ecological characteristics and importance of the wetland. Chichester and Langstone Harbours are large, sheltered estuarine basins comprising extensive mud and sand flats exposed at low tide. The site is of particular significance for over-wintering wildfowl and waders and also a wide range of coastal and transitional habitats supporting important plant and animal communities.

13. Ramsar Criteria: Circle or underline each Criterion applied to the designation of the Ramsar site. See Annex II of the Explanatory Notes and Guidelines for the Criteria and guidelines for their application (adopted by Resolution VII.11). 1, 5, 6

14. Justification for the application of each Criterion listed in 13 above: Provide justification for each Criterion in turn, clearly identifying to which Criterion the justification applies (see Annex II for guidance on acceptable forms of justification). Ramsar criterion 1 Two large estuarine basins linked by the channel which divides Hayling Island from the main Hampshire coastline. The site includes intertidal mudflats, saltmarsh, sand and shingle spits and sand dunes.

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11013 Page 2 of 11 Chichester and Langstone Harbours

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 3

Ramsar criterion 5

Assemblages of international importance:

Species with peak counts in winter: 76480 waterfowl (5 year peak mean 1998/99-2002/2003)

Ramsar criterion 6 – species/populations occurring at levels of international importance.

Qualifying Species/populations (as identified at designation): Species with peak counts in spring/autumn: Ringed plover , Charadrius hiaticula, 853 individuals, representing an average of 1.1% Europe/Northwest Africa of the population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Black-tailed godwit , Limosa limosa islandica, 906 individuals, representing an average of 2.5% Iceland/W Europe of the population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Common redshank , Tringa totanus totanus, 2577 individuals, representing an average of 1% of the population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Species with peak counts in winter: Dark-bellied brent goose, Branta bernicla 12987 individuals, representing an average of 6% bernicla, of the population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Common shelduck , Tadorna tadorna, NW 1468 individuals, representing an average of Europe 1.8% of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9-2002/3) Grey plover , Pluvialis squatarola, E Atlantic/W 3043 individuals, representing an average of Africa -wintering 1.2% of the population (5 year peak mean 1998/9-2002/3) Dunlin , Calidris alpina alpina, W Siberia/W 33436 individuals, representing an average of Europe 2.5% of the population (5 year peak mean 1998/9-2002/3) Species/populations identified subsequent to designation for possible future consideration under criterion 6. Species regularly supported during the breeding season: Little tern , Sterna albifrons albifrons, W 130 apparently occupied nests, representing an Europe average of 1.1% of the breeding population (Seabird 2000 Census) Contemporary data and information on waterbird trends at this site and their regional (sub-national) and national contexts can be found in the Wetland Bird Survey report, which is updated annually. See www.bto.org/survey/webs/webs-alerts-index.htm. Details of bird species occuring at levels of National importance are given in Section 22

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11013 Page 3 of 11 Chichester and Langstone Harbours

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 4

15. Biogeography (required when Criteria 1 and/or 3 and /or certain applications of Criterion 2 are applied to the designation): Name the relevant biogeographic region that includes the Ramsar site, and identify the biogeographic regionalisation system that has been applied. a) biogeographic region: Atlantic b) biogeographic regionalisation scheme (include reference citation): Council Directive 92/43/EEC

16. Physical features of the site: Describe, as appropriate, the geology, geomorphology; origins - natural or artificial; hydrology; soil type; water quality; water depth, water permanence; fluctuations in water level; tidal variations; downstream area; general climate, etc.

Soil & geology neutral, shingle, sand, mud, alluvium, nutrient-rich, sedimentary, clay, gravel Geomorphology and landscape lowland, coastal, floodplain, shingle bar, subtidal sediments (including sandbank/mudbank), intertidal sediments (including sandflat/mudflat), enclosed coast (including embayment), estuary, islands, lagoon, pools Nutrient status eutrophic, mesotrophic pH circumneutral Salinity brackish / mixosaline, saline / euhaline Soil mainly mineral Water permanence usually permanent Summary of main climatic features Annual averages (Bognor Regis, 1971–2000) (www.metoffice.com/climate/uk/averages/19712000/sites /bognor_regis.html) Max. daily temperature: 13.7° C Min. daily temperature: 7.7° C Days of air frost: 24.0 Rainfall: 717.4 mm Hrs. of sunshine: 1902.9

General description of the Physical Features: Chichester and Langstone Harbours are large, sheltered estuarine basins comprising extensive sand- and mud-flats exposed at low tide. The two harbours are joined by a stretch of water that separates Hayling Island from the mainland. Tidal channels drain the basin and penetrate far inland. The basin contains a wide range of coastal habitats.

17. Physical features of the catchment area: Describe the surface area, general geology and geomorphological features, general soil types, general land use, and climate (including climate type). Chichester and Langstone Harbours are large, sheltered estuarine basins comprising extensive sand- and mud-flats exposed at low tide. The two harbours are joined by a stretch of water that separates Hayling Island from the mainland. Tidal channels drain the basin and penetrate far inland.

