Chapter 7 - Ornithology
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
•
Introduction
7.1 This chapter describes the findings of the ornithological assessment of the proposed Wind Farm. It
details the methods used to establish the bird interest within the site boundary and surrounding area
and the process used to determine the nature conservation importance of the bird populations
present. The chapter then sets out the potential effects on birds during construction and operation
and assesses the significance of potential impacts on populations at an appropriate bio-geographic
scale. The means to mitigate any significant impacts are proposed and a summary of residual
impacts is provided. An assessment of non-avian ecology is presented in Chapter 6 (Ecology), and
complements this chapter. Technical data is provided in the Ornithology Technical Appendix 7A
(Appendix 7A). Confidential ornithological information which cannot be made available to the public
as a matter of law is provided in the Ornithology Confidential Annex, which has been made available
to The Highland Council, SNH and RSPB only.
7.2 This chapter adopts a format in which Baseline Description, Assessment of Potential Effects,
Mitigation and Assessment of Significance are considered separately for each species or species
group.
7.3 This chapter includes the following sections:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Consultations;
Legislation and Guidance;
Methodology - this section details the field survey methodologies used, assessment
methodologies and describes the possible potential effects that may result from the
development of the proposed Wind Farm on avian receptors;
Site design/layout - this section describes specific layout/design of the site which has been
made by E.ON Climate & Renewables (ECR) to accommodate the presence of specific birds
listed on Annex 1 of the EU Birds Directive and/or protected under Schedule 1 of the Wildlife
and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended);
Receptor assessments - this section includes a description of baseline avian ecology at the
site, followed by assessment of potential effects and proposed mitigation arranged by
species or receptor (designated site etc);
Summary of the Habitat Management Plan (HMP) to be developed;
Summary of residual effects - an assessment of the significance of the effects of the
proposed Wind Farm after mitigation has been implemented; and
Statement of significance.
Key Issues
7.4 The potential key avian ecology issues relating to the proposed Wind Farm are as follows:
•
•
the potential for the proposed Wind Farm to adversely affect the conservation status of bird
species afforded the highest level of statutory protection via inclusion in Annex 1 of the EU
Birds Directive. Such an effect may arise through habitat loss, disturbance or displacement,
more directly through collisions with the turbines, or indirectly through cumulative impacts;
the potential for the proposed Wind Farm to adversely affect the integrity of the Achanalt,
Beinn Dearg, Ben Wyvis and Cromarty Firth Special Protection Areas (SPA), or Glen Affric
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
•
•
•
to Strathconon potential SPA (pSPA), designated for their ornithological features of
European importance;
the potential for the proposed Wind Farm to adversely affect the conservation status of
geese and other wildfowl due to the risk of turbine collisions as they fly through the area on
migration or while commuting locally;
the potential for the proposed Wind Farm to adversely affect the conservation status of
breeding waders, through habitat loss, disturbance, displacement and collisions with the
turbines;
the potential for the proposed Wind Farm to adversely affect the conservation status of rare
or vulnerable breeding passerines, primarily through habitat loss, disturbance and
displacement; and
the potential for the proposed Wind Farm to adversely affect the ornithological interests of
local sites designated for their ornithological features.
7.5 The assessment is based on information available at the time of writing, and includes baseline data
from September 2008 to August 2009 (inclusive), and from April to June 2010 (inclusive).
Ornithological survey work (2002 to 2006 inclusive) was also carried out by Natural Research
Projects Ltd. (NRP) at the proposed Wind Farm site. The majority of this work is not in accordance
with current accepted methodologies and guidance for onshore Wind Farm developments. Data
obtained from this survey therefore provides supplementary information to this assessment on
historical breeding bird locations and populations.
Methodology
7.6 The following section illustrates consultee responses to the proposed Wind Farm and the legislation
and guidance used in this assessment. This information has subsequently been utilised to inform
appropriate methodologies, which identify the valued ecological receptors, and assess potential
effects which may occur as a result of the proposed Wind Farm development.
Consultations
7.7 In March 2009 a scoping document prepared by RPS, which included an outline of ornithology
survey methodologies, was issued to numerous consultees including The Highland Council
Planning Department, Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) and the Royal Society for the Protection of
Birds (RSPB) Scotland. In addition 3 specific ornithology documents were sent to SNH (one in
October 2008, one in May 2009 and one in August 2009). The first document outlined land access
issues and the need to move a flight activity vantage point (VP); the second document outlined
detailed ornithological survey methods which were not as per guidance but were necessary due to
land access issues (this document was also sent to RSPB Scotland and the Highland Council
Planning Department); and the third document outlined alterations to the Wind Farm design in order
to mitigate against any adverse effects to two particularly sensitive bird species, this was based on
baseline data gathered throughout the 2009 breeding season (information regarding the reasons for
this design alteration can be found in the Ornithology Confidential Annex).
7.8 Consultees were asked to comment on the ornithological issues surrounding the proposed Wind
Farm and the suitability of the proposed baseline survey methodologies, analysis and assessments
proposed by RPS. Details of the scoping responses and additional ornithological consultations are
summarised in Table 7.1.
7.9 A full data search of historical records of bird species of conservation concern was also conducted
with the Highland Biological Recording Group, the Local Bird Recorder for the Highlands (Scottish
Ornithologists Club (SOC)), RSPB Scotland, Highland Raptor Study Group (HRSG), Forestry
Chapter 7 – Page 1
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
Commission Scotland (FCS), Scottish Wildlife Trust (SWT) and the National Biodiversity Network
(NBN). Full details of the results of these consultations can be found in Appendix 7A and the
Ornithological Confidential Annex.
Table 7.1 Scoping Responses
Consultee
Response
In October 2008 RPS contacted SNH to inform it that VP 3 had been
Scottish Natural
dropped due to access restrictions and a new VP, VP4 would be used.
Heritage
VP4 was approximately 70m within the site boundary but was approx.
535m from the nearest proposed turbine (based on the initial Wind Farm
design, this is now 240m for the final Wind Farm design). Also due to
timing and bad weather conditions it was not possible to complete the
required 12hour goose migratory watches from the three VPs in October.
RPS requested that the October watch be carried out in early November
and that the November migratory watches would be carried out from midNovember.
SNH confirmed its acceptance of the location of VP4, as felt that it would
not significantly affect bird activity. SNH highlighted that by missing the
October survey hours during the goose migration period that RPS may
have missed some pink-footed goose movements. However recent
literature has indicated that goose migration periods appear to have
slipped later into the year1. Therefore SNH confirmed that if October
hours are completed in early November, and November hours are
completed in mid-late November and an additional 12 hours are
completed in early December then the migratory period would be covered
to its satisfaction.
In April 2009 RPS met Anne Murray of SNH to discuss changes to bird
survey methodologies at Corriemoillie due to access restrictions. It was
agreed that five VPs would be used to monitor breeding raptors within
2km of the site boundary to the west of the proposed development. In
addition the VPs would note any red-throated diver activity and breeding
birds, specifically waders, within 500m of the site boundary.
RPS also took this opportunity to discuss survey methodologies for
breeding birds within the site boundary and on adjacent moorland (where
access was permissible), access track surveys and specific red-throated
diver surveys if required. SNH confirmed its acceptance of all
methodologies (baseline studies section and Appendix 7A for all
methodology details). SNH also highlighted that RPS would need to fully
explain and justify deviations from guidance, and be upfront about likely
limitations of the survey data collected. Also for breeding bird survey
data, any extrapolations using data obtained from the breeding bird
survey, NRP data and the Lochluichart ES, justification and provision of
details of how this was carried out.
With reference to Ornithology only, the SNH response to the project
Scoping Report dated 21st May 2009 is as follows:
SNH was pleased to note that its guidance document on assessing
impacts of onshore Wind Farms on bird communities was being taken
into account, and that data gathered previously by NRP was being
1 http://www.wwt.org.uk/research/monitoring/pdf/2007%20Iceland-breeding%20goose%20census%20report.pdf.
Chapter 7 – Page 2
Consultee
RSPB Scotland
Response
utilised to target certain species for further surveys in 2009.
SNH highlighted the need for the ES to refer to the following
references:
• SNH Guidance "Calculating a theoretical collision risk assuming no
avoiding action" (2000); and
• Raptors: A field Guide to Survey and monitoring by J Hardey, H Crick,
C Wernham, H Riley, B Etheridge and D Thompson (2006).
SNH also highlighted that the proposed Corriemoillie Wind Farm could
have an effect on the Cromarty Firth SPA and that this site should be
included in the ES ornithology assessment. In addition surveys for redthroated diver should be carried out (this should be a target species), and
all other Annex 1 species should be recorded.
SNH was contacted in 2009 to discuss mitigation for sensitive bird
species, during the design process. SNH commented that it was very
pleased to see that early consideration and inbuilt mitigation for sensitive
species was being incorporated into the design of Corriemoillie Wind
Farm.
It was also pleased to see that account had been taken of other relevant
Wind Farm cases where sensitive species were present but had not been
accounted for in the design process, (information regarding the reasons
for this design alteration can be found in the Ornithology Confidential
Annex).
In their planning consultation response letter to Highland Council (22 July
2010), SNH provided advice and recommendations to safeguard
protected species.
It was SNH’s view that the proposal is likely to have a significant effect on
golden eagle, as a qualifying interest of the proposed Glen Affric to
Strathconon SPA. As a consequence, Highland Council is required to
undertake an appropriate assessment in view of the site’s conservation
objectives. However, based on the appraisal carried out to date SNH
concluded that the development will not adversely affect the integrity of
the site.
Despite agreed insignificant losses to the NHZ population of red-throated
divers predicted, it would be SNH’s preference to create a turbine-free
corridor along the main flight line.
Limiting construction activity within 1km of black grouse leks after 8 a.m.
should be considered.
In their response (dated 20th April 2009) to the Corriemoillie Scoping
Report, RSPB Scotland commended the decision to undertake fresh
ornithological surveys, given the age of the NRP data.
Furthermore, RSPB Scotland considered the suggested surveys and
timings of surveys appropriate for the site.
RSPB Scotland was informed of the methodology change due to access
restrictions, and was asked to comment on the alternate methodologies
being proposed.
In its response dated 5th June 2009, RSPB Scotland believes that the
suggested methods are the best available to assess the ornithological
interest of the site and surrounding area. They do state that it will
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
Consultee
Response
compromise the quality of the data for the assessment and that additional
information, particularly from the Lochluichart ES should be used
although the data is now out of date. Although the suggested methods
are accepted these should not be considered as a precedent for any
future Wind Farm monitoring surveys.
In their planning consultation response letter to Highland Council (22
March 2010), RPSB Scotland did not object to the development. They
did however recommend the need for an appropriate assessment and
commented on specific mitigation to safeguard important bird species,
and post-construction monitoring.
RSPB Scotland recommended restricting maintenance access within
500m of red-throated diver breeding sites during the breeding season to
vehicles only. No work should be carried out within 500m during the
construction period.
No operations within 750m of black grouse leks should take place before
9 a.m. and after 6 p.m. during the breeding season (mid-March to midMay).
Post-construction monitoring should focus on red-throated diver and
golden eagle impacts and breeding wader mitigation effects.
Legislation and Guidance
7.10 The ecological baseline surveys and assessment have been carried out with reference to a
number of national policy documents, as addressed in Chapter 4. Guidance and legislative
documents with relevance to ornithology, are listed below:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Council Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds (EU Birds Directive)2 as
amended by Directive 94/24/EC;
The Conservation (Natural habitats etc) Regulations 1994 (Habitats Regulations);
The Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Amendment (Scotland) Regulations 2007;
The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as regards reserved matters in
Scotland);
Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, as amended3 by the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act
2004;
Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (2006) Guidelines for Ecological Impact
Assessment in the United Kingdom (version 7 July 2006)4 ;
Band, W., Madders, M. and Whitfield, D.P. (2007). Developing field and analytical methods
to assess avian collision risk at Wind Farms5;
Birds of Conservation Concern 20096;
Survey Methods for Use in Assessing the Impacts of Onshore Wind Farms on Bird
Communities 20057;
2 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/consleg/1979/L/01979L0409-20070101-en.pdf
3 http://www.jncc.gov.uk/page-1377
4 http://www.ieem.org.uk/ecia/index.html
5 Band, W., Madders, M. and Whitfield, D.P. 2007. Developing field and analytical methods to assess avian
collision risk at Wind Farms. In de Lucas, M., Janss, G. & Ferrer, M. (eds.) Birds and Wind Power. Quercus.
6 Eaton, M., A., Brown, A., F., Noble, D., G., Musgrove, A., J., Hearn, R., Aebischer, N., J., Gibbons, D., W.,
Evans, A. & Gregory, R., D. 2009. Birds of Conservation Concern 3: the population status of birds in the United
Kingdom, Channel Islands and the Isle of Man. British Birds 102, pp296-341.
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
•
•
•
•
Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom 20068;
Bird Monitoring Methods 19989;
Raptors: A Field Guide to Survey and Monitoring10; and
Birds and Wind Farms: Risk Assessment and Mitigation 200711.
7.11 Other guidance, strategies and policies have also been taken into account including the UK
Biodiversity Action Plan priorities12 and the Highland Local Biodiversity Action Plans13.
Baseline Study Methodology
Desk Study
7.12 The purpose of the desktop study was to provide information on bird populations both on site,
and within the vicinity of the proposed Wind Farm, to identify target species for baseline surveys.
Information gained via this exercise was used to estimate breeding populations on site and in the
immediate surrounding area. This information combined with baseline survey results was utilised to
put the Corriemoillie population into context in terms of its regional importance. Comparisons were
made with local sites designated for important breeding and wintering bird assemblages, and the
Northern Highlands Natural Heritage Zone14 (NHZ) populations where possible.
7.13 A search was made for all sites with an international, national or local authority designation for
ornithological interests. This includes Special Protection Areas (SPAs), Site of Special Scientific
Interest (SSSIs) and Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs) within a 10km radius of
the proposed Wind Farm. In addition all SPAs within 25km of the proposed Wind Farm which have
geese as a qualifying species were also included in this assessment (Figure 7.1).
7.14 The specific information collected primarily covers red-throated diver, raptors, geese,
greenshank and golden plover. The following sources were accessed as part of the desktop study:
•
•
•
•
previous ornithological surveys carried out by NRP between 2002 and 2006;
Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC)15 website and SNH Sitelink16 websites to
provide information on designated sites in proximity to the proposed Wind Farm;
NBN website17;
HRSG for information on Annex 1 and Schedule 1 raptor records within 10km radius of the
proposed development; and
7 Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH). 2005. Survey methods for use in assessing the impacts of onshore windfarms
on bird communities. SNH, Battleby.
8 IEEM. 2006. Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom. IEEM, Winchester.
9 Gilbert, G., Gibbons, D.W., Evans, J. 1998. Bird Monitoring Methods. RSPB, Sandy.
10 Hardey, J., Crick, H., Wernham, C., Riley, H., Etheridge, B., Thompson, D. 2006. Raptors: A Field Guide to
Survey and Monitoring. Scottish Natural Heritage, Inverness.
11 de Lucas, M., Guyonne, F.E. and Ferrer, M. (eds). 2007. Birds and Windfarms: Risk Assessment and
Mitigation. Quercus, Madrid.
12 http://ukbap.org.uk/PrioritySpecies.aspx?group=1
13 http://www.highlandbiodiversity.com/htm/counties/ross_cromarty/ross_cromarty.php
14 Natural Heritage Zones have been defined throughout Scotland by SNH, as areas with shared natural heritage
characteristics including species, habitats and landscapes in addition to a range of other geographical and
geological features. SNH encourages the assessment of ecological impacts at the Natural Heritage Zone (NHZ)
level. Corriemoillie lies within NHZ 7. see http://www.snh.org.uk/futures/Data/pdfdocs/LANDSCAPES.pdf.
15 http://www.jncc.gov.uk
16 http://gateway.snh.gov.uk/portal/page
17 http://www.nbn.org.uk/
Chapter 7 – Page 3
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
•
scientific publications, SNH commissioned reports, and grey literature was reviewed to
provide information on population estimates and species sensitivity.
