Natural England Commissioned Report NECR205 Small-scale effects: How the scale of effects has been considered in respect of plans and projects affecting European sites - a review of authoritative decisions First published 29 February 2016 www.gov.uk/natural -england Foreword Natural England commission a range of reports from external contractors to provide evidence and advice to assist us in delivering our duties. The views in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of Natural England. Background The implementation of a wide range of plans or scale of effects (either the proportion of the area projects can affect the wildlife or habitats on of a site or qualifying habitat feature, or the sites which have been designated for their proportion of a population of a species) where nature conservation importance as European these were judged to have been relatively small Protected Areas. in the context of the case. It is uncommon for European Protected Areas to It updates and builds upon a previous Research be threatened by a project that would have Report ENRR704 from 2006 entitled ‘How the major adverse effects on nature conservation. scale of effects on internationally designated However, small-scale effects are more common nature conservation sites in Britain has been and Natural England advisers need to judge considered in decision making – A review of whether the small-scale effects on a site may authoritative decisions’ and will be used as a adversely affect its integrity and whether the referencing tool for Natural England and other effects are significant in light of the conservation decision makers, in particular Natural England objectives for the site. advisers involved in casework. Advisers also need to consider the significance This report should be cited as: of the effects of projects and developments, which on their own may be small but which, in CHAPMAN, C. & TYLDESLEY, D. 2016. Small- combination with other projects, could be scale effects: How the scale of effects has been significant. considered in respect of plans and projects affecting European sites - a review of This report aims to provide an analysis of authoritative decisions. Natural England authoritative decisions that have considered the Commissioned Reports, Number205. Natural England Project Manager - Elizabeth Bailey, Marine Advisor, Natural England, Mail Hub, County Hall, Spetchley Road, Worcester, WR5 2NP [email protected] Contractor - Dr Caroline Chapman, David Tyldesley and Associates, Sherwood House, 144 Annesley Road, Hucknall, Nottinghamshire NG15 7DD Keywords - habitats regulations, authoritative decisions, small-scale effects, likely significant effect, site integrity, de minimis Further information This report can be downloaded from the Natural England website: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/natural-england. For information on Natural England publications contact the Natural England Enquiry Service on 0845 600 3078 or e-mail [email protected]. This report is published by Natural England under the Open Government Licence - OGLv3.0 for public sector information. You are encouraged to use, and reuse, information subject to certain conditions. For details of the licence visit Copyright. Natural England photographs are only available for non commercial purposes. If any other information such as maps or data cannot be used commercially this will be made clear within the report. ISBN 978-1-78354-271-0 © Natural England and other parties 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS A Background to this report ............................................................................................... 1 A.1 Status of this report ................................................................................................. 1 A.2 Who is the report for? ............................................................................................. 1 A.3 Aims of this report ................................................................................................... 1 A.4 The importance of case law to the decision making process ................................... 2 A.5 The meaning of ‘authoritative decision’ ................................................................... 3 A.6 Decisions of the European Courts ........................................................................... 3 A.7 Judgments of the UK Courts ................................................................................... 4 A.8 Decisions of the Secretary of State / Scottish / Welsh Ministers .............................. 4 A.9 Decisions of Planning Inspectors and Reporters ..................................................... 5 A.10 Article 6(4) Opinions of the European Commission ............................................. 6 A.11 A note of caution ................................................................................................. 6 B Why the ‘Scale of Effect’ is important to decision making ............................................... 8 B.1 What is meant by ‘scale of effect’ ............................................................................ 8 B.2 How the scale of effect relates to the Habitats Regulations Assessment process ... 8 B.3 How the scale of an effect might influence the stage 1 and 2 conclusions ............ 11 C The Case Studies ........................................................................................................ 12 C.1 Selection ............................................................................................................... 12 C.2 The summary tables ............................................................................................. 12 D Discussion and conclusions ......................................................................................... 20 D.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 20 D.2 Habitat loss ........................................................................................................... 20 D.3 Habitat deterioration .............................................................................................. 25 D.4 Effects on species ................................................................................................. 26 D.5 Overall conclusions on effects of habitat loss, deterioration and on species ......... 28 D.6 Consideration of priority habitats and species ....................................................... 30 D.7 Consideration of conservation status or site condition ........................................... 32 E Appendix - Case Summaries........................................................................................ 33 E.1 EC v Spain C-404/09 (Alto Sil) .............................................................................. 33 E.2 EC v Italy C-304/05 (World Ski Championship) ..................................................... 36 E.3 EC v Portugal C-239/04 (Castro Verde) ................................................................ 38 E.4 EC v Austria C-209/02 (Wörschacher Moos) ......................................................... 39 E.5 EC v Spain C-355/90 (Santoňa Marshes) ............................................................. 40 E.6 Briels v Minister van infrastructure en milieu C-521/12 .......................................... 41 E.7 Sweetman v An Bord Pleanala C-258/11 .............................................................. 43 E.8 RSPB v Secretary of State – ‘the Ribble’ case ...................................................... 45 E.9 RSPB v Secretary of State – ‘Lydd Airport’ ........................................................... 48 E.10 Bagmoor Wind Ltd v Scottish Ministers ............................................................. 50 E.11 R (Akester) v DEFRA and Wightlink .................................................................. 52 E.12 Skye Windfarm Action Group v Highland Council .............................................. 53 E.13 Hornsea Project 1 offshore wind farm ................................................................ 55 E.14 Walney Extension offshore wind farm ................................................................ 56 E.15 Burbo Bank (Extension) offshore wind farm ....................................................... 58 E.16 North Killingholme Power Project ...................................................................... 59 E.17 Rampion offshore wind farm .............................................................................. 60 E.18 East Anglia One offshore wind farm .................................................................. 62 E.19 Able Marine Energy Park ................................................................................... 63 E.20 Triton Knoll offshore wind farm .......................................................................... 65 E.21 Galloper offshore wind farm............................................................................... 66 E.22 Hinkley Point C Nuclear Power Station .............................................................. 68 E.23 Kentish Flats Extension Offshore Wind Farm .................................................... 70 E.24 London Gateway ............................................................................................... 72 E.25 Mawcarse, Loch Leven, Kinross ........................................................................ 72 E.26 Port of Hull Quay 2005 .....................................................................................