18. Hydrological values: Describe the functions and values of the wetland in groundwater recharge, flood control, sediment trapping, shoreline stabilization, etc. Shoreline stabilisation and dissipation of erosive forces, Sediment trapping, Maintenance of water quality (removal of nutrients)

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11013 Page 4 of 11 Chichester and Langstone Harbours

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 5

19. Wetland types: Marine/coastal wetland Code Name % Area G Tidal flats 46 H Salt marshes 21.4 Other Other 14.3 F Estuarine waters 14.1 B Marine beds (e.g. sea grass beds) 1.7 Ts Freshwater marshes / pools: seasonal / intermittent 0.9 E Sand / shingle shores (including dune systems) 0.8 Tp Freshwater marshes / pools: permanent 0.4 Sp Saline / brackish marshes: permanent 0.3 W Shrub-dominated wetlands 0.07 M Rivers / streams / creeks: permanent 0.02 J Coastal brackish / saline lagoons 0.01

20. General ecological features: Provide further description, as appropriate, of the main habitats, vegetation types, plant and animal communities present in the Ramsar site, and the ecosystem services of the site and the benefits derived from them. The site comprises two large, interconnected sheltered estuarine basins providing extensive intertidal mud and sand flats with eelgrass Zostera spp. beds, large areas of mixed saltmarsh and extensive cord-grass Spartina spp. swards in an advanced state of degeneration. Fringing habitats include shingle spits, saline, brackish and freshwater lagoons, coastal grazing marsh and deciduous woodland. The site supports important overwintering populations of migratory waterfowl. Ecosystem services

21. Noteworthy flora: Provide additional information on particular species and why they are noteworthy (expanding as necessary on information provided in 12. Justification for the application of the Criteria) indicating, e.g. which species/communities are unique, rare, endangered or biogeographically important, etc. Do not include here taxonomic lists of species present – these may be supplied as supplementary information to the RIS. Nationally important species occurring on the site. Higher plants. Polypogon monspeliensis, Zostera angustifolia, Zostera marina, Zostera noltei 22. Noteworthy fauna: Provide additional information on particular species and why they are noteworthy (expanding as necessary on information provided in 12. Justification for the application of the Criteria) indicating, e.g. which species/communities are unique, rare, endangered or biogeographically important, etc., including count data. Do not include here taxonomic lists of species present – these may be supplied as supplementary information to the RIS. Birds Species currently occurring at levels of national importance: Species regularly supported during the breeding season: Mediterranean gull , Larus melanocephalus, 47 apparently occupied nests, representing an Europe average of 43.5% of the GB population (Seabird 2000 Census) Black-headed gull , Larus ridibundus, N & C 3180 apparently occupied nests, representing an Europe average of 2.4% of the GB population (Seabird 2000 Census)

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11013 Page 5 of 11 Chichester and Langstone Harbours

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 6

Common tern , Sterna hirundo hirundo, N & E 127 apparently occupied nests, representing an Europe average of 1.2% of the GB population (Seabird 2000 Census) Species with peak counts in spring/autumn: Little egret , Egretta garzetta, West 224 individuals, representing an average of 13.5% Mediterranean of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Eurasian oystercatcher , Haematopus ostralegus 3403 individuals, representing an average of 1% ostralegus, Europe & NW Africa -wintering of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Whimbrel , Numenius phaeopus, 192 individuals, representing an average of 6.4% Europe/Western Africa of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3 - spring peak) Eurasian curlew , Numenius arquata arquata, N. 3108 individuals, representing an average of 2.1% a. arquata Europe of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) (breeding) Spotted redshank , Tringa erythropus, Europe/W 6 individuals, representing an average of 4.4% of Africa the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Common greenshank , Tringa nebularia, 215 individuals, representing an average of 36% Europe/W Africa of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Ruddy turnstone , Arenaria interpres interpres, 569 individuals, representing an average of 1.1% NE Canada, Greenland/W Europe & NW Africa of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Species with peak counts in winter: Little grebe , Tachybaptus ruficollis ruficollis, 131 individuals, representing an average of 1.6% Europe to E Urals, NW Africa of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Black-necked grebe , Podiceps nigricollis 14 individuals, representing an average of 11.6% nigricollis, Europe, N Africa of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Great bittern , Botaurus stellaris stellaris, W 1 individuals, representing an average of 1% of Europe, NW Africa the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Eurasian teal , Anas crecca, NW Europe 2226 individuals, representing an average of 1.1% of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Red-breasted merganser , Mergus serrator, NW 306 individuals, representing an average of 3.1% & C Europe of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Water rail , Rallus aquaticus, Europe 12 individuals, representing an average of 2.6% of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Bar-tailed godwit , Limosa lapponica lapponica, 1189 individuals, representing an average of 1.9% W Palearctic of the GB population (5 year peak mean 1998/9- 2002/3) Species Information 17 British Red Data Book species and 84 nationally scarce species have been recorded from Chichester and Langstone Harbours Ramsar site.