Target Species
7.15 Information gathered via the desktop study identified which species the baseline surveys for the
ornithological assessment would focus on. These birds are defined as the target species which
have an associated moderate to high conservation value. The target species at Corriemoillie were:
•
•
•
•
•
•
red-throated diver;
raptors listed in Annex 1 of the EU Birds Directive and/or Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and
Countryside Act 1981 (as amended);
swans, geese and ducks (all species except mallard);
black grouse;
breeding waders (all species) with particular focus on greenshank and golden plover; and
other species included in the Red List of Birds of Conservation Concern (BoCC)6
Access Restrictions
7.16 From October 2008 onwards, all access to land owned by Lochluichart Estate which is
immediately adjacent to the Wind Farm proposal, was strictly prohibited. This access restriction
meant that outwith the site boundary, surveyors could not complete all ornithological surveys
adequately as stipulated by SNH guidance, specifically a 500m buffer zone for breeding birds and a
2km buffer zone for breeding raptors and divers. Therefore adaptations to survey methodologies
were implemented. This is described further in the Field Survey Methodology section and Appendix
7A.
Field Survey Methodology
7.17 Baseline surveys were conducted between September 2008 and August 2009 (inclusive) and
April to June 2010 (inclusive), to collect quantitative data and allow the effects of the proposed Wind
Farm to be assessed. Study area boundaries are shown in Figures 7.2, 7.7 and 7.8.
7.18 All ornithology surveys were designed and conducted by RPS. Full details of survey timings,
methodology and weather conditions can be found in Appendix 7A. All surveys were designed and
conducted in compliance with SNH guidance. However certain surveys had to be altered due to
access restrictions as previously mentioned. Where this was the case all methodologies were
agreed with RSPB Scotland and SNH prior to commencement. Full details of survey deviations
from guidance are presented in the Appendix 7A.
7.19
A summary of ornithological surveys is provided below.
Flight Activity Survey
7.20 Flight activity surveys using VPs were undertaken using the appropriate methodology advocated
by SNH7. Surveys were carried out from September 2008 to August 2009 (inclusive).
7.21 Three VPs were used to overlook the study area, which was defined as the site application
boundary plus a 500m buffer area. Due to access restrictions VP3 was dropped at the beginning of
October 2008 as it was located on the Lochluichart Estate. A suitable location was identified for a
new VP, VP4, in October 2008. The location of all four VPs is shown in Figure 7.3.
7.22
The coordinates for all VPs are given in Table 7.2.
Chapter 7 – Page 4
Table 7.2 Site VP Locations
VP
1
2
3
4
Grid Reference
NH 34690 65477
NH 35255 66991
NH 33129 67015
NH 34947 68186
7.23 A full viewshed analysis showing the two VP combination scenarios are shown in Figure 7A.9
and 7A.10 of Appendix 7A.
7.24 Based on the identified target species (specifically geese), VP survey effort during key migratory
periods adhered to SNH guidelines i.e. 36 hours per VP during the autumn (September-November)
and spring (March-mid-May) migratory period. However due to extremely poor weather conditions
in early May and land owner restrictions on access, the 12 hours proposed for each VP which would
have been conducted before mid-May were not carried out. Instead VP hours were conducted in
the latter part of May when access issues had been resolved. This is believed to not be an issue
considering the key migratory period in autumn was covered and the peak spring migratory period in
April was covered in accordance with SNH guidance and low levels of activity were recorded. In
addition there are no SPAs designated for any goose species within 20km of the turbines. The
information collected on key target species flying over the proposed Wind Farm site and the
adjacent airspace, was used to predict the number of individuals per species that might collide with
the wind turbine rotors. The model methods used were based on the Band Collision Risk Model5
recommended by SNH.
7.25 A full breakdown of all VP survey hours and detailed methodology can be found in the
Ornithology Technical Appendix 7A.
Breeding Bird Survey
7.26 A breeding bird survey was undertaken within the forestry on site using a methodology based on
the Brown & Shepherd (1993)18 method for surveying upland waders, and the Common Bird Census
(CBC)19 method for surveying passerines. The methodology used involved a single surveyor
walking all of the forestry rides, recording details of all birds seen and heard. This meant that all
parts of the forestry were walked to within 70m within the site boundary. The surveys took place
between dawn and 9am, during the time of peak activity for target species.
7.27 In areas of open moorland where access was permissible, breeding bird surveys were also
carried out within a 500m buffer to the east of the site boundary (Figure 7.4), following the standard
Brown & Shepherd (1993) methodology.
7.28 A three-visit approach was used for all breeding bird survey work, as recommended in SNH
guidance for breeding bird surveys. The three survey visits were made in April, May and June 2009,
in order to ensure that the key phases of the breeding cycle were covered.
18 Brown, A., F. & Shepherd, K., B. (1993). A method for censuring upland breeding waders. Bird Study 40: 189195.
19 Marchant, J.H. (1983). Common Bird Census Instructions. BTO, Tring.
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
7.29 A full description of methodologies for this survey work, duration and timing of surveys are
detailed in Appendix 7A. Sensitive breeding records are displayed in the Ornithology Confidential
Annex.
7.36 Survey data from the Lochluichart Wind Farm Environmental Statement and surveys conducted
at Corriemoillie by NRP have been utilised to provide additional information to this assessment for
this species. Any records obtained via consultations have also been included in the assessment.
Breeding Raptor Survey
7.37 On the lochans where red-throated diver were present and believed to be breeding/attempting to
breed, specific red-throated diver VPs were established. All incoming and out going flights from the
lochan were recorded and breeding success/failure was established. The VP methodology follows
that advocated by SNH7 for both Wind Farms in general and more specifically red-throated diver.
The location of the VPs and viewsheds is shown in Figure 1 in the Ornithology Confidential Annex.
7.30 The initial study area for this particular survey type was defined as the area within the site
boundary plus a 2km buffer (Figure 7.5). However following access restrictions surveyors could not
gain access to the 2km buffer to the northwest, west and southwest of the site boundary (Figure
7.5). Following consultation with SNH and RSPB Scotland (as in the consultation section) the
following methodology was utilised to assess breeding raptor activity:
•
•
•
•
five VPs overlooking the area to the northwest; west and southwest of the site boundary
were used to assess raptor activity. Locations of these VPs are illustrated in Figure 7.6). A
full viewshed analysis is shown in Figure 7A.3 of Appendix 7A;
it is accepted that there are limitations to VP surveys when assessing breeding birds in
comparison to surveyors intensely walking over all ground within the 2km buffer zone. It is
also accepted that due to topography not all the ground within the 2km buffer could be
viewed from the five VPs (Figure 7A.3 Appendix 7A);
to compensate for these shortfalls, each VP was surveyed for 12 hours per month in each of
April, May, June and July. VP observations were also spread throughout all periods of the
day to include dawn and dusk hours; and
SNH, RSPB Scotland, HRSG and Colin Crooke Highland Ornithology Ltd. have been
contacted and provided additional raptor records for this area to aid any shortfalls in our data
through the adapted methodology. Also ornithology data gathered during surveys for the
Lochluichart Wind Farm (which covers the land where access was prohibited), has been
used to supplement findings and contribute to this assessment.
7.31 Areas within the study area to the northeast, east and southeast of the site boundary (Figure
7.5) have been assessed using standard methods as accepted by SNH. All survey work for each
species was undertaken in accordance with the methodologies stipulated in Hardey et al. (2006)10.
Survey work was carried out monthly between mid-March to end of July 2009.
7.32 A full description of methodologies for this survey work, duration and timing of surveys are
detailed in the Appendix 7A. Sensitive breeding records are displayed in the Ornithology
Confidential Annex.
Breeding Red-throated Diver Survey
7.33 Information gathered during the desk study identified historic records of red-throated diver in the
locality of the proposed Wind Farm.
7.34 Two survey visits between May and July 2009 (inclusive) were undertaken. All suitable lochans
within the site boundary and the 2km study area (access permitted) were surveyed in order to
identify breeding attempts (Figure 7A.6 Ornithology Technical Appendix. Methods followed those
set out in Gilbert et al. (1998)9.
7.35 Where access was restricted, the five VPs used for breeding raptor surveys also targeted redthroated diver flights with the timing of these VPs coinciding with peak activities for this species, i.e.
dawn and dusk, and their arrival on their breeding grounds (mid-late April).
7.38 A full description of methodologies for this survey work, duration and timing of surveys are
detailed in Appendix 7A. Sensitive breeding records are displayed in the Ornithology Confidential
Annex.
Breeding Black Grouse Survey
7.39 Black grouse surveys were conducted following the methodology detailed in Gilbert et al.
(1998)9. This survey was conducted between April and mid-May 2009. Suitable lek habitat was
identified from black grouse data obtained from RSPB Scotland, previous survey work carried out by
NRP and the experience of two surveyors who completed this work. The suitable areas were
surveyed three times; one visit in late April and two visits in early/mid May. In addition, VP sessions
during the spring migratory period were timed to coincide with peak lek activity times.
7.40 A full description of methodologies for this survey work, duration and timing of surveys are
detailed in Appendix 7A. Sensitive breeding/lekking records are displayed in the Ornithology
Confidential Annex.
Winter Walkover Survey
7.41 Winter walkover surveys commenced in September 2008. The aim of these surveys was to
record wintering birds using the forestry, within the site boundary, during the winter period.
7.42 Winter surveys ceased after the November 2008 visit as it was concluded that the site was
species poor during the autumn/early winter and there was no benefit to continuing the survey work.
Information obtained from NRP winter surveys has been used to supplement this assessment.
7.43 A full description of methodologies for this survey work, duration and timing of surveys are
detailed in Appendix 7A (Figure 7A.7 for survey route).
Access Track Surveys
7.44 At the time of commencement of 2009 breeding bird surveys, the planned access track to the
site took a southern route, from the A835 in the east, to the southeastern corner of the Wind Farm
(Figure 7.7) – the November 2009 application. This route was surveyed in 2009, from April to July
(inclusive). Prior to the 2010 breeding season the access track options were reassessed, and two
alternatives were considered: an amended southern route approximately 1.7km in length, linking the
A832 to the previously proposed access track route (Figure 7.7); and a northern route,
approximately 0.3km in length linking the northern boundary of the development to the consented
Lochluichart Wind Farm access track (Figure 7.8). Both options were surveyed in 2010, and it is the
latter option (northern route) which was eventually selected for use. Formation of this track will
comprise a minor section of newly built track and as such, land take has been minimised.
2009 Access Track Surveys
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
Chapter 7 – Page 5
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
7.45 Breeding raptor surveys were undertaken between April and July 2009 along the previouslyproposed southern access track route (November 2009 application). All suitable habitats for both
breeding forestry species (goshawk, red kite etc) and open moorland species (hen harrier, merlin
etc) within 1km of the access track route were surveyed as per SNH guidance7 and Hardy et al,
(2006)10. A single VP was also used between mid-march and July (inclusive), to record displaying
raptors (Figure 7.3). Viewshed analysis for this VP is shown in Figure 7A.8 in Appendix 7A.
7.46 Three breeding bird surveys covering the November 2009 access route were undertaken
between April and June 2009 (inclusive). A combination of methods was used. Sections of existing
track were walked slowly by surveyors. In areas where new track was proposed, open ground
forestry rides within the forestry were utilised by surveyors. All birds observed exhibiting breeding
behaviour and heard were recorded. In areas of open moorland the Brown & Shepherd (1993)18
methodology was used.
7.47 Black grouse surveys were undertaken with one visit in April and two visits in early/mid May
2009. Surveys were conducted following the methodology detailed in Gilbert et al. (1998)9. All
suitable habitats within 1km of the southern access track were surveyed to locate any black grouse
leks
7.48
Figure 7.7 illustrates the study areas for these surveys.
2010 Access Track Surveys
7.49 In 2010, only the area around the short section of the new part of the proposed northern access
route was surveyed, which links the proposed development to the existing access road to the north.
To the south, only the then-considered amended section of the southern access track was
surveyed.
Table 7.3 Summary of NRP Surveys 2002-2006
Survey Type
2002
2003
Conducted
Conducted
Generic VPs
between April between
February and
and
March. Total
December
of 16 hours of
(Inclusive).
observation
Total of 127
time.
hours of
observation
time.
No survey.
Autumn
Migration VPs
geese
migration
VPs
conducted
between
October and
December
(inclusive).
Total of 23
hours of
observation
time.
2004
No survey
Autumn
geese
migration
VPs
conducted
between
October and
December
(inclusive).
Total of 21
hours of
observation
time.
7.50 Breeding raptor surveys were conducted within a 1km buffer of survey areas from April to June
2010 (inclusive), following the methodology detailed in Gilbert et al. (1998) and Hardy et al. (2006)10.
7.51 Breeding bird surveys again followed the Brown and Shepherd (1993)18 methodology, occurring
within a 500m buffer of both access track options. Three survey visits were made in April, May and
June.
7.52 Black grouse surveys were conducted between April and June 2010 within a 1km buffer of both
access track options following the methodology in Gilbert et al. (1998)9.
7.53 A full description of methodologies for this survey work, duration and timing of surveys are
detailed in Appendix 7A. Sensitive breeding records are displayed in the Ornithology Confidential
Annex.
7.54
Upland
Breeding Bird
Survey
Two visits
between April
and June
using the
Brown &
Shepherd
Methodology.
No survey.
No survey.
Woodland
Breeding Bird
Survey
Two visits
between April
and June, no
methodology
described.
Whole site
No survey.
No survey.
Figure 7.8 illustrates the study areas for these surveys.
Natural Research Projects Ltd Surveys 2002-2006
7.55 Table 7.3 summarises surveys and survey methodologies undertaken by NRP from 2002 to
2006.
Chapter 7 – Page 6
2005
Conducted
between
March and
December
(Inclusive).
Total of 101
hours of
observation
time.
Autumn
geese
migration
VPs
conducted
between
October and
December
(inclusive).
Total of 24
hours of
observation
time. Spring
migration
VPs
conducted
between
March and
mid-May
(inclusive).
Total of 37
hours of
observation
time.
Two visits
between April
and June
using the
Brown &
Shepherd
Methodology.
Including
Access
Track.
Two visits
carried out in
May and
June.
2006
Conducted
between
January and
March
(Inclusive).
Total of 20
hours of
observation
time.
No survey.
No survey.
No survey.
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
Survey Type
Black Grouse
Survey
Raptor
Surveys
Breeding Diver
Survey
Winter Bird
Survey
Transects
2002
not covered
just sampled.
No formal
survey but
forestry
edges
surveyed for
this species.
No formal
survey. Birds
observed
from VPs
No Specific
survey but
birds were
recorded
during
breeding bird
surveys.
Site area
sampled via
transects.
2003
2004
2005
2006
•
•
No survey.
No survey.
No survey.
No survey.
No survey.
No survey.
No survey.
No survey.
Two Visits,
one in late
April and two
visits in
early/mid
May.
Walkovers
carried out in
April, May
and June
searching for
signs of
breeding.
Surveys
carried out in
April, May
and June with
main focus
on confirming
breeding in
July and
August.
Appropriate
breeding
methodology
and VPs
used.
Transects
across site.
Carried out
monthly
between
November
and March
(inclusive).
No survey.
•
•
No survey.
Surveys
carried out in
June July and
August.
Appropriate
breeding
methodology
and VPs
used.
Transects
carried out
between
January and
March
(inclusive).
•
determining the magnitude of the impacts including consideration of the sensitivity of the
receptor and the duration and reversibility of the effect;
determining the significance of the impacts based on the interaction between the effect
magnitude/duration, and the nature conservation value and the likelihood of the effect
occurring. In addition, sensitivity of the receptor affected is also considered for potential
ornithological impacts;
identifying mitigation measures required to address significant adverse effects;
determining the residual impact significance after the effects of mitigation have been
considered, including a description of any legal and policy consequences; and
identification of any monitoring requirements.
7.57 The assessment process involves identifying VERs. These ornithological receptors and their
values are determined by the criteria defined in Table 7.4. It should be noted that these criteria are
intended as a guide and are not definitive. Attributing a value to a receptor is generally
straightforward in the case of designated sites, as the designations themselves are normally
indicative of a value level. For example a moorland designated as a Special Protection Area (SPA)
under the Habitats Directive is implicitly of European (i.e. International) importance. Professional
judgement is important when attributing a value level to a particular species or individual habitat. In
these cases, reference has also been made to national guidelines for the selection of Sites of
Special Scientific Interest20 in order to determine which level of significance should be applied.
Social and economic factors are also considered when valuing receptors.