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11013 Page 6 of 11 Chichester and Langstone Harbours

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 7

23. Social and cultural values: Describe if the site has any general social and/or cultural values e.g. fisheries production, forestry, religious importance, archaeological sites, social relations with the wetland, etc. Distinguish between historical/archaeological/religious significance and current socio-economic values. Aesthetic Aquatic vegetation (e.g. reeds, willows, seaweed) Archaeological/historical site Environmental education/ interpretation Fisheries production Livestock grazing Non-consumptive recreation Scientific research Sport fishing Sport hunting Subsistence fishing Tourism Traditional cultural Transportation/navigation b) Is the site considered of international importance for holding, in addition to relevant ecological values, examples of significant cultural values, whether material or non-material, linked to its origin, conservation and/or ecological functioning? No

If Yes, describe this importance under one or more of the following categories: i) sites which provide a model of wetland wise use, demonstrating the application of traditional knowledge and methods of management and use that maintain the ecological character of the wetland: ii) sites which have exceptional cultural traditions or records of former civilizations that have influenced the ecological character of the wetland: iii) sites where the ecological character of the wetland depends on the interaction with local communities or indigenous peoples: iv) sites where relevant non-material values such as sacred sites are present and their existence is strongly linked with the maintenance of the ecological character of the wetland:

24. Land tenure/ownership: Ownership category On-site Off-site Non-governmental organisation + + (NGO) Local authority, municipality etc. + + National/Crown Estate + + Private + + Public/communal + +

25. Current land (including water) use: Activity On-site Off-site Nature conservation + + Tourism + + Recreation + + Current scientific research +

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11013 Page 7 of 11 Chichester and Langstone Harbours

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 8

Cutting of vegetation (small- + scale/subsistence) Fishing: commercial + + Fishing: recreational/sport + + Marine/saltwater aquaculture + Gathering of shellfish + Bait collection + Arable agriculture (unspecified) + Permanent arable agriculture + Livestock watering hole/pond + Permanent pastoral agriculture + Hay meadows + + Hunting: recreational/sport + + Industry + + Sewage treatment/disposal + + Harbour/port + + Flood control + + Irrigation (incl. agricultural water + supply) Mineral exploration (excl. + hydrocarbons) Transport route + + Domestic water supply + Urban development + Non-urbanised settlements + + Military activities + + Horticulture (incl. market + gardening)

26. Factors (past, present or potential) adversely affecting the site’s ecological character, including changes in land (including water) use and development projects:

Explanation of reporting category: 1. Those factors that are still operating, but it is unclear if they are under control, as there is a lag in showing the management or regulatory regime to be successful. 2. Those factors that are not currently being managed, or where the regulatory regime appears to have been ineffective so far.

NA = Not Applicable because no factors have been reported. Adverse Factor Category Description of the problem (Newly reported Factors only) Reporting Category On-Site Off-Site Major Impact? Erosion 2 + + Eutrophication 1 + + Pollution – domestic 1 + sewage

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11013 Page 8 of 11 Chichester and Langstone Harbours

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 9

For category 2 factors only. What measures have been taken / are planned / regulatory processes invoked, to mitigate the effect of these factors? Erosion - Coastal Defence Strategies, regulation of private coastal defences, shoreline management plans are in place or are being developed. Some larger-scale saltmarsh re-creation projects, beneficial usage of maintenance dredgings and managed realignment scheme to offset losses to coastal squeeze have been proposed. CHaMPs identify potential areas suitable for managed realignment.

Is the site subject to adverse ecological change? YES

27. Conservation measures taken: List national category and legal status of protected areas, including boundary relationships with the Ramsar site; management practices; whether an officially approved management plan exists and whether it is being implemented.

Conservation measure On-site Off-site Site/ Area of Special Scientific Interest + + (SSSI/ASSI) Special Protection Area (SPA) + Land owned by a non-governmental organisation + for nature conservation Management agreement + + Site management statement/plan implemented + Area of Outstanding National Beauty (AONB) + + Special Area of Conservation (SAC) +

b) Describe any other current management practices: The management of Ramsar sites in the UK is determined by either a formal management plan or through other management planning processes, and is overseen by the relevant statutory conservation agency. Details of the precise management practises are given in these documents. 28. Conservation measures proposed but not yet implemented: e.g. management plan in preparation; official proposal as a legally protected area, etc. No information available 29. Current scientific research and facilities: e.g. details of current research projects, including biodiversity monitoring; existence of a field research station, etc. Contemporary. Fauna. Numbers of migratory and wintering wildfowl and waders are monitored annually as part of the national Wetland Birds Survey (WeBS) organised by the British Trust for Ornithology, Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee. Bird Ringing by Solent Shorebirds Study Group. Environment. Coastal Sediment (SCOPAC) Water Quality/Eutrophication (EA/Southern Water). Various research and educational establishments carry out ongoing research into a number of different aspects of the environment.

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11013 Page 9 of 11 Chichester and Langstone Harbours