Table 7.4 Approach to Valuing Ecological Receptors
Value Level
Examples
International
National
Assessment of Significance
7.56 The approach taken to the assessment of ornithological impacts follows the guidance produced
by the Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (IEEM)4. These guidelines set out the
process for assessment through the following stages:
•
•
•
identification of Valued Ecological Receptors (VERs) (the ecological components of highest
value present at a site);
determining the nature conservation value of the VERs present within the zone of influence
that may be affected by the development;
identifying the potential effects based on the nature of the construction, operation and
decommissioning of the proposed development;
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
Regional
An internationally designated site (e.g. SPA) as designated under the Birds
Directive, or Ramsar wetland sites designated under the Ramsar
Convention), candidate site, qualifying feature (e.g. pink-footed geese
connected to a nearby (SPA), or an area meeting the criteria for an
international designation.
A regularly occurring, nationally important population of any internationally
important species listed under Annex I of the Birds Directive, or regularly
occurring migratory species listed under Annex II/2 of the Birds Directive
connected to an SPA designated for this species.
A nationally designated site, or area meeting criteria for national level
designations (e.g. Site of Special Scientific Interest [SSSI]).
A regularly occurring, regionally important population of any nationally
important species listed as a UK BAP priority species and Species listed
under Schedule 1 or of the Wildlife and Countryside Act or Annex I of the
Birds Directive.
A regularly occurring, locally important population of any nationally important
species listed as a UK BAP priority species and Species listed under
Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act or Annex I of the Birds
Directive.
Sites which exceed the local authority-level designations but fall short of
SSSI selection guidelines.
20 Nature Conservancy Council. 1989 (revised 1998). Guidelines for Selection of Biological SSSIs. Nature
Conservancy Council, Peterborough.
Chapter 7 – Page 7
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
Value Level
Examples
Local
Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation or equivalent sites selected on
local authority criteria (SWT Reserves).
Local Nature Reserves (LNR).
Other species of conservation concern, including species listed under the
Local BAP (HLBAP) and the UK Birds of Conservation Concern.
All other species that are widespread and common and which are not
present in locally, regionally or nationally important numbers which are
considered to be of low or poor ecological value (e.g. UK Birds of
Conservation Concern Green List species).
Negligible
7.58
7.60 In the case of designated sites, spatial magnitude is assessed in respect of the area within the
designated site boundary. For non-designated sites, spatial magnitude is assessed in respect of an
appropriate scale depending on the value of the receptor e.g. Local. Impacts on breeding bird
populations are assessed in a regional context.
7.61 Effects and spatial magnitude are assessed within the appropriate bio-geographic regions as
recommended in SNH guidance23. These are detailed below:
•
Effects on VERs are judged in terms of magnitude and duration21.
7.59 Magnitude refers to the size of an impact, and is determined on a quantitative basis where
possible. This may relate to the area of habitat lost to the development footprint in the case of a
habitat receptor, or predicted loss of individuals in the case of a population of a particular species of
bird. Magnitude is assessed within five levels, as detailed in Table 7.5
Table 7.5 Criteria for Describing Spatial Magnitude (adapted from Percival 2007)22
Spatial
Description
magnitude
Total loss or very major alteration to key elements/features of the baseline (preVery high
development) conditions such that the post development
character/composition/attributes would be fundamentally changed and may be
lost from the site altogether.
Guide: <20% of population/habitat
Major loss or major alteration to key elements/features of the baseline
High
conditions such that the post development character/composition/attributes
would be fundamentally changed.
Guide: 20-80% of population/habitat
Loss or alteration to one or more key elements/features of the baseline
Medium
conditions such that post development character/composition/attributes would
be partially changed.
Guide: 5-20% of population/habitat
Minor shift away from baseline conditions. Change arising from the
Low
loss/alteration would be discernible but the underlying
character/composition/attributes would be similar to pre-development
circumstances/patterns.
Guide: 1-5% of population/habitat
Very slight change from baseline condition. Change barely distinguishable,
Negligible
approximating to the “no change” situation.
Guide: <1% population/habitat
21 Regini, K. 2000. Guidelines for ecological evaluation and impact assessment. Ecology and Environmental
Management. In Practice, 29 (September), pp. 1, 3-7. Winchester, Institute of Ecology and Environmental
Management.
22 Percival, S.M. 2007. Predicting the effects of Wind Farms on birds in the UK: the development of an objective
assessment method. In de Lucas, M., Janss, G. & Ferrer, M. (eds.) Birds and Wind Power: Risk Assessment and
Mitigation. Quercus, Madrid.
Chapter 7 – Page 8
•
•
impacts on breeding bird populations are assessed in a regional context. The appropriate
regional bio-geographic unit has been identified as the Natural Heritage Zone (NHZ) by
SNH. NHZ classifications represent areas with a high level of bio-geographic coherence,
and are unrelated to administrative boundaries. At this stage, little data on bird populations
for the majority of species is available at NHZ level. The constraints of available data
therefore make assessment at NHZ level difficult. Corriemoillie lies within the North
Highlands NHZ, and regional impacts are assessed within this area as far as is practicable;
effects on non-breeding bird populations are assessed in a national context; and
any potential impacts on migratory goose populations of conservation importance are
assessed at an international level, in context with local sites for which these species are
qualifying features.
7.62 Duration is defined as the time for which the impact is expected to last before recovery – i.e.
return to pre-construction baseline conditions (Table 7.6).
Table 7.6 Criteria for Describing Duration24
Duration
Definition
Permanent Effects continuing indefinitely beyond the span of one human generation (taken
as approximately 25 years), except where there is likely to be substantial
improvement after this period (e.g. the replacement of mature trees by young
trees which need >25 years to reach maturity, or restoration of ground after
removal of a development. Such exceptions can be termed “very long term
effects”)
Temporary Long term (15 - 25 years or longer - see above)
Medium term (5 – 15 years)
Short term (up to 5 years)
7.63 Knowledge of how rapidly the population or performance of a species is likely to recover
following loss or disturbance (e.g. by individuals being recruited from other populations elsewhere)
is used to assess duration, where such information is available.
7.64 In addition, birds are assessed with consideration to their behavioural sensitivity and ability to
recover from temporary adverse conditions. Behavioural sensitivity is determined subjectively
based on the species’ ecology and behaviour, using the broad criteria set out in Table 7.7. The
judgement takes account of information available on the responses of birds to various stimuli (e.g.
predators, noise and disturbance by humans). It should be noted that behavioural sensitivity can
differ between similar species and between different populations of the same species. Thus the
23 SNH. 2006. Assessing significance of impacts from onshore windfarms on birds outwith designated areas.
SNH, Inverness.
24 Criteria for defining duration and sensitivity are based on tables provided by Mike Madders of Natural Research
(Projects) Ltd.
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
behavioural responses of birds are likely to vary with both the nature and context of the stimulus and
the experience of the individual bird. Sensitivity also depends on the activity of the bird, for
example, a species is likely to be less tolerant of disturbance whilst breeding than at other times. In
addition, individual birds of the same species will differ in their tolerance depending on the level of
human disturbance that they regularly experience in a particular area, and have become habituated
to (e.g. individuals that live in an area with high human population and activity levels are likely to
have a greater tolerance than those that occupy remote locations with little or no human
disturbance). However, tolerance is likely to increase as breeding progresses.
Table 7.7 Behavioural Sensitivity of Birds
Sensitivity Definition
Species or populations occupying habitats remote from human activities, or that
High
exhibit strong and long-lasting (guide: >20 mins) reactions to disturbance
events.
Species or populations that appear to be warily tolerant of human activities, or
Moderate
exhibit short-term reactions (guide: 5-20 minutes) to disturbance events.
Species or populations occupying areas subject to frequent human activity and
Low
exhibiting mild and brief reaction (including flushing behaviour) to disturbance
events.
7.65 Magnitude, duration and sensitivity are then considered alongside proposed mitigation, and the
nature of the effect determined. The nature of any effect on a VER is assessed using the criteria in
Table 7.8, which is based upon IEEM guidelines. The concept of “integrity” in this context refers to
sustained coherence of ecological structure and function of a VER, and includes consideration of
both temporal and spatial factors. It is to be noted that there may be positive effects on VERs as a
result of development and mitigation, as well as negative.
Table 7.8 Nature of Ecological Effects
Nature of Criteria
Effect
The change is likely to cause an adverse effect on the integrity of a VER.
Major
Negative
The change adversely affects the VER, but there will probably be no effect on its
Negative
integrity.
No effect.
Neutral
The change is likely to benefit the VER.
Positive
The change is likely to cause a positive effect on the integrity of an ecological
Major
receptor.
Positive
7.66 Having followed this process, the significance of an impact is then determined. The 2006 IEEM
guidelines use only two categories: “significant” or “not significant”. In assessing whether an impact
is significant, the concept of “ecological integrity” is a guiding principle. This concept can be applied
to both designated sites (for example a SSSI) and to defined populations (for example a regional
breeding curlew population). This concept underpins much of the European legislation in relation to
nature conservation.
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
Baseline Description & Assessment of Effects
Designated Site Summary
7.67 Consultation and a search of available digital datasets indicates that there are no statutory
designations of European importance (e.g. Special Protected Areas [SPA]), national importance
(e.g. Sites of Special Scientific Interest [SSSI]) or non-statutory local importance (e.g. Scottish
Wildlife Trust [SWT] reserves) within the application site boundary. Table 7.9 provides details of
statutory designations of ornithological European importance within 10km of the site boundary and
25km if grey geese are listed as a qualifying species, statutory designations of national importance
within 10km, and non-statutory designations within 5km of the application site. Full citations for
statutory designated sites can be obtained at http://www.jncc.gov.uk. Locations of statutory
designations are shown in Figure 7.1.
Table 7.9 Summary of Designated Sites
Designation
Site Name
Distance from
Corriemoillie
Wind Farm
Glen Affric
Located approx
Proposed
to
3.6km south of
SPA (pSPA)
Strathconon the site
SPA/SSSI
Achanalt
Marshes
SSSI
Fannich
Hills
SPA/SSSI
SPA/SSSI/NN
R/IBA
Located approx
7.6km
southwest of
the site.
Located approx
5.8km west of
the site.
Beinn Dearg Located approx
4.7km north of
the site.
Ben Wyvis
SSSI & SAC –
approx 8.1km
east
SPA approx8.9km
east
Reason for Designation
The pSPA supports, in summer, a nationally
important population of the Annex 1 species
golden eagle with 10 breeding pairs recorded
in 2003, representing 2.2% of the British
breeding population.
The SPA is designated for regularly
supporting, in summer, a nationally important
population of the Annex 1 species wood
sandpiper with an average of 3 breeding pairs
between 1991-1995, representing 50% of the
British breeding population.
The SSSI is designated for supporting an
extremely rich breeding bird assemblage,
including, greenshank, dunlin, curlew and
redshank.
The SSSI is designated for its upland breeding
bird assemblage.
The SPA is designated for supporting a
nationally important population of breeding
dotterel. From 1987 to 1993, an average of
22 pairs of dotterel bred within the Beinn Dearg
SPA, representing 3% of the British breeding
population.
The SSSI is designated for supporting a rich
breeding bird assemblage.
The SPA is designated for supporting a
nationally important population of breeding
dotterel. From 1987 to 1993, an average of
20 pairs of dotterel bred within the Ben Wyvis
SPA, representing 2% of the British breeding
population.
Chapter 7 – Page 9
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
Designation
SPA/Ramsar/
SSSI
Site Name
Cromarty
Firth
Central
Highland
IBA
Distance from
Corriemoillie
Wind Farm
NNR – approx
7.6km east
Located approx
21 km
southeast of the
site.
Located approx
2.3km south of
the site.
Reason for Designation
The SSSI is designated for supporting a
breeding population of Dotterel.
The NNR is designated for supporting a
breeding population of Dotterel.
The SPA is designated for supporting an
internationally important population of wintering
greylag geese (1,782, 2% of total Icelandic
population, all of which winters in GB). The
SPA also supports a nationally important
wintering population of whooper swan
(1992/93-96/97 winter peak mean of 64, 1% of
GB). The SPA also supports in excess of
20,000 waterfowl each winter and is nationally
important for breeding osprey and common
tern.
The Ramsar and SSSI citations include the
same species for which the SPA is designated.
This non-statutory designation is for an area
classified as being important by RSPB
Scotland for raptors and other specialist
montane and forest birds.
Potential Effects on Ornithological Receptors
7.68
The main ways in which a Wind Farm may affect ornithological receptors are via:
•
•
•
Habitat loss for breeding, foraging or roosting;
Disturbance or Displacement; and
Collision with turbines.
7.69 In addition to effects which are directly related to the proposed Wind Farm, there may be other
effects which arise as a result of the combined effects of multiple Wind Farms within the local or
regional area. These cumulative effects may also result in effects which would previously be
considered to be not significant becoming more important and significant in context.
7.70
Each of these forms of potential effect is discussed in turn below.
Habitat Loss
7.71 During the construction phase of the proposed Wind Farm, the potential effects of associated
noise and visual disturbance could lead to the temporary displacement or disruption of breeding and
foraging birds. Potential effects are likely to be greatest during the breeding season (mainly
between March and August, depending on species) and behavioural sensitivity to the effects will
vary between species (Table 7.7). Disturbance of birds due to construction activities of this type
have not been sufficiently quantified and the available information is often contradictory. However,
larger bird species, those higher up the food chain or those that feed in flocks in the open tend to be
more vulnerable to disturbance than small birds living in structurally complex or closed habitats such
Chapter 7 – Page 10
as woodland (Hill et al. 1997)25 The potential effects associated with construction activities are only
likely to occur for as long as the construction phase continues. The exception to this would be if an
adverse effect on the breeding success of a receptor were such that the local population becomes
extinct and replacement through recruitment or recolonisation does not occur.
Disturbance
7.72 The operation of turbines and associated human activities for maintenance purposes also has
the potential to cause disturbance and displace birds from the application site. Disturbance effects
during the operational phase may be less than during the construction phase. Studies have shown
that, in general, species are not disturbed beyond 500 to 800m from turbines and, in some cases,
birds do not appear to have been disturbed at all. However, individual turbines, or the Wind Farm
as a whole, may present a barrier to the movement of birds, restricting or displacing birds from
much larger areas. The effect this would have on a population is subtle and difficult to predict with
any great certainty. If birds regularly have to fly over or around obstacles or are forced into
suboptimal habitats, this may result in reduced feeding efficiency and greater energy expenditure.
By implication, this will reduce the efficiency with which they accumulate reserves, potentially
affecting breeding success. During the lifetime of the Wind Farm, however, birds may habituate to
the presence of turbines, thus the effect is likely to be greatest in the short-term.
Collision
7.73 Collision of a bird with the turbine rotors is almost certain to result in the death of the bird. In low
density populations, such as raptors, this could have a more adverse effect on the local population
than in higher density populations (e.g., skylark) because a higher proportion of the local population
would be affected in a low density population. The frequency and likelihood of a collision occurring
depends on a number of factors. These include aspects of the size and behaviour of the bird
(including their use of the site) the nature of the surrounding environment and the structure and
layout of the turbines.
7.74 Collision risk is perceived to be higher for birds that spend much of the time in the air, such as
foraging raptors and those that have regular flight paths between feeding and breeding/roosting
grounds (e.g., geese and red-throated diver). The majority of bird fatalities at Wind Farms have
occurred on major migration routes, in reduced visibility or at night26,27,28. Birds are also more
susceptible if the Wind Farm is located in an area of unusually high prey density. A close array of
turbines across a natural wind funnel (a “wind wall”) has also been known to cause increased bird
mortality. For diurnal foraging raptors, the proximity of structures on which to perch can increase
the likelihood of collision with turbines29.
25 25 Hill, D.A., Hockin, D., Price, D., Tucker, G., Morris, R. & Treweek, J. 1997. Bird disturbance: improving the
quality of disturbance research. Journal of Applied Ecology 34: 275-288.
26 Crockford, N.J. 1992. A review of the possible impacts of windfarms on birds and other wildlife. JNCC Report
No. 27. JNCC, Peterborough; Gill, J.P., Townsley, M. & Mudge, G.P. 1996. Review of the impacts of windfarms
and other aerial structures upon birds. SNH Review 21; Thelander, C.G., Smallwood, K.S. & Rugge, L. 2003. Bird
risk behaviours and fatalities at the Altamont Wind Resource Area. Report to the National Renewable Energy
Laboratory, Colorado.