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 10

Flora. Spartina survey (EN project). Completed. Environment. Extensive research and survey into: Tidal regimes. Proposed: Intertidal Habitat Monitoring (EN/EA project). Sediment movement. Flora and Fauna. The distribution of all major plant and animal groups/communities. 30. Current communications, education and public awareness (CEPA) activities related to or benefiting the site: e.g. visitor centre, observation hides and nature trails, information booklets, facilities for school visits, etc. Interpretation facilities and interpretative panels exist at strategic locations on the Harbour footpaths; all nature reserve areas are covered by warden and ranger services with an educational remit. An Education Officer is employed by the Chichester Harbour Conservancy to instruct both school parties and adults in the cultural and nature conservation aspects of the harbour. 31. Current recreation and tourism: State if the wetland is used for recreation/tourism; indicate type(s) and their frequency/intensity. Activities, Facilities provided and Seasonality. Walking, including dog walking: all year. Birdwatching: all year. Angling and bait-digging: all year. Swimming (in restricted areas) - mostly summer. Sailing, windsurfing, canoeing, waterskiing. Sept-Feb wildfowling. 32. Jurisdiction: Include territorial, e.g. state/region, and functional/sectoral, e.g. Dept. of Agriculture/Dept. of Environment, etc. Head, Natura 2000 and Ramsar Team, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, European Wildlife Division, Zone 1/07, Temple Quay House, 2 The Square, Temple Quay, Bristol, BS1 6EB 33. Management authority: Provide the name and address of the local office(s) of the agency(ies) or organisation(s) directly responsible for managing the wetland. Wherever possible provide also the title and/or name of the person or persons in this office with responsibility for the wetland. Site Designations Manager, English Nature, Sites and Surveillance Team, Northminster House, Northminster Road, Peterborough, PE1 1UA, UK 34. Bibliographical references: Scientific/technical references only. If biogeographic regionalisation scheme applied (see 15 above), list full reference citation for the scheme. Site-relevant references

Barne, JH, Robson, CF, Kaznowska, SS, Doody, JP & Davidson, NC (eds.) (1998) Coasts and seas of the United Kingdom. Region 9 Southern England: Hayling Island to Lyme Regis. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough. (Coastal Directories Series.) Barne, JH, Robson, CF, Kaznowska, SS, Doody, JP & Davidson, NC & Buck, AL (eds.) (1998) Coasts and seas of the United Kingdom. Region 8 Sussex: Rye Bay to Chichester Harbour. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough. (Coastal Directories Series.)

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11013 Page 10 of 11 Chichester and Langstone Harbours

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), page 11

Bratton, JH (ed.) (1991) British Red Data Books: 3. Invertebrates other than insects. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough Buck, AL (ed.) (1997) An inventory of UK estuaries. Volume 6. Southern England. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough Burd, F (1989) The saltmarsh survey of Great Britain. An inventory of British saltmarshes. Nature Conservancy Council, Peterborough (Research & Survey in Nature Conservation, No. 17) Chichester Harbour Conservancy www.conservancy.co.uk Clark, M & Gurnell, A (1987) The Solent estuary: environmental background. Southampton University, GeoData Unit, Southampton Covey, R (1998) Chapter 7. Eastern Channel (Folkestone to Durlston Head) (MNCR Sector 7). In: Benthic marine ecosystems of Great Britain and the north-east Atlantic, ed. by K. Hiscock, 199-218. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough. (Coasts and Seas of the United Kingdom. MNCR series) Cranswick, PA, Waters, RJ, Musgrove, AJ & Pollitt, MS (1997) The Wetland Bird Survey 1995–96: wildfowl and wader counts. British Trust for Ornithology, Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds & Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Slimbridge Doody, JP, Johnston, C & Smith, B (1993) Directory of the North Sea coastal margin. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough Fowler, SL (1995) Review of nature conservation features and information within the Solent & Isle of Wight Sensitive Marine Area. Report to the Solent Forum Strategic Guidance Subgroup [Includes extensive bibliography] Hampshire and Isle of Wight Wildlife Trust (2004) Wetlands of International Importance designated under the Ramsar Convention, The Solent Coast. Hampshire and Isle of Wight Wildlife Trust, Report to the Environment Agency Musgrove, AJ, Langston, RHW, Baker, H & Ward, RM (eds.) (2003) Estuarine waterbirds at low tide. The WeBS Low Tide Counts 1992–93 to 1998–99. WSG/BTO/WWT/RSPB/JNCC, Thetford (International Wader Studies, No. 16) Musgrove, AJ, Pollitt, MS, Hall, C, Hearn, RD, Holloway, SJ, Marshall, PE, Robinson, JA & Cranswick, PA (2001) The Wetland Bird Survey 1999–2000: wildfowl and wader counts. British Trust for Ornithology, Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds & Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Slimbridge. www.wwt.org.uk/publications/default.asp?PubID=14 Ratcliffe, DA (ed.) (1977) A Nature Conservation Review. The selection of biological sites of national importance to nature conservation in Britain. Cambridge University Press (for the Natural Environment Research Council and the Nature Conservancy Council), Cambridge (2 vols.) Sneddon, P & Randall, RE (1994) Coastal vegetated shingle structures of Great Britain: Appendix 3. Shingle sites in England. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough Stroud, DA, Chambers, D, Cook, S, Buxton, N, Fraser, B, Clement, P, Lewis, P, McLean, I, Baker, H & Whitehead, S (eds.) (2001) The UK SPA network: its scope and content. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough (3 vols.) www.jncc.gov.uk/UKSPA/default.htm Tubbs, C (1991) The Solent: a changing wildlife heritage. Hampshire and Isle of Wight Wildlife Trust, RomseyTubbs, CR & Tubbs, JM (1980) Wader and shelduck feeding distribution in Langstone Harbour, Hampshire. Bird Study, 27, 239-248

Please return to: Ramsar Secretariat, Rue Mauverney 28, CH-1196 Gland, Switzerland Telephone: +41 22 999 0170 • Fax: +41 22 999 0169 • email: [email protected]

Ramsar Information Sheet: UK11013 Page 11 of 11 Chichester and Langstone Harbours

Produced by JNCC: Version 3.0, 13/06/2008 Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Appendix 4: Key environmental conditions that support site integrity for Natura site component SSSIs.

Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Appendix 4: Key environmental conditions that support site integrity for Natura site component SSSIs. Solent and Southampton Water SPA

Condition Status and Trends There are 22 coincidental or adjacent SSSI sites of varying statuses; Yar Estuary SSSI: 30 units; 83.15% of the area is favourable and 16.85% unfavourable recovering. Most of the unfavourable area is affected by sea level rise and 'coastal squeeze'. Much of the unit is backed by hard sea defences so that the habitats are unable to retreat landward as levels rise. Changes in water level may also be having adverse impacts on the distribution and extent of biotopes associated with the intertidal sediments. The issue is being addressed through the creation of compensatory habitat and coastal realignment at Medmerry. Hurst Castle and Lymington River Estuary SSSI: 34 units; 27.04% of the area is favourable, 70.09% unfavourable recovering and 2.87% unfavourable declining. Inappropriate sea defences along the eastern part of the broadleaved, mixed and yew woodland - lowland unit have caused loss of vegetation along a 5 metre wide strip of one unfavourable declining unit and another is experiencing loss of intertidal habitat due to natural erosion. Operation of ferries is accelerating this erosion. Bembridge School and Cliffs SSSI: 6 units; 92.45% of the area is favourable and 7.55% unfavourable no change. Unfavourable units generally due to presence of beach huts or landscaped gardens affecting interest feature and vegetation encroachment on cliff face. New Forest SSSI: 582 units; 45.53% of the area is favourable, 53.22% unfavourable recovering, 0.43% unfavourable no change, 0.81% unfavourable declining and 0.01% destroyed/part destroyed. Only small areas of the SSSI overlap with the SPA. King's Quay Shore SSSI: 30 units; 76.99% of the area is favourable, 20.95% unfavourable recovering, 1.86% unfavourable declining and 0.21% destroyed / part destroyed. Unfavourable declining and destroyed areas are woodland areas affected by inappropriate woodland management. Sowley Pond SSSI: 2 units both of which are favourable. Upper Hamble Estuary and Woods: 16 units; 85.94% of the area is favourable, 11.31% unfavourable recovering and 2.75% unfavourable no change. Unfavourable unit is outside of the SPA geographical area. Whitecliff Bay and Bembridge Ledges SSSI: 8 units; 99.07% of the area is favourable and 0.93% unfavourable no change. Eling and Bury Marshes SSSI: 4 units; 11.46% of the area is favourable and 88.54% unfavourable recovering. Unfavourable recovering units are affected by diffuse pollution, which is being addressed by through the Solent DWP action, and by sea level rise creating 'coastal squeeze' as much of the unit is backed by hard sea defences. However, the issue is being addressed through the creation of compensatory habitat and coastal re-alignment at Medmerry. Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

Lincegrove and Hackett's Marshes SSSI: 3 units, all unfavourable recovering. The excessive algal weed and diffuse pollution impacts are being addressed through the South Downs and Harbours Clean Water Partnership Delivery Strategy. 7.1.19 Brading Marshes to St Helen's Ledges SSSI: 58 units; 50.57% of the area is favourable, 39.79% unfavourable recovering and 9.64% unfavourable declining. Unfavourable declining units are affected by different factors; coastal squeeze due to sea defences, encroachment by scrub, undergrazing, poor waterway management and illicit vehicles. 7.1.20 Lower Test Valley SSSI: 8 units all of which are of favourable status. 7.1.21 Lymington River ReedBeds SSSI: 4 units; 35.50% of the area is favourable and 64.50% is unfavourable recovering. Unfavourable units are part of HLS scheme and remedied by the Lymington reed bed water level management plan, which re-establishes tidal exchange in the Lymington River. The scheme will deliver 21ha of intertidal habitat, and address the water levels to create a more sustainable and manageable suite of habitats. 7.1.22 Dibden Bay SSSI: 2 units; 98.00% of the area is favourable and 2% is unfavourable declining. This SSSI only abuts the SPA alongside the eastern edge of the site. The unfavourable unit is outside of the SPA geographical area. 7.1.23 Hythe to Calshot Marshes SSSI: 6 units, all unfavourable recovering. The habitat is affected significantly by sea level rise and 'coastal squeeze' as much of the unit is backed by hard sea defences so that the habitats are unable to retreat landward as levels rise. Changes in water level may also be having adverse impacts on the distribution and extent of biotopes associated with the intertidal sediments. 7.1.24 The issue is being addressed through the creation of compensatory habitat and coastal re-alignment at Medmerry. declining. There is only one unit, to the south of the SSSI, which is coincidental to the SPA, which has a status of ‘unfavourable no change’ (water flow, water quality and some aspects of channel and banks habitat structure are below targets and standards). Main causes include; inappropriate weirs dams and other structures, invasive freshwater species, siltation and agriculture/run off water pollution. 7.1.25 Lee-on-the Solent to Itchen Estuary SSSI: 27 units; 82.49% of the area is favourable, 15.98% unfavourable recovering, 1.53% unfavourable no change. Unfavourable recovering units show significant retreat of coastal marsh with large areas being replaced by mudflats. Algal mats in the Hamble estuary and elsewhere, with Ulva lactuca particularly abundant, suggests eutrophication. The ‘unfavourable no change’ unit contains a submerged clay bed feature, which is no longer exposed due to sediment recharge. With the lack of long-shore drift and change in beach profile, the sediment from the recharge appears to be accumulating on the exposures. River Test SSSI: 91 units; 18.50% favourable, 36.99% unfavourable recovering, 12.36% unfavourable no change and 32.16% unfavourable Titchfield Haven SSSI: 8 units; 96.48% of the area is favourable and 3.52% unfavourable declining. The unfavourable area is a reedbed community which has scrub encroachment including willow and oak saplings. 7.1.26 Newtown Harbour SSSI: 78 units; 89.33% of the area is favourable, 10.32% unfavourable recovering and 0.35% unfavourable declining. Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