27 Gill, J.P., Townsley, M. and Mudge, G.P. 1996. Review of the impacts of Wind Farms and other aerial
structures upon birds. Scottish Natural Heritage Review No. 21. SNH, Edinburgh.
28 Thelander, C.G., Smallwood, K.S. and Rugge, L. 2003. Bird risk behaviours and fatalities at the Altamont
Pass Wind Resource Area. Period of performance: March 1998 – December 2000. National Renewable Energy
Laboratory, Colorado.
29 Orloff, S. & Flannery, A. 1996. Avian mortality in Altamont Pass WRA – final report. California Energy
Commission, Sacramento.
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
7.75 Where there has been sufficient flight activity at Potential Collision Risk Height (PCH), collision
risk modelling has been conducted following the Band Model, in accordance with SNH guidance7,30.
Full details of the methodology can be found in Appendix 7A.
Value
7.76 It should be noted that operational disturbance and collision risk effects are mutually exclusive in
a spatial sense, i.e., a bird that avoids the Wind Farm area due to disturbance cannot be at risk of
collision with the turbine rotors at the same time. However, they are not mutually exclusive in a
temporal sense; a bird may initially avoid the Wind Farm, but habituate to it, and would then be at
risk of collision.
Cumulative Effects
LOCAL
7.77 Cumulative effects would not be detected when considering the proposed Wind Farm in
isolation, but become significant in combination with other effects. The context in which cumulative
effects are considered depends upon the ecology of the species in question.
7.78 It may be appropriate to consider cumulative collision risk to geese associated with an SPA
within the context of their wider foraging range. This may involve the consideration of Wind Farms
within, for example, 20km of the SPA (the actual range considered would be informed by the
available information on area use by the particular roost population).
7.79 For other receptors, such as breeding waders, it may be appropriate to consider the effects on
the local population as identified in the assessment, in the context of any planned Wind Farms in the
immediate vicinity which have the potential of causing additional displacement. It may be
considered that breeding pairs will move into adjacent suitable habitat when the development is
considered in isolation, where in reality this land may be unavailable due to consent or another
proposed project, specifically the consented Lochluichart Wind Farm adjacent on the land to the
west of the proposed Wind Farm.
7.80
Cumulative effects are only considered for receptors identified in this assessment.
7.81 Cumulative effects are considered as integral components of the assessment of effects on
receptors within 10km of Corriemoillie.
Receptor Assessment
7.82 A summary of identified avian Valued Ecological Receptors (VERS) is provided in Table 7.10
below. The VER assigned to each of the species is based upon baseline results from all survey
work as opposed to the species conservation/protection status.
Table 7.10 Summary of Identified Avian Receptors
Value
VER
Pink-footed goose
INTERNATIONAL
Greylag goose (Cromarty Firth SPA)
Golden eagle (Glen Affric to Strathconon pSPA)
Red-throated diver
NATIONAL
Greenshank
Red Kite
REGIONAL
NEGLIGIBLE
VER
Marsh Harrier
Hen Harrier
Goshawk
Osprey
Merlin
Peregrine falcon
Golden plover
Black grouse
Dunlin
Snipe
Skylark
Red-listed species (other than skylark)
Waterfowl
Crossbill (winter)
Bullfinch (winter)
Breeding passerine assemblage (common species e.g.,
chaffinch, blue tit great tit etc.)
Winter passerine assemblage
Other raptors (buzzard, sparrowhawk & kestrel)
7.83 Receptors of negligible conservation importance are not considered further in this assessment
as they were not recorded in important numbers. These receptors are generally common and
widespread species.
7.84 The results of field surveys and historical data searches are summarised below. Results from
all relevant surveys are compiled to produce a baseline description for each particular receptor
detected or reported. These are then discussed as species groups or individual receptor accounts
as appropriate. Potential construction and operational effects are also considered for each receptor.
7.85 Mitigation is discussed where appropriate. However, it should be considered that the principle
mitigation measure adopted to minimise the ecological impact of the development has been the use
of an iterative design process (as considered in Chapter 2 (Approach to EIA) and in the Confidential
Annex). Use has been made of ecological constraints plans and ecological issues have been taken
into account throughout the design process. This means that most mitigation measures are
embedded within the overall design, allowing the opportunity to microsite turbines away from
sensitive habitats or species. This section presents specific measures adopted through the different
phases of the development. An ecological clerk of works (ECoW) would be appointed to oversee
mitigation measures, and ensure best practice during the construction and decommissioning
phases.
7.86 Potential decommissioning effects are considered to be of the same nature as construction
effects, with the exception that habitat is likely to be restored and displaced birds able to return to
abandoned territories.
7.87 Full details of survey results can be found in Appendix 7A, where they are presented for each
discrete survey type.
30 SNH. 2000. Guidance Note: Windfarms and Birds: Calculating a theoretical collision risk assuming no
avoiding action. SNH, Battleby.
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
Chapter 7 – Page 11
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
Pink-footed Goose
Baseline
7.88 Seven flights of pink-footed geese were observed during flight activity surveys, totalling 589
birds. Only 3 of the 7 flights crossed the proposed Wind Farm site. Two of the three flights, totalling
54 birds, were observed from VP6. This VP was not part of the migratory geese survey work and
was not in use during the 2008 autumn migratory period or all of the spring migratory period;
therefore these flights can not be used in the collision risk model. All flights are shown in Figure 7.9,
with full flight details presented in Table 7A.27 of Appendix 7A. Seven goose flights were recorded
by NRP during all migration VP survey work in 2005 and 2006 (Data obtained does not stipulate
species or number of birds or heights). No geese data is presented in the Lochluichart ES.
7.89 The single remaining pink-footed goose flight of 100 birds was recorded at Potential Collision
Height (PCH) during the 2009 spring migratory period. Based on these results collision risk
modelling has been completed for this species.
7.90 Due to the localised and vulnerable nature of the global population in winter, the pink-footed
goose population in the UK is considered to be of international importance. It is considered that at
least 50% of the world population winters in Scotland (Forester et al, 2007)31, with over 50% of UK
wintering birds being concentrated into 10 or fewer sites.
7.91 Winter numbers of pink-footed goose in Scotland have been estimated at 100,000-150,00031.
The total British population was estimated at 287,563 in November 2007 (Mitchell, 2008)32. There
has been a large increase in the wintering population since the mid-1980s due to a combination of
factors specifically, increased acreages of winter cereal and permanent grass leys, combined with a
decline in shooting pressure and better protection of many major roosts.
7.92 Pink-footed goose has a favourable conservation status and its current British population is in
excess of 250,000 birds. Furthermore, pink-footed goose is a legitimate quarry species an
estimated 25,000 are legally shot in Britain each year (Frederiksen, 2002)33.
7.93 Pink-footed geese are considered to be of international value in the context of this assessment.
Pink-footed geese are also a priority species of the Highland Ross and Cromarty Local Biodiversity
Action Plan (LBAP).
Potential Construction Effects
7.94 There are no known pink-footed goose roosts of national or international importance or
important foraging grounds within 25km of the proposed Wind Farm. Therefore no birds will be
displaced during construction activities. Subsequently there is no pathway for effect during the
construction phase as identified in this assessment.
Potential Operation Effects
7.95 There is a possibility that pink-footed geese may collide with turbines. However no regular
migratory flights were observed and there are no roosts within 20km and no regular foraging routes
from known roosts were detected. A single flight of 100 birds was observed during the spring
migratory period in 2009, the birds traversed the proposed Wind Farm site at PCH. Collision risk
modelling has been carried out for the spring migratory period only as there were no flights recorded
during the autumn migratory period.
7.96
Full details of collision risk modelling can be found in Appendix 7A.
7.97 SNH currently accepts a 99% avoidance rate for geese. Using a 99% avoidance rate, the model
yields an estimated mortality of one bird every 0.6 years i.e. 1.6 bird collisions per year. This is
equivalent to 41.5 geese, during the spring migratory period, during the life time of the Wind Farm
Taking the lower estimate of the total number of pink-footed geese which winter in Scotland
(100,000) this loss is equivalent to 0.0004% of the population, i.e. <1%. The estimated mortality
avoidance rate is therefore considered to be of negligible magnitude in and national passage and
subsequent international passage population context. This effect is considered to be of short-term
duration and negligible magnitude and therefore not significant.
Greylag Goose
Baseline
7.98 A single greylag goose flight, of three birds, was recorded during flight activity surveys. There
were no further observations of this species from targeted surveys or incidental records when other
surveys were being undertaken. Collision risk modelling has not been conducted for this species as
based on these data the result would be negligible. All flights are shown in Figure 7.9. Two single
flights of greylag geese were observed during all migratory watches conducted by NRP in 2005 and
2006. One flight consisted of just a single bird and the other flight was of a skein of 30 birds (no
height data available). In addition, seven goose flights were recorded but data obtained does not
stipulate species, number of birds or heights. NRP data from 2002-2003 does indicate a brief
passage of greylag geese in April 2003, however no detailed data was available. No goose data is
presented in the Lochluichart ES.
7.99 At least 20% of the entire greylag goose population winters in the UK, with over 50% of UK
wintering birds being concentrated into 10 or fewer sites. Despite this localisation, numbers are
high and the species is a legitimate quarry species that can be hunted outside the close season
(Hearn and Mitchell, 2004)34. The species is not afforded a high level of protection under European
or UK Law, and is not the subject of a specific action plan within the UK or Highland Biodiversity
process.
7.100 Greylag goose is on the UK Amber List of BoCC, due to the localised and vulnerable nature of
the northwest European population. Of the three greylag goose populations found in Britain, the
birds seen at Corriemoillie are likely to belong to the migratory population that breeds in Iceland,
95% of which winter in Scotland31.
31 Forrester, R. W., Andrews, I., J., McInerny. C., J., Murray, R., D., McGowan, R., Y., Zonfrillo, B., Betts, M., W.,
Jardine, D., C. & Grundy, D., S. (eds). (2007). The Birds of Scotland. The Scottish Ornithologists’ Club,
Aberlady.
32 Mitchell, C. 2008. Status and distribution of Icelandic-breeding geese: results of the 2007 international census.
Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust Report, Slimbridge.
33 Frederiksen, M. (2002). Indirect estimation of the number of migratory greylag and pink-footed geese shot in
Britain. Wildfowl, 53, 27–34.
Chapter 7 – Page 12
7.101 The winter Icelandic population of greylag goose increased up to 1990 but has since declined
slightly31. The species remains relatively abundant in Britain with wintering numbers estimated at
107, 137 in 2007, an increase of 30% on the 2006 figures32. Scottish numbers were considered to
34 Hearn, R., D. & Mitchell, C., R. (2004). Greylag Gosse Anser anser (Iceland population) in Britain and Ireland
1960/61-1999/2000. Waterbird Review Series, WWT and JNCC, Slimbridge.
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
be approximately 83,500 birds in November 200434. Within Scotland there has been a northwards
range shift since the 1980s31. Currently, the majority of the population winters in north Scotland.
7.102 Despite inclusion on the Amber List, greylag goose has a favourable conservation status and its
current British population is in excess of 100,000 birds. Furthermore greylag goose is a legitimate
quarry species an estimated 25,000 are legally shot in Britain each year33.
7.103 Greylag geese are considered to be of international value in the context of this assessment.
Greylag geese are also a priority species of the Highland Ross and Cromarty LBAP.
Potential Construction Effects
7.104 The Cromarty Firth SPA, approximately 21km southeast of the proposed Wind Farm, is the
nearest known greylag goose roost of national and international importance. Baseline results
however indicate that the proposed Wind Farm is not near any known foraging areas or on any
foraging routes for the Cromarty Firth birds. Therefore no birds will be displaced during construction
activities subsequently there is no pathway for effect during the construction phase as identified in
this assessment.
Potential Operation Effects
7.105 There is a possibility that greylag geese may collide with turbines. However, flight activity
surveys did not detect a regular foraging route from the nearest known roost for this species (the
Cromarty Firth SPA), or migratory flight routes across the site. The single flight of three birds that
was recorded did occur at PCH traversing the proposed Wind Farm envelope. However a collision
risk model has not being carried out for this species as the result based on these data would be
negligible. As such, any potential effect as a result of collision risk is considered to be of short-term
duration negligible magnitude, and so not significant.
7.109 A small number of flights were recorded that were not associated with either breeding territory.
These did not follow regular flyways, and are likely to be attributed to non-breeding adults or
immature birds.
7.110 Historical information indicates that the territory that was unsuccessful in 2009 was occupied in
2005, successfully rearing one chick (data from NRP surveys).
7.111 In 2006, the two territories were not found to be occupied. However, a territory to the west was
detected, and the pair successfully reared one chick (data from NRP surveys). This territory was
also occupied in 2004, and successfully reared one chick (data from the Lochluichart ES). This
territory was not occupied in 2009.
7.112 No territories were detected in 2003 (data from the Lochluichart ES).
7.113 Full details for the red-throated diver baseline are provided in the Confidential Annex, due to the
sensitive nature of this information.
7.114 There is an estimated breeding population of 227 red-throated diver territories on mainland
Scotland, in the context of an estimated Scottish breeding population of 1255 pairs (based upon the
results of the last national survey in 2006)35. The mainland population was found to have increased
by 14.1% between 1994 and 2006. Therefore, although a species of European conservation
concern, the mainland Scotland red-throated diver breeding population appears to be stable, and
may be increasing.
7.115 Red-throated divers are listed on Annex I of the Birds Directive, Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and
Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), and the Amber list of BoCC.
Red-throated Diver
7.116 Red-throated divers are considered to be of national importance in the context of this
assessment.
Baseline
Potential Construction Effects
7.106 Two red-throated diver territories were identified during breeding bird surveys in 2009. One of
these failed at the egg-laying stage, and the other successfully reared one chick.
7.117 As the forestry will be felled prior to construction, the habitat onsite will be altered. However, the
habitats used by breeding red-throated divers will remain unchanged and so no effect is predicted.
As all tree felling will be completed outside the breeding season, this will not result in disturbance to
breeding red-throated divers.
7.107 A total of 52 red-throated diver flights were observed during flight activity surveys. Although the
flights did not conform to a predictable model, these flights were predictable in the sense that they
were spatially localised to particular areas of the site, due to their association with breeding
territories and flyways to and from feeding waterbodies. Therefore, only the 35 flights that crossed
the proposed Wind Farm (inclusive of a 200m buffer of rotor swept area) were considered in
collision risk modelling. Of these flights, 31 were at PCH (total of 1395 seconds). A total of 27
flights were recorded originating from and terminating at the successful breeding territory (15
incoming and 12 outgoing), which was also responsible for the majority of flights crossing the
proposed Wind Farm area. Fewer flights were recorded from the failed territory, due to the
difference in behaviour of chick-rearing and non-breeding birds. None of these flights crossed the
Wind Farm.
7.108 Due to the sensitive nature of this species all flight line data is displayed in Figures 2, 3, 5 and 6
in the Ornithology Confidential Annex. Details of observed flight activity are provided in Appendix
7A.
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
7.118 Red-throated divers are highly susceptible to human disturbance, which is thought to be one of
the main causes of breeding failure for this species. Therefore, it is proposed that a 500m and
750m buffers will be implemented for all red-throated diver territories, where restrictions on
construction activities will be applied as appropriate, so as to prevent displacement36. Although
these distances are based upon human disturbance, they have been accepted by SNH for
construction activities at other Wind Farm sites, including Carraig Gheal Wind Farm.
7.119 Red-throated diver reactions to activity appear to be mainly due to visual disturbance as a result
of presence of pedestrians and appear to be less affected by transient disturbance caused as a
result of vehicles passing within view of lochans37. This also appears to be the case with other
35 Dillon, I.A., Smith, T.D., Williams, S.J., Haysom, S. and Eaton, M.A. 2009. Status of red-throated divers Gavia
stellata in Britain in 2006. Bird Study 56, 147-157.
36 Ruddock, M. and Whitfield, D.P. 2007. A review of disturbance distances in selected bird species. A report
from Natural Research (Projects) Ltd to Scottish Natural Heritage. SNH, Inverness.