7.1.27 Unfavourable recovering units include diffuse pollution issues, which are being addressed through the Isle of Wight Catchment Sensative Farming Project. The unfavourable declining unit is outside of the SPA geographic boundary. 7.1.28 Medina Estuary SSSI: 12 units all of which are favourable. 7.1.29 Thorness Bay SSSI: 14 units; 96.21% of the area is favourable and 3.79% is unfavourable declining. The unfavourable declining areas are showing signs of under grazing and succession with scrub encroachment and herbaceous plants. The shingle bank of one unit is highly trampled due to foot traffic from the holiday park lane and car park. 7.1.30 Lymington River SSSI consists of one unfavourable recovering unit, of which only the southern most points of the river overlap with the SPA geographical area. The assessment concerns have now been addressed and remedied by the Lymington reed bed water level management plan (See above commentary for Lymington River ReedBeds SSSI). Ryde Sands and Wootton Creek SSSI: 17 units of which 71.92% of the area is favourable and 28.08% is unfavourable recovering. The western areas of unfavourable recovering units (that are coincidental) are affected by sea level rise and 'coastal squeeze' as much of the unit is backed by hard sea defences so that the habitats are unable to retreat landward as levels rise. Changes in water level may also be having adverse impacts on the distribution and extent of biotopes associated with the intertidal sediments. The issue is being addressed through the creation of compensatory habitat and coastal re-alignment at Medmerry. The other mid-point coincidental area is affected by heavy use by hovercraft and access to the marina. No visible strandline and high visitor use for this area suggest it is not in favourable condition. North Solent SSSI: 98 units; 63.21% of the area is favourable, 34.94% is unfavourable recovering, 0.93% unfavourable no change and 0.91% unfavourable declining. At several locations of open coast, active erosion of salt marsh is apparent with significant areas of marsh reverting to mudflat, particularly around the seaward areas of the Beaulieu River estuary. Some units are remedied by the Lymington reed bed water level management plan (See above commentary for Lymington River ReedBeds SSSI). The unfavourable declining area is outside of SPA geographic area. Key Environmental Conditions Supporting Site Integrity  Sufficient space between the site and development to allow for managed retreat of intertidal habitats and avoid coastal squeeze  No dredging or land-claim of coastal habitats  Unpolluted water  Absence of nutrient enrichment in the intertidal zone  Absence of eutrophication and acidification from atmospheric pollution  Absence of non-native species  Low levels of recreational pressure both on shore and offshore can avoid disturbance effects during sensitive (overwintering) periods Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

 Freshwater inputs are of value for providing a localised increase in prey biomass for certain bird species, specific microclimatic conditions and are used for preening and drinking  Low amounts of silt loss  Short grasslands surrounding the site are essential to maintaining interest features as they are now the key foraging resource Portsmouth Harbour SPA

Condition Status and Trends There is one coincident or adjacent SSSI site of mostly unfavourable recovering status; Portsmouth SSSI: 23 units consisting of; 23.44% Favourable, 76.19% unfavourable recovering, 0.02% unfavourable declining and 0.35% destroyed /part destroyed. Key Environmental Conditions Supporting Site Integrity  Sufficient space between the site and development to allow for managed retreat of intertidal habitats and avoid coastal squeeze  Unpolluted water  Absence of nutrient enrichment of water  Absence of non-native species  Maintenance of appropriate hydrological regime Chichester and Langstone Harbours SPA