37 Chris Cathrine, pers. obs.
Chapter 7 – Page 13
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
birds38. One breeding territory is located within line-of-sight of proposed construction areas, while
the other is located outwith line-of-sight of any activities. A stand of trees will be retained around the
breeding lochan that would otherwise be in line-of-sight of construction activities in an attempt to
avoid disturbance from certain activities during the breeding season. It is proposed that restrictions
on construction activities within agreed buffers are designed with consideration to line-of-site. It is
considered that the proposed mitigation is likely to avoid disturbance to breeding red-throated
divers, and enable the retention of territories during the construction phase. If trees are lost (e.g.
due to wind throw) then a buffer of at least 500m will be implemented around red-throated diver
territories.
7.120 However, due to the paucity of studies concerning construction disturbance to red-throated
divers and the uncertainty associated with the efficacy of the proposed mitigation a precautionary
approach has been adopted in this assessment.
7.121 Construction activities are likely to be undertaken during the breeding season within line-of-site
of one of the breeding territories. It is therefore considered that one breeding territory (equivalent to
<0.5% of the mainland Scotland breeding population) will be lost from the breeding population
through displacement for a single season. This effect is considered to be of short-term duration
and negligible magnitude and so not significant.
Potential Operational Effects
7.122 Historical records indicate that occupied breeding territories in the study area have varied each
year, and it has been noted that alternative sites may be used in different breeding seasons where
there is an abundance of available lochans compared to the number of breeding pairs39. On Lewis,
distances of approximately 1km between nest sites used in consecutive years are not unusual40.
However, red-throated divers are generally believed to have high site fidelity, and so it has been
assumed in this assessment that they would return to the identified breeding territories each year in
the absence of a change in conditions41.
7.123 Red-throated divers continued to breed successfully within 200m of an operational turbine at
Burgar Hill Wind Farm (Orkney) without a habituation period, and will breed close to roads. As one
territory at Corriemoillie is located more than 1km from the nearest operational turbine location, no
effect is predicted due to operational disturbance on this pair.
7.124 The second territory is located beyond 200m of any turbine locations. It is considered possible
that this pair will continue to use their traditional lochan, and that there may be no interruption in
occupancy after construction, as occurred at Burgar Hill Wind Farm. However, Burgar Hill Wind
Farm is smaller than that proposed at this site, and the situation of the breeding territories differ in
relation to infrastructure. However, due to this uncertainty surrounding how breeding red-throated
divers may react to operational turbines in this situation, a precautionary approach has been
adopted in this assessment. It is therefore considered that one breeding territory (equivalent to
<0.5% of the mainland Scotland breeding population) could be lost from the breeding population
through displacement. This effect is considered to be of permanent duration but negligible
magnitude and so not significant.
38 Cameron MacIver, pers. comm.
39 Pendlebury, C., Zisman, S., Walls, R., Sweeney, J., McLoughlin, E., Robinson, C., Turner, L. and Loughrey, J.
2008. Literature review to assess bird species connectivity to Special Protection Areas, A report by RPS under
contract to SNH. RPS, Glasgow.
40 Andrew Stevenson, pers. comm.
41 Okill, D. 2002. Ringing red-throated divers. Or, banding red-throated loons. Newsletter, Diver/Loon Specialist
Group 4, 5-7.
Chapter 7 – Page 14
7.125 Should this territory be lost, the risk of collision would be trivial, as the majority of flights that
cross the proposed Wind Farm follow a flyway associated with this territory. In this event there
would be a risk of an effect of short-term duration and negligible magnitude and so not significant.
7.126 However, should the red-throated diver territory be retained there would be a higher risk of
mortality through collision with turbines. Collision risk modelling was therefore completed for
breeding red-throated divers and full details are presented in Appendix 7A. However, the final Wind
Farm layout was designed with a 500m corridor to allow the continued unimpeded use of the flyway
associated with this territory. To demonstrate the efficacy of this corridor, two models were
calculated. The first does not consider the corridor, and shows the potential collision risk for redthroated divers with no consideration to the flyway. The second shows the potential effect when the
corridor design is taken into account by calculating potential collision risk using only the flights that
do not follow the unimpeded flyway.
7.127 In the absence of the corridor the model yielded an estimated mortality of one bird every 4.99
years assuming the standard 95% avoidance rate. However, SNH has accepted an avoidance rate
of 98% for other Wind Farm applications42. This avoidance rate is considered more realistic,
considering there has been only a single recorded collision of a red-throated diver with an
operational wind turbine, while birds have been observed to fly between turbines at Burgar Hill,
where no collisions have been recorded. The 98% avoidance rate yields an estimated mortality of
one bird every 12.47 years, or slightly more than two birds during the operational life of the Wind
Farm. Although it is thought that red-throated divers reach breeding maturity within two or three
years, they have a high rate of breeding failure and so low fledging rate (0.1943). Based on this, it is
estimated that the replacement of two individuals would take at least 16 years. Therefore, this
would be considered to be a negative effect of long-term duration and low magnitude, and so
significant.
7.128 However, when collision risk is modelled taking the corridor into account the standard avoidance
rate of 95% yields an estimated mortality of one bird every 14.52 years, while the more realistic
avoidance rate of 98% yields an estimate of one bird every 36.1 years. This is less than one bird
during the lifetime of the proposed Wind Farm. In the unlikely event that a single bird was lost, it is
considered that it would take at least 8 years for this bird to be replaced. With the corridor in place,
this effect is considered to be of medium-term duration and negligible magnitude and so not
significant.
Golden Eagle
Baseline
7.129 A total of 22 golden eagle flights were recorded during all flight activity surveys conducted from
VPs1-9, totalling 23 birds. Collision risk modelling has been carried out for this species based on
these data for both the breeding and non-breeding season. Full details of flights can be found in
Table 7A. 61 of Appendix 7A. Due to their sensitive nature, all Flight lines for this species are
shown in Figure 10 in the Ornithology Confidential Annex.
7.130 Survey work conducted by NRP in 2002 and 2003 indicated a low level of activity of this species
over the site during the autumn period. No records of this species were observed between 2005
and 2006. Data obtained from the Lochluichart ES states that 10 flights of this species were
observed, nine of which were of juvenile birds and the remaining one flight, an adult.
42 SNH. 2009. Response to proposed Viking Wind Farm, Shetland.
43 Bundy, G. 1976. Breeding biology of the red-throated diver. Bird Study 23, 249-256.
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
7.131 Based on these results collision risk modelling has been carried out for this species on the data
recorded during both the breeding and non-breeding seasons.
7.132 No nest sites were located during breeding raptor surveys and breeding raptor VPs within the
2km study area. In addition there are no known golden eagle nesting locations within 5km of the
proposed Wind Farm (Ornithology Confidential Annex). Based on radio tracking and intensive
observations, home range sizes for 11 golden eagle territories in western Scotland have been
estimated at 1.7km-4.6km44.
7.138 Golden eagle is listed in Annex I of the EU Birds Directive and Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and
Countryside Act (1981, as amended) and the amber list of BoCC. Golden eagle is a priority species
on the Highland Ross and Cromarty LBAP.
7.139 Baseline results indicate this species does use the moorland to the west of the and there are
known territories within 5-10km of the site. Based on the proximity of the pSPA where golden eagle
is a qualifying feature, this species is therefore considered to be of International ecological
importance.
7.133 There is little or no suitable habitat within the site boundary for this species. The site lies within
a shallow bowl covered with plantation forestry. There are very few if any suitable cliffs/crags or
ledges with a preferred northerly or easterly aspect to support a nesting attempt by this species.
Approximately 4% of golden eagle nests recorded in Scotland have been tree nests; this has
typically been in mature Scots pine10. The Corriemoillie Forest is very poor quality coniferous
plantation and would not suit a nesting attempt by this species There is however suitable foraging
and breeding habitat for this species to the north, northwest, west and south of Corriemoillie Forest.
Potential Construction Effects
7.134 The most recent national survey for this species conducted in 2003 estimated the Scottish
population to be 441 pairs45. In 2006, 122 known home ranges in the Highlands were checked for
occupancy, 101 of these (83%) were occupied. Only 30 pairs from the 101 occupied territories
successfully fledged young46. Of the 101 occupied territories visited in the Highlands only 1 territory
was monitored in Easter Ross46.
7.141 González et al. (2006)52 recommended that after an extensive study of golden eagles in Spain, a
minimal protection buffer of 500m with a vulnerable zone extending to 800m in which some lowlevel human activities are allowed. In the UK, recommended buffer zones have ranged from 750–
1500m (McGrady et al. 199753, Currie & Elliott 199754), and 900 – 1100m (Petty, 199855).
7.135 There are 90 known golden eagle territories in NHZ7. During the 1992 national population
survey only 45 of these were occupied; in the last national survey in 2003 this had reduced to 43
occupied territories47.
7.136 The Glen Affric to Strathconon pSPA holds good numbers of golden eagle at moderate density
and with high productivity. The site supports 10 pairs of golden eagle, 2.2% of the GB population
(2003 national survey data)48. Whilst complete monitoring of this area has not been undertaken
annually, numbers have been consistent in recent decades (nine active pairs in 1992 and 10 in
1982) and no eagle territories are known to have fallen vacant since the time of the 2003 survey.
The mean young fledged per pair on Glen Affric to Strathconon was 0.33 in 1992 and 0.40 in 2003
compared with the national average of 0.32 fledged per pair in 1992 and 0.36 in 2003.
7.137 Golden eagles only start to breed from the age of four. At this stage the bird is classed as a
sub-adult, eagles do not become adults until the age of seven31. The species is therefore long lived
but with a low productivity rate and the population has low recruitment levels.
44 Haworth, P.F. et al. 2006. Ranging distance of resident Golden Eagles Aquila chrysaetos in western Scotland
according to season and breeding status. Bird Study, 53, 265-273
45 Eaton, M.A., Dillon, I., A, Stirling-Aird, P.K. & Whitfield, F.P. (2007). The status of the golden eagle Aquila
chrysaetos in Britain in 2003. Bird Study 54: 212-220.
46 Etheridge, B., Holling, M., Riley, H., Wernham, C., Thomson, D. (2008). Scottish Raptor Monitoring Scheme
Report 2006. Scottish Ornithologist Club.
47 Whitfield, D P, Fielding, A H, McLeod, D R A and Haworth, P F. (2008). A conservation framework for golden
eagles: implications for their conservation and management in Scotland. Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned
Report No.193
48
http://www.snh.org.uk/pdfs/strategy/GEConsult/5.4A-GLENAFFRICSTRATHCONONCASE-B437667.pdf
50 Madders, M. & Whitfield, D.P. (2006). Upland raptors and the assessment of Wind Farm impacts. Ibis, 148,
43-56.
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
7.140 Golden eagles have been rated as having high sensitivity to Wind Farms by Madders and
Whitfield (2006)50, with evidence from Walker et al. (2005)51 suggesting that range use changed for
a pair of resident golden eagles after a Wind Farm in Scotland was constructed within a territory
(although there were possibly other confounding habitat management factors). Studies in the USA
conversely have not noted any displacement effects due to the operation of Wind Farms (Madders
& Whitfield 200650).
7.142 From an extensive literature and peer review of golden eagle disturbance effects (including the
above papers), Ruddock and Whitfield (200756) recommended that golden eagles are potentially
affected to an upper limit of 750-1000m. No reviewer recommended a distance of greater than 2km.
7.143 Using the above information, baseline results that foraging takes place over the adjacent
moorland and that the nearest known nesting location is greater than 5km, as a precaution it is
considered that Corriemoillie lies at the edge of a territory range. Baseline results indicate a higher
level of activity during the breeding season compared to the non-breeding season. However the
relatively low levels of activity indicate that the site and adjacent moorland is of marginal importance
for foraging during the breeding season and of relatively low importance during the non-breeding
season.
7.144 Overall construction effects on this species is considered to be of short-term duration and
negligible magnitude, and so not significant.
Potential Operation Effects
51 Walker, D., M. McGrady, A. McCluskie, M. Madders & D. R. A. McLeod. 2005. Resident Golden Eagle
ranging behaviour before and after construction of a Wind Farm in Argyll. Scottish Birds 25:2452 González, L.M., Arroyo, B.E., Margalida, A., Sanchez, R. & Oria, J. (2006). Effect of human activities on the
behaviour of breeding Spanish imperial eagles (Aquila adalberti): management implications for the conservation of
a threatened species. Animal Conservation, 9, 85-93.
53 McGrady, M.J., McLeod, D.R., Petty, S.J., Grant, J.R. & Bainbridge, I.P. (1997). Golden Eagles and Forestry.
Research Information Note 292. Forestry Commission, Farnham, UK.
54 Currie, F. & Elliott, G. (1997). Forests and Birds: A Guide to Managing Forests for Rare Birds. Forestry
Authority, Cambridge and Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, Sandy, UK.
55 Petty, S.J. 1998. Ecology & conservation of raptors in forests. Forestry Commission Bulletin, 118. The
Stationary Office, Edinburgh.
56 Ruddock, M. and Whitfield, D.P. 2007. A review of disturbance distances in selected bird species. A report
from Natural Research (Projects) Ltd to Scottish Natural Heritage. SNH, Inverness.
Chapter 7 – Page 15
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
7.145 There is a possibility that golden eagles may collide with the turbines. Initial studies into Wind
Farms reported that up to 67 golden eagles were killed annually at Altamont Pass in California
(Smallwood and Thelander, 2008 in RSPB sensitivities57), with proportionally more golden eagles
being killed than would have been predicted by chance. This is likely to have been due to hunting
behaviour (Orloff & Flannery, 1992)29 and poor turbine placement for eagle foraging.
7.146 In contrast, throughout the whole of Europe, Hötker et al. (2004)58 found only one reported
casualty of a golden eagle due to collision with a wind turbine in Spain.
7.147 More recent evidence from operational Wind Farms has shown that golden eagles actively avoid
turbines51. From a recent review of monitoring studies at four operational Wind Farms in the USA, a
precautionary avoidance level of 99% was recommended (Whitfield, 200959).
7.148 A total of 22 flights were recorded during all flight activity surveys but of these only six were
recorded at PCH within the 2km VP viewsheds. Five of the six flights were recorded during the
breeding season (total time at PCH = 600 seconds), the remaining one flight was observed during
the non-breeding season (total time at PCH = 157.5 seconds).
7.149 Collision risk modelling has been calculated for this species for both the breeding and nonbreeding season. Two models have been calculated. A standard average model has been
produced which assumes that activity will remain the same, and a weighted average model which
assumes activity will increase over the site post-felling. Of all the flights observed only eight
traversed the proposed Wind Farm envelope and the majority of flight activity for this species was
recorded on moorland to the west and northwest of Corriemoillie Forest. It is most likely that
Corriemoillie will become more suitable for golden eagle to forage over post felling. Full details of
collision risk modelling are provided in Appendix 7A.
7.150 The turbine collision avoidance rate for this species was set at 99%59. During the non-breeding
season the standard average model calculates a collision risk of one golden eagle every 257.58
years. The weighted average model for the non-breeding period calculates a collision risk of one
golden eagle every 85.86 years. Assuming 86 birds are present during the winter period (this is
based on 43 pairs holding territories from 2003 national survey and that birds are present all year),
this level of predicted mortality for the weighted average model, which represents a worst case
scenario, is a loss of 0.01% of the NHZ7 population. This assumption does not account for juvenile
or sub-adult non-breeding birds which may be in NHZ7 during the winter. This is considered to be
an impact of negligible magnitude, and so not significant.
7.151 The standard average model based on data obtained from the breeding season calculates a
collision risk of one golden eagle every 97.73 years. This equates to 0.01 collisions per year and no
birds during the life time of the Wind Farm. The weighted average model for the breeding season
calculates a collision risk of one golden eagle every 12.38 years, this equates to 0.08 collisions per
year and approximately two birds during the life time of the Wind Farm. Making the same
assumptions as above on the NHZ7 population and using the weighted average model which
represents a worst case scenario, this would be a loss of 0.09% of the NHZ7 population. Again this
57 Bright, J., Langston, R., Bullman, R., Evans, R., Gardner, S. & Pearce-Higgins, J. (2008). Map of bird
sensitivities to Wind Farms in Scotland: A tool to aid planning and conservation. Biological Conservation 141:
2342-2356.
58 Hotker, H., Thomsen, KM., & Jeromin, H. (2006). Impacts of biodiversity of exploitation of renewable energy
sources: the example of birds and bats-facts, gaps in knowledge, demands for further research, and ornithological
guidelines for the development of renewable energy exploitation. Michael-Otto-Institut im NABU, Bergenhusen.
59 Whitfield, P.D. (2009). Collision avoidance of golden eagles at Wind Farms under the 'Band' collision risk
model. Report to Scottish Natural Heritage. Natural research Projects Ltd.
Chapter 7 – Page 16
assumption does not take into account additional juvenile and sub-adult birds which would be part
of the NHZ7 golden eagle population during the breeding season. This is considered to be an
impact of short-term duration and negligible magnitude, and so not significant.
Greenshank
Baseline
7.152 Four greenshank territories were identified during breeding bird surveys in 2009. Two of these
were within the application site boundary (northwest and central), and a third was located east of the
site along the November 2009 access route. The fourth was outwith the study area, east of the site.
Two of the three territories within the study area failed to rear young (northwest site and southern
access track), while the central territory raised one chick. All 2009 territories are shown in Figure
7.11. In 2010 two territories were located within the northern access route survey area (c. 500m and
600m from the proposed track), one of which to the northwest of the Wind Farm area may be the
same as that recorded in 2009 (Figure 7.11).
7.153 Data collected by NRP in 2005 identified three greenshank territories, indicating a similar
population density, and suggesting a stable population within the study area.
7.154 A feeding area was also identified during surveys in 2009 (shown in Figure 7.11). This area
offers open habitat with scattered small pools, making it ideal for foraging greenshank. It is likely
that birds from both territories located within the site boundary commute to this location to forage as
there is little alternative foraging habitat within the site, due to the extent of the commercial forestry
plantation.
7.155 A total of 28 greenshank flights were observed during flight activity surveys in the 2009 breeding
season, and 26 of these were detected within viewsheds. Seventeen of these flights were at PCH
and totalled 1050 seconds of flight activity. Activity was observed throughout the application site
and surrounding moorland and was associated with the breeding territories. All greenshank flights
are shown in Figure 7.10. Collision risk modelling has been carried out for this species.
7.156 There is an estimated breeding population of 390 territories in South Scotland (all mainland
areas excluding Caithness and Sutherland). This compares to an estimated Scottish population of
1080 pairs based upon the results of the last national survey in 199560. This area was further
subdivided in a more recent study, where an increase of 79% was detected between 1980-1991
and 2000-2002 during upland breeding bird surveys in West Flows. This indicated a favourable
population status in the local area, and concluded that greenshank have a favourable conservation
status throughout Scotland61.
7.157 Greenshank are listed on Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended).
7.158 Greenshank are considered to be of national importance in the context of this assessment.
Potential Construction Effects
7.159 As the forestry will be felled prior to construction, the habitat onsite will be altered. However, the
resulting open ground will be similar to surrounding habitat, which is suitable for breeding
60 Hancock, M.H., Gibbons, D.W. and Thompson, P.S. 1997. The status of breeding Greenshank Tringa
nebularia in the United Kingdom in 1995. Bird Study 44, 290-302.
61 Sim, I.M.W., Gregory, R.D., Hancock, M.H. and Brown, A.F. 2005. Recent changed in the abundance of
British upland breeding birds. Bird Study 52, 261-275.
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
greenshank. It is also likely that the ground conditions will become wetter in the absence of trees.
This could create suitable foraging habitat.
Collision risk modelling was therefore completed for breeding greenshank and full details are
presented in Appendix 7A.
7.160 As all tree felling will be completed outside the breeding season, this will not result in
disturbance to breeding greenshank.
7.168 A highly precautionary model was adopted, designed to estimate mortality in the event that the
site was fully occupied. The model yielded an estimated mortality of one bird every 5.65 years
assuming the standard 95% avoidance rate. However, this avoidance rate is considered overprecautionary and unrealistic for waders. Therefore, the avoidance rate of 99% was applied, as
suggested for application with golden plovers64. This rate yields an estimated mortality of one bird
every 28.23 years, which is less than one bird during the 25 year operational life of the Wind Farm.
Should a greenshank be lost to collision, this could result in the loss of a breeding territory.
However, it is anticipated that another territory would become established and the lost bird replaced
to the population within two years (the age at which greenshank reach maturity).
7.161 Construction activities will cause disturbance, and greenshank may be displaced from the
foraging area due to its close proximity to turbine 4 (100m). However, the felling of the surrounding
forestry will improve the suitability of other areas of the site for foraging birds. Therefore, no effect is
predicted.
7.162 There is a paucity of studies considering disturbance effects on greenshank. A maximum
disturbance distance of 300m has been suggested for wood sandpiper, which are closely related56.
It is proposed that a 300m buffer is implemented for all greenshank territories, where restrictions on
construction activities will apply so as to prevent displacement.
7.163 However, as there is a degree of uncertainty as to the efficacy of the proposed construction
phase mitigation, a precautionary approach has been adopted in this assessment. It is therefore
considered that the two breeding territories within the proposed Wind Farm site will be lost from the
breeding population through displacement for a single season. This effect is considered to be of
short-term duration and negligible magnitude and so not significant.
Potential Operational Effects
7.164 Greenshank are known to have high site fidelity, and so can be expected to return to breeding
territories each year. Although specific disturbance studies have not been conducted, it is thought
that breeding greenshank will behave similarly to golden plovers, which may be displaced within
200m of operational turbines62,63,64. This has been considered in the final layout design, and no
turbines are to be located within 200m of greenshank breeding territories in an attempt to avoid the
permanent displacement of greenshank breeding within the application site boundary. However, it
is possible that the two territories breeding within the site boundary may be displaced, and
permanently lost from the breeding population. This is equivalent to a loss of 0.5% of the South
Scotland population as estimated in 1995. Coupled with the positive trend detected for this
population, this effect is considered to be of permanent duration and negligible magnitude and so
not significant.
7.165 Tracks and areas of hardstanding are believed to present a potential barrier to dispersal to
greenshank as a result of young becoming trapped in associated ditches and drowning63. Young
greenshank are led by their parents to small waterbodies located close to the nest site. As the track
design has avoided intersecting potential routes between nest locations and nearby waterbodies, no
effect is predicted.
7.166 Should all territories be lost within the proposed Wind Farm site, there would be no risk of
collision.
7.167 However, should the greenshank territories be retained through the integrated mitigation and
improvement in foraging habitat there would be a risk of mortality through collision with turbines.
62 Pearce-Higgins, J.W., Stephen, L., Langston, R.H.W. and Bright, J.A. 2008. Assessing the cumulative
impacts of Wind Farms on peatland birds: a case study of golden plover Pluvialis apricaria in Scotland. Mires and
Peat 4, Article 1.
63 Thompson, D. 2007. Proposed Wind Farm development at Achany Estate, Lairg, Sutherland & Proposed
Wind Farm development at Beinn Rosail, Strath, Oykel, Invercassley, Sutherland: Principal Precognition. SNH.
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
7.169 This estimated mortality is considered to be of short-term duration and negligible magnitude in
the context of the South Scotland breeding population, and therefore not significant. The South
Scotland breeding population relates to the whole Scottish population outwith Caithness and
Sutherland.
Red Kite
Baseline
7.170 A total of 12 red kite flights were recorded during all flight activity surveys conducted from VPs19, totalling 14 birds. Of the 12 flights recorded only eight flights occurred at PCH traversing the
Wind Farm envelope. Of those eight flights at PCH and within the proposed Wind Farm envelope,
four flights were recorded during the non-breeding season (total time at PCH = 1837.5 seconds),
and the other four flights were recorded during the breeding season (total time at PCH = 71.25
seconds). Full details of flights can be found in Table 7A. 44 of the Ornithology Technical Appendix
7A. Due to their sensitive nature, all flight lines for this species are shown in Figure 11 in the
Ornithology Confidential Annex. During previous survey work conducted by NRP between 2005
and 2006, this species was not recorded. However during NRP survey work between 2002-2003 a
small amount of activity was noted in July 2003 (no details provided). This species was not
recorded during survey work conducted for Lochluichart ES.
7.171 Based on these results, collision risk modelling has been carried out for this species on the data
recorded during both the breeding and non-breeding seasons.
7.172 No nest sites were located during breeding raptor surveys and breeding raptor VPs within the
2km study area. A breeding site for this species is located within 10km of the proposed Wind Farm.
This species is well monitored in this area, and so this is likely to be an accurate picture of the local
population. Due to the sensitive nature of this information, full details can be found in Confidential
Annex. Furthermore there are no SPA's within 10km of the proposed Corriemoillie Wind Farm site
that have red kite as a qualifying species.
7.173 Red kites have undergone a rapid population expansion in Scotland in the last 15-20 years.
This has occurred via a three phase re-introduction programme in three areas of Scotland one of
which occurred in the Highlands; with some birds being released on the Black Isle between 1989199310. There were estimated to be between 1,463 and 1,713 pairs of red kites breeding in Britain
in 2007, with an estimated 50 pairs recorded in the Highland re-introduction programme areas in
64 Whitfield, D.P. 2007. The effects of Wind Farms on shorebirds (Waders: Charadrii), especially with regard to
wintering golden plovers. Natural Research Ltd., Banchory.
Chapter 7 – Page 17
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
200865. It has been estimated that in 2009 the Scottish breeding population reached a minimum of
149 pairs66. The Scottish population in winter is estimated at between 300-350 birds31.
7.174 Red kite is listed in Annex I of the EU Birds Directive and Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and
Countryside Act (1981, as amended) and the amber list of BoCC. Red Kite is also a priority species
within the Highland Ross and Cromarty LBAP.
7.175 Due to the absence of any breeding locations within 2km of the Corriemoillie Wind Farm site and
the low levels of activity recorded for this species during all flight activity surveys, this species is
considered to be of regional ecological value.
Potential Construction Effects
7.176 The site is not important for foraging red kite during the breeding season based on flight activity
survey data. However red kites spent a longer period of time over the site during the winter period,
suggesting the site is used by red kites during the winter for foraging.
7.177 There is a possibility that red kite will be displaced from the site during the construction phase of
the proposed Wind Farm during winter only. However due to the infrequent activity observed it is
likely that the site and surrounding area are a marginal foraging area for this species and there are
no winter roosts located on site or within 2km of the site based on the low activity observed.
7.178 Radiotracking work carried out by the RSPB has found sub-adult red kites regularly ranging
within 10km from their winter roosts, with maximum distances being 20km (Kevin Duffy pers.
comm.). Other accounts have estimated that red kites normally forage within 4km of their roost site
during winter, utilising a maximum area of up to 2000-3000ha (English Nature 2002)67. Studies of
Welsh birds have found individuals travelling 10km in a single day (Cramp & Simmons 1980)68.
Studies in Germany found red kites foraging up to 10km from the roost site (Davis & Davis 1981)69.
7.179 If the proposed Wind Farm does lie within a red kite winter foraging area, this only comprises a
very small amount of that foraging area based on figures obtained from these studies. In addition,
more suitable habitat for this species, i.e. mature woodland for breeding and roosting, with extensive
open low ground, moorland areas and marginal agricultural habitats for foraging, is available to the
south of the site.
7.180 Any impacts during the construction phase on this species will be short-term duration and
negligible magnitude based on information presented above. For these reasons no significant
effect is predicted for this receptor during the construction phase
Potential Operation Effects
7.181 There is a possibility that red kites may collide with turbines. However, the flight activity survey
did not detect regular foraging activity across the site or local area, and there are no known
territories within 2km of the application site. Only four red kite flights were observed during flight
activity surveys within viewshed areas in the breeding season and four in winter. All of these flights
were at PCH. Activity was distributed over the site and surrounding area, with slightly higher levels
65 http://www.gigrin.co.uk/red_kites_in_the_united_kingdom_breeding_pairs_1989-2007.html
66 http://www.scottishraptorgroups.org/news.php?month=10&year=2009
67 English Nature. 2002. Return of the red kite: the red kite reintroduction programme in England. English
Nature.
68 Cramp, S. & Simmons, K.E.L., eds. 1980. The handbook of the birds of Europe, the Middle East and North
Africa: the birds of the Western Palaearctic; Volume II: Hawks to Bustards. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
69 Davis, P.E. & Davis, J.E. 1981. The food of the Red Kite in Wales. Bird Study, 28, 33-39.
Chapter 7 – Page 18
in winter and more activity over moorland surrounding the site. This higher level of activity may be
due to increased foraging ranges and dispersing young in winter. Collision risk modeling was
conducted for this species as a precaution, given the borderline level of flight activity and the
possibility that the site may become more suitable for foraging birds after the forestry is felled.
7.182 Full details of collision risk modeling are provided in Appendix 7A.
7.183 Using an avoidance rate of 98%, the model yields an estimated mortality of one bird every 170.2
years during the breeding season and one bird every 14.13 years during the winter. This is
equivalent to one to two birds lost to the wintering population during the operational phase of the
Wind Farm. This is less than the number of young fledged in a single year in Scotland. In 2006 79
young were fledged from 35 sites in the highlands alone (Etheridge et al., 200646).
7.184 The estimated collision mortality during the breeding season of 0.01 red kite collisions per year
represents a loss of 0.01% of the regional population, based on 50 pairs recorded in 2008. This is
less than 1% of the breeding population if a pair is lost as a result of death to one adult. The risk of
loss of birds during the breeding season throughout the operational phase is short-term duration
and negligible magnitude therefore not significant.
7.185 The estimated collision mortality during the non-breeding season of 0.07 red kite collisions per
year represents a worst case scenario loss of 0.023% of the national population, based on winter
estimate of 300 birds in Scotland. This is less than 1% of the national wintering population if a bird
is lost as a result of death to one adult. The risk of loss of birds during the non-breeding season
throughout the operational phase is therefore negligible.
7.186 This estimated collision mortality is considered to be of negligible magnitude in regional (NHZ7)
breeding and national wintering population contexts, and therefore not significant.
Marsh Harrier
Baseline
7.187 A single marsh harrier flight was recorded during all flight activity surveys. There were no
further observations of this species from targeted surveys or incidental records when other surveys
were being undertaken. The flight was not observed traversing the proposed Wind Farm envelope.
Collision risk modelling has not been conducted for this species as based on these data the result
would be negligible. Due to their sensitive nature, all flight lines for this species are shown in Figure
12 in the Ornithology Confidential Annex. During previous survey work conducted by NRP this
species was not recorded. This species was not recorded during survey work conducted for
Lochluichart ES.
7.188 No nest sites were located during breeding raptor surveys and breeding raptor VPs within the
2km study area. Furthermore HRSG and Colin Crooke Highland Ornithology Ltd are not aware of
any known nest location for this species within 10km of the proposed Corriemoillie Wind Farm.
During previous survey work conducted by NRP no marsh harrier flights were observed.
7.189 Marsh harrier is a rare breeder in Scotland with only 9 pairs recorded in 2006. All birds from the
Scottish population are thought to migrate to Europe and Africa during the winter with the possible
exception of some female birds which winter in south and east England31. The main Scottish marsh
harrier population is located at the Tay Estuary which hosts a small but regular population of
between 3-5 nesting pairs.
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
7.190 Scottish Marsh Harriers rely solely on reed bed habitats for nesting purposes though chicks from
the Tay region have successfully nested in arable crops in England. It has been shown that there is
a strong preference for fertile arable farmland adjacent to the breeding site, which clearly augments
the range and abundance of prey species31.
7.191 The Scottish population still remains extremely fragile, the reasons for which remain unclear.
Whilst the limited area of suitable wetland habitat in Scotland may be a factor which restricts
expansion in the long term, given a number of apparently suitable sites, there is ample opportunity
for colonisation and expansion in the short term70.
7.192 Marsh Harrier is listed in Annex I of the EU Birds Directive and Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and
Countryside Act (1981, as amended) and the amber list of BoCC.
7.193 Due to the absence of any breeding locations within 2km of the Corriemoillie Wind Farm site and
the low levels of activity recorded for this species during all flight activity surveys, this species is
considered to be of regional ecological value.
Potential Construction Effects
7.194 There is no pathway for effect during the construction phase as identified in this assessment.
Potential Operation Effects
7.195 There is a possibility that marsh harrier may collide with turbines. However only one flight was
recorded and this did not traverse the proposed Wind Farm envelope. It is likely that bird (recorded
in April 2009) was en route to its breeding site or was a non-breeding bird.
7.196 Collision risk modelling has therefore not been completed for this species, as the result would be
negligible. As such, any potential effect as a result of collision risk is considered to be of short-term
duration and negligible magnitude, and so not significant.