Condition Status and Trends There are four coincident or adjacent SSSI sites of varying statuses; Chichester Harbour SSSI: 43 units; 22.09% of the area is favourable, 77.67% unfavourable recovering and 0.24% unfavourable no change. Unfavourable recovering areas are mainly units affected significantly by sea level rise and 'coastal squeeze' as much of the units’ area is backed by hard sea defences so habitats are unable to retreat landward as levels rise. Recovery is through creation of compensatory habitat and coastal re-alignment at Medmerry. Some unfavourable units including the ‘unfavourable no change’ units are impacted by diffuse pollution creating excessive nutrients, characterised by green algae. Sinah Common SSSI: 2 units, both unfavourable recovering. Scrub levels on dune grassland remains above target although there is evidence of recent clearance. Langstone Harbour SSSI: 13 units; 8.96% of the area is favourable, 90.60% unfavourable recovering and 0.45% unfavourable declining. Issues associated with 'coastal squeeze' and changes in water level are being addressed through the creation of compensatory habitat and coastal re-alignment Applicant’s Report to Inform Appropriate Assessment

at Medmerry. There is also concern about high nutrient levels throughout Langstone Harbour, resulting in excessive algal growth in places. The unfavourable declining unit is partly coincidental with the SAC but is a roosting habitat for wintering birds above high tide level. There is an increasing amount of scattered scrub so that it is becoming less attractive to birds. Warblington Meadow SSSI: consisting of one unfavourable recovering unit, now under Higher Level Stewardship (HLS). Key Environmental Conditions Supporting Site Integrity  Sufficient space between the site and development to allow for managed retreat of intertidal habitats and avoid coastal squeeze  Unpolluted water  Absence of nutrient enrichment in the intertidal zone  Absence of eutrophication and acidification from atmospheric pollution  Absence of non-native species e.g. from shipping activity  Maintenance of appropriate hydrological regime, e.g. freshwater flows at heads of channels are important for birds to preen, drink and feed  Short grasslands surrounding the site are essential to maintaining interest features as they are now the key foraging resource for brent goose

Key Proposed Infrastructure Options P Proposed Landfalls Proposed HVDC Cables (Marine)

Proposed HVAC Cables (Marine)

Converter Station Site Boundary Daedalus HVAC/HVDC Cables Route (Onshore) Chilling HVAC Cables Route Corridor (Onshore) Existing Existing 400kV Overhead Line

P

This map includes data from the following sources: - Ordnance Survey - National Grid Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2016. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673 Contains Ordnance Survey Data © Crown copyright and database right 2016

SITE MAP

P

Km 0 5 10 20

Project: IFA2 UK Onshore Environmental Statement Title: Location Plan

Figure No.: 1.1

Date: Scale: Ref No: 20/04/2016 1:25,000 @A3 G3221.220

Km Drawn: Checked: Approved: 0 0.25 0.5 1 CB JB JB Key

Environmental Designations 20km Search Area

Proposed Infrastructure P Proposed Landfall 10 Proposed HVAC Cables (Marine)

6 Proposed HVDC Cables (Marine)

Converter Station Site (4ha)

Environmental Designations

Special Protection Area (SPA)

Special Areas of Conservation (SAC)

Ramsar

Solent and Dorset Coast Draft Special Protection Area Bounday

1 Chichester and Langstone Harbours (Ramsar & SPA)

New Forest (Ramsar, SAC & SPA) 9 2 3 Portsmouth Harbour (Ramsar & SPA)

4 Solent & Southampton Water (Ramar & SPA)

5 Briddlesford Copses (SAC)

4 6 Emer Bog (SAC)

7 South Wight Maritime (SAC)

8 Solent & Isle of Wight Lagoons (SAC)

9 Solent Maritime (SAC)

10 River Itchen (SAC)

11 Beacon Hill (NNR)

12 Newtown Harbour (NNR) 9 13 North Solent (NNR)

14 Old Winchester Hill (NNR)

15 Titchfield Haven (NNR)

2 P 4 3 4 1 P

3 4 9 8 9

Contains Ordnance Survey data 8 4 © Crown copyright and database right 2016 4 Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2016. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673

9 4

5

Project: 4 8 IFA2 7 UK Onshore Environmental Statement Title: European Sites within 20km Radius of the IFA2 Interconnector Development Figure No.: This map includes data from the following sources: 1.2 - Ordnance Survey Contains Ordnance Survey Data © Crown copyright and database right 2016 - National Grid Date: Ref No: - Enviornment Agency 20-04-2016 G3221.191

Kilometres Drawn: Checked: Approved: 0 2.5 5 10 JS/MK TR TR Pond Key

17.7m ROAD Red Line Boundary

Red Line Boundary - 200m Buffer Pond

Pond Red Line Boundary - 500m Buffer

Track

ETL Solent Court Cottage

LANE

Track Nature CHILLING Reserve Little The Belfry Chilling Farm

Drain CHILLING LANE Pumping Station 11.0m El Sub Sta Chilling Copse Play El Sub Sta Area Path (um) Tennis Court Chilling Barn

Holiday Village 13.4m Mud The Bungalow

88 16

Mud Track

73

66 Brownwich Mud and Mean Sand High Water Shingle Sand and ShinglePath (um)

Outfall

Mud and Sand Farm CS 10.7m

Mean Low Coastal 9.4m Water Slope

Foot Bridge Mean High Water

Sea House

Sand Coastal Slope Contains Ordnance Survey data and Mud Und © Crown copyright and database right 2016

Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2016. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673 Mean Low Water

Project: IFA2 UK Onshore Environmental Statement Title: Extent of Bird Survey Area at Chilling

Figure No.: 4.1

Date: Ref No: 20-04-2016 G3221.225 Service Layer Credits: Meters Drawn: Checked: Approved: 0 50 100 200 MK TR TR Key Red Line Boundary

Red Line Boundary - 200m Buffer

Red Line Boundary - 500m Buffer

Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2016

Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2016. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673