Hen Harrier
Baseline
7.197 A total of four flights were recorded during all flight activity surveys. Three of the four flights
recorded were at PCH and traversed the proposed Wind Farm envelope. One of the three flights
occurred during the non-breeding period (total time at PCH = 15 seconds) with the other two being
recorded during the breeding period (total time at PCH = 161.25 seconds). Full details of flights can
be found in Table 7A. 52 of Appendix 7A. Due to their sensitive nature, all flight lines for this
species are shown in Figure 12 in the Ornithology Confidential Annex. Surveys conducted by NRP
observed a single flight of this species in 2005. During NRP survey work between 2002-2003 a
small amount of activity was observed in May 2003 (no detailed data was provided). This species
was not recorded during survey work conducted for Lochluichart ES.
7.200 National surveys show the UK population to have remained fairly stable at 578-700 breeding
pairs over the last twenty years71. There are however, large regional differences in the population
trend. The most recent national survey reported 102 breeding pairs in the Northern Highlands in
2004 (17.1% of the Scottish population), a 240% increase since 199872. However, there was a
large discrepancy between the two methods for calculating trends in the North Highlands suggesting
that this increase in the population is not as large in reality.
7.201 Hen Harrier is listed in Annex I of the EU Birds Directive and Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and
Countryside Act (1981, as amended) and the red list of BoCC. Hen Harrier is listed as a priority
species on the Highland Ross and Cromarty LBAP.
7.202 Due to the absence of any breeding locations within 2km of the Corriemoillie Wind Farm site and
the low levels of activity recorded for this species during all flight activity surveys, this species is
considered to be of regional ecological value.
Potential Construction Effects
7.203 During the construction phases of the project there is potential for disturbance-displacement
from foraging areas for birds throughout the year. However, since the site is not within the core
foraging range of a breeding hen harrier pair (2km, according to SNH guidelines7), and therefore
does not represent an important breeding or feeding resource for hen harriers, any such effects (of
low magnitude) would have no more than a minor impact on the conservation status of the species
at any level (not significant). The same applies for wintering harriers, since there is no known SPA
roost location within 2km of the site. Any winter displacement is therefore not predicted to be
detrimental to SPA or SPA-associated wintering harriers. Therefore any impact would be short-term
duration and negligible in magnitude therefore not significant.
Potential Operation Effects
7.204 There is a possibility that hen harrier may collide with turbines. However, the flight activity
survey did not detect regular foraging activity across the site or local area, and there are no known
territories within 2km of the application site. Only two hen harrier flights were observed during flight
activity surveys within viewshed areas in the breeding season and 1 in winter. All of these flights
were at PCH. Activity was distributed over the site and surrounding area, with slightly higher levels
in the breeding season and more activity over the site. Collision risk modelling was conducted for
this species as a precaution, given the borderline level of flight activity, and the possibility that the
site may become more suitable for foraging birds after the forestry is felled.
7.205 Full details of collision risk modelling are provided in Appendix 7A.
7.206 Using an avoidance rate of 99%, the model yields an estimated mortality of one bird every
434.12 years during the breeding season and one every 3897.93 years during the winter. This is
equivalent to no birds lost to the breeding or wintering population during the operational phase of
the proposed Wind Farm.
7.198 Based on these results collision risk modelling has been carried out for this species on the data
recorded during both the breeding and non-breeding seasons.
7.199 No nest sites were located during breeding raptor surveys and breeding raptor VPs within the
2km study area. There are no SPA's within 10km of the proposed Wind Farm that has hen harrier
listed as a qualifying species.
70 http://www.scottishraptorgroups.org/raptors/marsh_harrier.php
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
71 Bright, J., Langston, R., Bullman, R., Evans, R., Gardner, S., and Pearce-Higgins, J. 2006. Map of bird
sensitivities to Wind Farms in Scotland: A tool to aid planning and conservation. Biological Conservation 141:
2342-2356 .
72 Sim, I.M.W., Dillon, I.A., Eaton, M.A., Etheridge, B., Lindley, P., Riley, H., Saunders, R., Sharpe, C., Tickner,
M. (2007). Status of the Hen Harrier Circus cyaneus in the UK and Isle of Man in 2004, and a comparison with
the 1988/89 and 1998 surveys. Bird Study, 54(2): 256-267.
Chapter 7 – Page 19
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
7.207 This estimated collision mortality is considered to be of short-term duration and negligible
magnitude in regional (NHZ7) breeding and national wintering population contexts, and therefore
not significant.
7.216 Due to the absence of any breeding locations within 2km of the proposed Wind Farm site and
the extremely low levels of activity recorded for this species during all flight activity surveys, this
species is considered to be of regional ecological value.
7.208 There is an increasing body of evidence that hen harriers can successfully breed within close
proximity to Wind Farms. A recent review on levels of turbine avoidance at various Wind Farms
suggest breeding hen harrier densities may be reduced only within a 250m buffer of the turbines,
and no effects over 800m have been shown for any species studied73. Although not fully in the
public domain, reliable verbal accounts confirm that at Paul’s Hill Wind Farm (24 turbines
operational since 2006) and Lendrum Hill Wind Farm (24 turbines), successful nesting has taken
place in successive years within approximately 300m of these operational Wind Farms.
Potential Construction Effects
7.217 There are no breeding sites within 2km of the proposed Wind Farm therefore during the
construction phase there will be no disturbance/displacement of this species, i.e. no significant
impact.
Potential Operation Effects
7.218 There is no pathway for effect during the operational phase as identified in this assessment.
7.209 Furthermore, no harrier collisions have been recorded at the two operational Wind Farms
mentioned above, and only two collisions have been recorded at any Wind Farms in the UK, Europe
or North America. The recorded UK collision was at a Wind Farm in County Antrim in 200774 and
was believed to be as a result of a wintering bird not familiar with its surroundings colliding during a
period of poor visibility. This suggests that flight behaviours of hen harriers are such that collisionrisk with turbines is minimal.
Osprey
Goshawk
Baseline
Baseline
7.210 There were no goshawk flights observed traversing the proposed Wind Farm envelope during
flight activity surveys. A single sighting was observed during breeding raptor surveys outwith the
proposed Wind Farm site, to the south. Two flights of Goshawk were recorded from the November
2009 access track VP in 2009 but these were over 2km from the proposed Wind Farm. Due to their
sensitive nature, all Flight lines for this species are shown in Figure 15 in the Ornithology
Confidential Annex. During previous survey work conducted by NRP this species was not recorded.
This species was not recorded during survey work conducted for Lochluichart ES.
7.211 Collision risk modelling has not been conducted for this species as the result would be
insignificant.
7.212 No goshawk nest sites were located during breeding raptor surveys and breeding raptor VPs
within the 2km study area. There are no confirmed goshawk territories within 5km of the proposed
Wind Farm (Ornithology Confidential Annex).
7.213 Goshawk is under-recorded within NHZ7, the species has never become as well established in
this region compared to the adjacent northeast Highlands. The core populations for this species are
located in Dumfries & Galloway and Lothian and Borders46.
7.214 The most recent population estimate for Scotland is at least 130 breeding pairs, with between
350 and 450 individuals in winter31.
7.215 Goshawk is listed Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981, as amended).
73 Pearce-Higgins, J.W., Stephen, L.H., Langston, R.H.W., Bainbridge, I.P., & Bullman, R. (2009). The
distribution of breeding birds around upland Wind Farms. Journal of Applied Ecology.
74 Scott, D. and McHaffie, P. (2008). Hen harrier circus cyaneus killed at windfarm site in County Antrim. Irish
Birds 8: 436-437
Chapter 7 – Page 20
7.219 Collision risk modelling has not been completed for this species, as the result would be
negligible. As such, any potential effect as a result of collision risk is considered to be of negligible
magnitude, and so not significant.
7.220 A total of five flights totalling five birds were observed during flight activity surveys. Four of the
five flights traversed the proposed Wind Farm envelope at PCH (total time at PCH - 352.5 seconds).
All four flights occurred during the raptor breeding season. Osprey flights were also recorded from
the November 2009 access track VP. However due to the sensitive nature of these data all flight
line observations for this species are displayed in Figures 13 and 15 of the Ornithology Confidential
Annex. Surveys conducted by NRP observed no flights of this species in 2005 or 2006. During
NRP survey work between 2002-2003 a small amount of activity was observed in July 2003 (no
detailed data was provided). This species was not recorded during survey work conducted for
Lochluichart ES.
7.221 Based on these data, collision risk modelling has not been conducted for this species as the
result would be insignificant. A single osprey nest location occurs at approximately 2km from the
proposed Wind Farm site (Ornithology Confidential Annex). Regular foraging activity was not
observed, in fact that which was recorded was very infrequent. The pair were also known to have
successfully raised chicks, therefore foraging activity would be expected to have been greater, but
the proposed Wind Farm site and surrounding lochans appear to have been infrequently used if at
all.
7.222 Foraging locations are usually within 10km of nesting locations, with some males recorded as
making regular foraging flights of approximately 20km (Roy Dennis pers. comm.). One satellitetracked individual has been recorded occasionally to hunt at 28km from the nest (Roy Dennis pers.
comm.). Expected activity across the site would be much higher than that observed from a
successful pair, if it was key foraging habitat for this species.
7.223 Historically, Osprey was widespread in Scotland, but suffered severe persecution during the
early 19th century. By 1900 it was nearly extirpated from Scotland, with the last confirmed breeding
record at Loch Loyne in 1916. Since the early 1960’s the ospreys’ breeding range in Scotland has
slowly expanded. By 2006 it was widely accepted that the population was approaching 200 pairs
with approximately half of the population occurring in the Highlands. Osprey is an increasing
summer breeding visitor to mainland Scotland, but is still believed to be recovering its previously lost
range31. The Scottish Osprey population winters in sub-Saharan Africa68.
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
7.224 In 2006, 106 known nest locations in the Highlands were checked for occupancy. Of the 106
sites 74 were occupied which fledged a total of 97 young46.
7.233 In Britain, the species breeds on moorland, notably in the Scottish Highlands and Islands, the
Welsh mountains, the English Pennines and the Scottish Southern Uplands. There are an
estimated 1,330 breeding pairs of merlin in the UK75.
7.225 Osprey is listed in Schedule I of the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981 as amended) and Annex
1 of the EU Birds Directive. Osprey is listed as a priority species on the Highland Ross and
Cromarty LBAP.
7.234 The most recent breeding merlin population estimate for Scotland is at least 800 pairs31. A
larger winter population of 3000+ birds includes Icelandic birds overwintering in Scotland31.
7.226 Although a breeding site was located, the activity across the proposed Wind Farm site was low.
This species is therefore considered to be of regional ecological value.
7.235 Merlin is listed in Annex I of the EU Birds Directive and Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and
Countryside Act (1981, as amended) and the amber list of BoCC.
Potential Construction Effects
7.236 Due to the absence of any breeding locations within 2km of the proposed Wind Farm site and
the extremely low levels of activity recorded for this species during all flight activity surveys, this
species is considered to be of regional ecological value.
7.227 There is a possibility that osprey may be disturbed during the construction phase. Current
accepted disturbance distances for this species are between 500-750m56 No construction activity for
the proposed Wind Farm will take place within this distance of the known nesting location.
7.228 There is one breeding site at approximately 2km from the proposed Wind Farm site therefore
there is a theoretical potential for disturbance-displacement of osprey from foraging areas during the
construction and operational phases of the project. However, the proposed Wind Farm site and
immediate surrounding area based on baseline results is not a significant foraging area for this
species. It is concluded therefore that during the construction phase any disturbance/displacement
effects to this species will be of short-term duration and negligible magnitude, i.e. not significant.
Potential Operation Effects
7.229 There is a possibility that osprey may collide with turbines. However, the flight activity survey
did not detect regular foraging activity across the site or local area, even though there is one known
breeding location at approximately 2km from the application site. Only five osprey flights were
observed during flight activity surveys, all at PCH. Four of the five flights were observed traversing
the proposed turbine envelope. Collision risk modelling has therefore not been completed for this
species, as the result would be negligible. As such, any potential effect as a result of collision risk is
considered to be of short-term duration and negligible magnitude, and so not significant.
Merlin
Baseline
7.230 There were no merlin flights observed traversing the proposed Wind Farm envelope during flight
activity surveys. Two merlin flights were observed during breeding raptors surveys, both were
outwith the proposed Wind Farm envelope and were greater than 1km from the proposed site
boundary. During previous survey work conducted by NRP between 2005 and 2006 no
observations of this species were recorded. Data obtained from the Lochluichart ES indicated two
single hunting flights of this species. It was perceived birds were breeding to the east of
Lochluichart lodge but this was not confirmed.
7.231 Collision risk modelling has not been conducted for this species as the result would be
insignificant.
7.232 No merlin territories or nest sites were located during breeding raptor surveys and breeding
raptor VPs within the 2km study area. There are no confirmed merlin territories within 3km of the
proposed Wind Farm (Ornithology Confidential Annex).
Potential Construction Effects
7.237 There is a theoretical potential for disturbance or displacement of merlin from foraging areas
during the construction and operational phases of the project. However, the proposed Wind Farm
site and its immediate surrounding area is evidently not an important feeding area for this species.
7.238 There are no breeding sites within 2km of the proposed Wind Farm. Therefore during the
construction phase any impacts will be short-term duration and negligible magnitude i.e. no
significant impact.
Potential Operation Effects
7.239 There is a possibility that merlin may collide with turbines. However, the flight activity survey did
not detect foraging activity across the site or local area, and there are no known territories within
2km of the application site. Only two merlin flights were observed during flight activity surveys, and
both of these flights were outwith the proposed Wind Farm site boundary. Collision risk modelling
has therefore not been completed for this species, as the result would be negligible. As such, any
potential effect as a result of collision risk is considered to be of short-term duration and negligible
magnitude, and so not significant.
Peregrine Falcon
Baseline
7.240 Peregrine were observed on three occasions during flight activity surveys. Only two of the three
flights traversed the application site boundary, and both were recorded during the non-breeding
season and in total lasted 225 seconds at PCH. Collision risk modelling has not been conducted for
this species as the result would be insignificant. A further two flights of this species were observed
in 2009 from the November 2009 access track VP. Both flights were approximately 2km from the
proposed Wind Farm site boundary. Due to their sensitive nature, all flight lines for this species are
shown in Figures 12 and 15 in the Ornithology Confidential Annex. During previous survey work
conducted by NRP between 2005 and 2006 no observations of this species were recorded. During
NRP survey work between 2002-2003 a small amount of activity was observed in June 2003 (no
detailed data was provided). Data obtained from the Lochluichart ES indicated two single hunting
flights of this species by the same bird on the same day in February 2003. No territories of this
species were observed.
75 Baker, H., Stroud, D. A., Aebischer, N. J., Cranswick, P. A., Gregory,R. D., McSorley, C. A., Noble, D.G &
Rehfisch, M. M. (2006) Population estimates of birds in Great Britain and the United Kingdom. British Birds 99: 2544.
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
Chapter 7 – Page 21
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
7.241 No peregrine territories or nest sites were located during breeding raptor surveys and breeding
raptor VPs within the 2km study area. There are no confirmed peregrine territories within 3km of the
proposed Wind Farm; however known territories are present within 5km (Ornithology Confidential
Annex).
7.242 The last national survey of breeding peregrines, in 2002, located 1,402 breeding pairs, a 9%
increase over the population found by the previous survey in 1991(BTO,2009)76. There are an
estimated 600 pairs of peregrine falcon in Scotland46. There is no data available regarding the
number of breeding peregrine within the NHZ7 at present.
7.243 Peregrines are listed on Annex I of the Birds Directive, Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and
Countryside Act, and the Amber List.
7.244 Due to the absence of any breeding locations within 2km of the proposed Wind Farm site and
the low levels of activity recorded for this species during all flight activity surveys, this species is
considered to be of regional ecological value.
Potential Construction Effects
7.245 There is a theoretical potential for disturbance or displacement of peregrine from foraging areas
during the construction and operational phases of the project during the winter. However, the
proposed Wind Farm site and immediate surrounding area is evidently not an important foraging
area for this species.
7.246 As well as successfully breeding in active quarries and urban areas in the UK, post-construction
monitoring of two south Scotland Wind Farms by RPS has revealed that peregrine has bred
successfully within 500m of turbines. Percival (1998) reported that at a Wind Farm site in the UK,
one or two pairs of peregrines were nesting near a Wind Farm of 22 turbines, one within 250 m of
turbines with no apparent effect.