Project: IFA2 UK Onshore Environmental Statement Title: Extent of Bird Survey Area at Daedalus

Figure No.: 4.2

Date: Ref No: 20-04-2016 G3221.226 Service Layer Credits: Meters Drawn: Checked: Approved: 0 50 100 200 MK TR TR ETL Key Solent Court Red Line Boundary Cottage G Noise Prediction Location Existing NGET Substation

Proposed NGET Substation

9 Nature CHILLINGLANE Proposed Onshore Infrastructure Reserve G Preferred Open Cut Cable Route (Easement) The Belfry Little Chilling Farm Ponds Preferred Open Cut/Pipejacked Cable Route (Easement)

Alternative Open Cut Cable Route (Easement)

Drain Preferred Open Cut Cable Route (Construction Working CHILLING Area) LANE Pumping Station Alternative Open Cut Cable Route (Construction El Sub 11.0m Working Area) Sta Chilling Copse Jointing Bay (Easement) El Sub Play Area Sta 8 Path (um) Tennis Chilling Barn Proposed HDD Transition Bay (Easement) G Court Path (um) Proposed HDD Transition Bay (Construction Working

Shingle Holiday Village Area) 13.4m Proposed HDD from Transition Bay to MLWM Mud Fairhaven The Bungalow Groyne 35 100m Temporary Laydown Area 39 43 10 24 Sand and Shingle G 6 88 78

50 Mud 16

73 Track Holiday Village 250m

58

66

Mud and Mean G 7 Sand High Water

Shingle 3 Path (um) Sand and Shingle 250m G 2 150m Outfall G G 100m 1 Mud and Sand

9.1m

CS

Mean Low Coastal Water Slope Contains Ordnance Survey data Post © Crown copyright and database right 2016 G 250m Foot Bridge Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data 5 © Crown copyright 2016. Mean High Water All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673 G 100m 4 3.0m Sea House

Sand and Shingle Sand and Mud

Und Project: IFA2 UK Onshore Environmental Statement Title: Mean Low Predicted Noise Levels Onshore at Chilling Water for different Works Activities Figure No.: 5.1

Date: Ref No: 20-04-2016 G3221.223 Service Layer Credits: Meters Drawn: Checked: Approved: 0 50 100 200 MK TR TR Key Red Line Boundary

G Noise Prediction Location Proposed Onshore Infrastructure

Proposed Pipejacked Cable Route (Easement)

Proposed Open Cut Cable Route (Easement)

Proposed Open Cut/Pipejacked Cable Route (Easement) Proposed Open Cut Cable Route (Construction Working Area)

Joint Bay (Easement)

Runway Constraint

Runway End Safety Area (RESA)

Runway Strip

Access and Working Areas

AIL and Possible Construction Traffic Access

Site Access (Permanent and Possible Construction 100m Traffic Excluding AIL) Temporary Construction Area G 10 Temporary Laydown Area 250m Converter Station Building Footprint 11 G Converter Station Mitigation Area

13 100m 12 250m G G

Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2016

Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data G © Crown copyright 2016. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673 15 250m G 14 100m

Project: IFA2 UK Onshore Environmental Statement Title: Predicted Noise Levels Onshore at Daedalus for different Works Activities Figure No.: 5.2

Date: Ref No: 20-04-2016 G3221.224 Service Layer Credits: Meters Drawn: Checked: Approved: 0 50 100 200 MK TR TR Key Selected Ecological constraint Buffers 1km Buffer from Chichester and Langstone Harbours, Portsmouth Harbour and Solent Southampton Water (Ramsar/SPA) 10km Buffer from Chichester and Langstone Harbours, Portsmouth Harbour and Solent Southampton Water (Ramsar/SPA)

Environmental Designations Special Protection Area (SPA)

Ramsar

1 Chichester and Langstone Harbours (Ramsar & SPA)

3 Portsmouth Harbour (Ramsar & SPA)

4 Solent & Southampton Water (Ramar & SPA)

Proposed Development Sites (! Development

4 !40 ( (!12 (!19 7 (! (!5 (!11 14 8 (!(! 13 !4 16 (! ( (!(!3 (!41 !27 !18 (!9 (!17 (((!24 (!2 (!38 (!21 36 !30 (! 39 (!22 ( 3 37 4 (! 4 !31 28 (! ( (! 1 (!42 (!20 (!35 !34 (!23 26 (!1 (!33 ( !25 (! !6 ( 15( !10 3 (!29 (! ( Note 4 (!32 For development description and in-combination effects assessment refer to tables 6.1 and 6.2.

4 4

4

4

Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2016

Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data © Crown copyright 2016. All rights reserved. Licence number 0100031673

Project: IFA2 UK Onshore Environmental Statement Title: In-combination Effects Assessment

Figure No.: This map includes data from the following sources: 6.1 - Ordnance Survey Contains Ordnance Survey Data © Crown copyright and database right 2016 - National Grid Date: Ref No: - Enviornment Agency 20-04-2016 G3221.219

Kilometres Drawn: Checked: Approved: 0 2.5 5 10 MK TR TR

IFA2 UK Onshore Development Applicant’s Report to Inform

Habitat Regulations Assessment

The sole responsibility of this publication lies with the author. The European Union is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein.

Page 102