7.247 There are no breeding sites within 2km of the proposed Wind Farm; therefore during the
construction phase any impacts on this species will be short-term duration and negligible magnitude
i.e. no significant impact.
Potential Operation Effects
7.248 There is a possibility that peregrines may collide with turbines. However, the flight activity
survey did not detect a regular foraging activity across the site or local area, and there are no known
territories within 2km of the application site. Only two peregrine flights were observed during flight
activity surveys, although both of these flights were at PCH and both flights were observed
traversing the proposed turbine envelope. Collision risk modelling has not been completed for this
species, as given the small number of flights observed, the result would be negligible. As such, any
potential effect as a result of collision risk is considered to be of negligible magnitude, and so not
significant.
Golden Plover
465 seconds). Only two of the ten flights at PCH traversed the proposed Wind Farm envelope.
Collision risk modelling has been carried out for this species. Full details of flights can be found in
Table 7A.71 of Appendix 7A. All flight lines for this species are displayed in Figure 7.10.
7.250 Previous survey work conducted by NRP between 2002-2003 recorded 2 pairs breeding within
the buffer zone of the proposed Wind Farm site (buffer zone distance not defined but was less than
500m). No territories were recorded during the 2005 breeding bird survey conducted by NRP. Data
obtained from the Lochluichart ES indicated five breeding pairs within their survey area.
7.251 In 2009, two territories were identified within the 500m breeding bird survey study area where
access was permissible (Figure 7.11) and a third territory was identified through flight activity from
VPs overlooking moorland to the west (restricted access zone). Based on these data and results
from NRP and Lochluchart ES it is estimated that between three and five pairs were present within
the whole 500m study area (Table 7A.19 in Appendix 7A for details).
7.252 During breeding bird surveys in 2010 along the northern access route, a single territory was
recorded approximately 300m from the proposed track (Figure 7.11).
7.253 Golden plover breed in northern latitudes across the Western Palaearctic from Iceland to
western Siberia. Breeding habitats include heather moorland, blanket bog, acid grasslands, forest
edge tundra and montane plateau. The European population is believed to number 440,000785,000 pairs77. The race apricaria breeds in the British Isles, at the southern limit of the species’
distribution. In Britain, the species favours moorland and boggy habitats in the uplands of northern
and western Scotland (including the Outer Hebrides).
7.254 Whilst the core population in northern Europe is believed to be stable, the southern populations
including those of P. a. apricaria in Britain and Ireland are believed to have been declining since the
19th century. A comparison of the species distribution between the two national breeding bird
atlases in 1968-71 and 1988-91 reveals a 7% range contraction in Britain, with this being most
pronounced in the southern populations including those of Wales, the Pennines, southwest
Scotland and the eastern Highlands78.
7.255 The most recent breeding population estimate of 22,600 pairs75 in Britain suggests that the core
British populations in upland Scotland remain strong, albeit at a lower level than in the 19th century.
The BTO’s breeding bird survey records between 1994 and 2007 show a decrease in Scotland of
5%79, although breeding densities in Scotland of 2-7 pairs per km2 are among the highest anywhere
in the species’ range77.
7.256 Golden plover is listed in Annex 1 on the EU Birds Directive (migratory). Birds observed at
Corriemoillie are not associated with any designated sites (SPA or SSSI), the presence of territories
and minor flight activity means this species is considered to be of regional ecological importance.
Potential Construction Effects
7.257 The site is currently unsuitable for golden plover, and no territories are present.
Baseline
7.249 A total of 11 flights totalling 14 birds were observed during all flight activity surveys. Ten of the
11 flights were recorded at PCH and all occurred during the breeding season (total time at PCH =
76 BTO (2009). 2002 National Peregrine Survey described at: http://www.bto.org/survey/complete/peregrine.htm.
Chapter 7 – Page 22
77 Hagemeijer, W.J.M., Blair, M. (Eds.), 1997. The EBCC Atlas of European Breeding Birds: Their Distribution
and Abundance. T. & A.D. Poyser, London
78 Byrkjedal & Thompson. 1998. Tundra Plovers. T & A.D. Poyser, London.
79 Risely, K., Noble, D.G. & Baillie, S.R. (2008). The Breeding Bird Survey 2007. BTO Research Report 508.
British Trust for Ornithology, Thetford.
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
7.258 The territory located to the west of the site will be displaced and assumed to be lost to the
population by the construction of the adjacent consented Lochluichart Wind Farm. It is proposed
that a 250m buffer is implemented around any golden plover territories in which restrictions on
construction activities will apply, as has been accepted at Carraig Gheal Wind Farm. As all
detected territories are located beyond 300m of the site infrastructure, any effect on golden plover is
considered highly unlikely.
Potential Operation Effects
7.259 After the trees have been felled and the proposed Wind Farm constructed, the site will become
more suitable for breeding golden plover. Therefore, the trees will be mulched and the mulch used
to cover the area within 200m of turbine locations. This will deter golden plovers from breeding
within close proximity to turbines by making the habitat unsuitable by preventing the regeneration of
bog during the operational life of the proposed Wind Farm. The Habitat Management Plan (HMP)
will benefit golden plover by improving suitability of habitat beyond 200m of turbines through active
management to encourage bog regeneration.
7.260 There is a possibility that golden plover may collide with turbines. Almost all golden plover
flights were observed over the moorland due west of the Corriemoillie site (Figure 7.10). Although
only two flights traversed the proposed Wind Farm area, all ten flights at PCH have been used in the
collision risk model. A weighted average collision risk model has been calculated for this species.
This has been based upon the flightlines observed over moorland areas rather than the forestry, as
this is where the majority of flightlines occurred. This represents a more realistic but very
precautionary assessment assuming that golden plover will move into the proposed Wind Farm area
after felling takes place and occupy all available suitable habitat. Therefore this collision risk is a
worst case scenario for this species. Full details of how this has been modelled are provided in
Appendix 7A.
7.261 Full details of collision risk modelling are provided in Appendix 7A.
7.262 Whitfield (2007)64 estimated avoidance rates for a range of North American waders, including
the closely related American golden plover, concluding that the species was able to take avoiding
action in over 99% of potential collision events. It is reasonable to assume on the basis of this
research that golden plover will also have an avoidance rate in excess of 99%. Such a high
avoidance rate is in line with the fact that only seven golden plover fatalities have ever been
attributed to turbine collisions (England: 1; Norway: 2; Germany: 2; Netherlands: 1; and Sweden: 1),
despite large numbers of golden plovers occurring at Wind Farm sites throughout Europe80.
7.263 Using an avoidance rate of 99%, the model yields an estimated mortality of 1 bird every 24.99
years during the breeding season. This is equivalent to zero to one birds lost to the breeding
population during the operational phase of the Wind Farm. The Scottish breeding population has
recently been estimated as 15,000 pairs31. The estimated collision mortality during the breeding
season of 0.04 golden plover collisions per year represents a loss of >0.01% of the Scottish
breeding population.
7.264 Pearce-Higgins et al. (2009)73 have shown that at 11 Wind Farms across Scotland, golden
plover avoid turbines within 500m, although there was also a possible avoidance of tracks.
Evidence suggests that an effect of human activity disturbance, which may occur during
construction periods, is also of similar extent. Bright et al. (2006)71 reported distances at which
golden plover react to human disturbance range from 50m to 400m and concluded that breeding
golden plover would appear to be affected by human disturbance over distances of a “few hundred
80 RPS (2008) Golden Plovers and Wind farms Joint Study Report 3.
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
metres”. Furthermore, data from the golden plover and Wind Farms joint study currently being
carried out by RPS, indicates that golden plover have successfully bred at a Beinn Tharsuinn Wind
Farm in Sutherland, within 150m of the turbines. As such, no pairs are likely to be displaced.
7.265 The birds observed at Corriemoillie are not associated with any statutory designated sites.
Furthermore there are no designated sites within 10km of the proposed Wind Farm for which golden
plover are a qualifying species. Although no regional or NHZ7 population data is available for this
species, the loss of a single breeding bird during the life time of the proposed Wind Farm is
considered to be of short-term duration and negligible magnitude, and so not significant.
Black Grouse
Baseline
7.266 No black grouse flights were observed traversing the proposed Wind Farm envelope during
flight activity surveys. A single male black grouse was recorded on separate occasions lekking
during black grouse surveys in 2009. The first observation recorded the bird lekking due south of
Lochan Dubh na Curra and the second observation recorded the bird lekking due west of Lochan
Dubh na Curra. Three flights of a single bird were observed during raptor surveys of the access
track and a single male bird was flushed during a raptor walkover survey approximately 1.5km
northwest of the site. However due to the sensitive nature of these data all flightline observations
for this species are displayed in Figure 9 in the Ornithology Confidential Annex.
7.267 In 2010, a single male was again heard lekking to the west of Lochan Dubh na Curra, in a
similar area to 2009. In addition, a second single male was heard lekking approximately 600m from
the proposed northern access track route, and 1.1km from the nearest turbine.
7.268 During previous survey work conducted by NRP between 2002-2003 a single lek of four to five
males was recorded. In 2005 NRP recorded three single males lekking in different locations, two
further observations of a single male bird, one female and one bird was heard calling. Records from
2005 are shown in Figure 9 in the Ornithology Confidential Annex. Data obtained from the
Lochluichart ES indicates no black grouse observation in the survey area.
7.269 The black grouse is one of the fastest declining bird species in the UK. Its population has
declined in many parts of the UK over the last century, and in the last two to three decades this has
accelerated, leading to considerable range contraction and concerns about further localised
extinctions81. As a result, black grouse has been set as a priority for conservation action, featuring
in SNH’s Species Framework, the Scottish Biodiversity List, and the Birds of Conservation Concern
Red List. Black grouse are also the subject of UK Biodiversity Action Plans.
7.270 Estimates of numbers in the UK have been derived from two national surveys. A 2005 survey82
estimated 5,078 displaying males in the UK, and revealed a 29% decline in Scotland since the
previous survey completed in 1995-9681: Scotland is however still the species’ stronghold in the UK
with 66% of the population.
7.271 Black grouse is on the UK Red List of BoCC and is a Priority Species within the UK Biodiversity
Action Plan. Black Grouse is also listed as a priority species on the Highland Ross and Cromarty
LBAP.
81 Hancock, M., Baines, D., Gibbons, D., Etheridge, B. & Shepherd, M. 1999. Status of male black grouse Tetrao
tetrix in Britain in 1995-96. Bird Study 46: 1-15.
82 Sim, I.M.W., Eaton, M.A., Setchfield, R.P., Warren, P.K., Lindley, P. (2008). Abundance of male Black Grouse
Tetrao tetrix in Britain in 2005, and change since 1995-96. Bird Study, Nov 2008
Chapter 7 – Page 23
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
7.272 With the closest recorded lek of one bird in 2010 being 1.1km from the proposed Wind Farm site
and the lack of flight activity across the site and adjacent land, black grouse is considered to be of
local ecological importance.
Potential Construction Effects
7.273 There is a potential for black grouse to be displaced during the construction phase. The single
lekking birds observed that were greater than 200m are considered as 2 separate leks. Sim et al.
(2005) estimated that a total of 770 lekking males were present in north Scotland during the last
national survey. This was a decline of 16% compared to the 1995-1996 estimates for the region82.
7.274 Based on these data the loss of up to three individual lekking birds via construction of both the
proposed Wind Farm and northern access track constitutes approximately 0.39% of the regional
population. This is less than 1% regional population loss. It is considered that this will be a short
duration impact of neglible magnitude on the regional population and is not significant.
7.275 The population in this area is believed to be slowly spreading west with birds beginning to
colonise Strathbran Forest. Therefore, based on SNH and RSPB recommendations it is suggested
that during construction of the proposed Wind Farm no activity takes place within 1km of either
location lek location during the spring lek period (15 March to 15 May), and if this is unavoidable,
activity will not occur before 8am and after 6pm.
7.276 This species is discussed in the Habitat Management Plan (HMP).
Potential Operation Effects
7.277 There were no records of black grouse traversing the proposed Wind Farm, hence collision risk
modelling has not been completed for this species, as the result would be negligible. As such, any
potential effect as a result of collision risk is considered to be of short-term duration and negligible
magnitude, and so not significant.
Dunlin
Baseline
7.278 No dunlin flights were recorded during flight activity surveys. A single territory was recorded
within the breeding bird survey study area (Figure 7.11). During previous survey work conducted by
NRP between 2002 to 2006 no dunlin territories were recorded. Data obtained from the
Lochluichart ES indicated a single successful pair was present in 2003 within the southern section
of their survey area. Based on these data and results from NRP and Lochluichart ES it is estimated
that between one and two pairs were present within the whole 500m study area (Table 7A.19
Appendix 7A).
Potential Construction Effects
7.282 The site is not important for this species either for foraging or breeding. The single territory
observed is at the outer limit of the breeding bird survey study area. The site and adjacent
moorland is not suitable for this species, as the majority of the population breed at much higher
altitudes and prefer dry conditions, the proposed Wind Farm site is extremely wet.
7.283 It is therefore concluded that there is no pathway for effect during the construction phase as
identified in this assessment.
Potential Operation Effects
7.284 There is a possibility that dunlin may collide with turbines. However, the flight activity survey did
not detect foraging activity across the site or local area. No flights of this species were recorded.
Collision risk modelling has therefore not been completed for this species, as the result would be
negligible. As such, any potential effect as a result of collision risk is considered to be of negligible
magnitude, and so not significant.
Snipe
Baseline
7.285 Two snipe territories were observed within the breeding bird survey study area. One territory in
the restricted access zone was identified via high levels of flight activity from VP surveys; the
second territory was located both within the access track site boundary and the site breeding bird
survey study area (Figure7.11). A total of 16 flights for this species were observed during flight
activity surveys. All flights occurred on the same day during the breeding season and all were at
PCH (Figure 7.10). This high level of activity resulted in the assumption of the second snipe
territory present within the restricted access zone.
7.286 None of the flights observed traversed the proposed Wind Farm envelope, therefore collision
risk modelling has not been carried out for this species.
7.287 During the breeding bird survey conducted by NRP in 2005 four snipe territories were identified.
Only two of the four territories that were recorded were inside the proposed Wind Farm site
boundary. Data obtained from the Lochluichart ES indicates the presence of two territories within
their survey area in 2003.
7.288 Based on these data and results from NRP and Lochluchart ES it is estimated that between two
and three pairs were present within the whole 500m study area (Table 7A.19 Appendix 7A).
7.289 The Scottish breeding population of common snipe (race Gallinago gallinago gallinago) is
believed to be 34,000-40,000 pairs. An estimated 8,150 pairs breed in the Scottish uplands. The
Scottish population of snipe represents 65% of the British total for this species31.
7.279 The Scottish breeding population for the race Calidris alpina schinzii is believed to be 15,60028,600 pairs, which is around 85% of the British breeding population. Dunlin has a discontinuous
breeding distribution in Scotland this is determined by habitat. In the uplands birds are
concentrated in the Flow Country of Sutherland and Caithness and the peatland of the Northern
Isles. Upland bird breeding tends to occur around 900m in open moorland31. The Highland Bird
Report refers to this species as an uncommon breeder in the Highlands.
7.290 Snipe are amber-listed on the BoCC. Snipe is also listed as a priority species on the Highland
Ross and Cromarty LBAP.
7.280 Dunlin has recently been added to the BoCC Red-list.
Potential Construction Effects
7.281 Based on these data, dunlin are considered to be of local ecological importance.
7.292 There is a possibility that snipe will be displaced from the proposed Wind Farm area during the
construction phase. The two estimated territories represent approximately 0.02% of the upland
Scottish breeding population. If displacement of the territory to the west of the proposed Wind Farm
Chapter 7 – Page 24
7.291 Based on this information snipe is considered to be of local ecological importance.
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
does occur, as a result of the consented Lochluichart Wind Farm, before construction of
Corriemoillie, this would be lost to the local population. However, it is very unlikely that birds
displaced from suitable habitat within the Lochluichart Wind Farm envelope would move into the
proposed Wind Farm area prior to construction, due to the highly unsuitable habitat currently
present. As such, any potential effect as a result of construction is considered to be of negligible
magnitude, and so not significant.
Potential Operation Effects
7.293 There is a possibility that snipe may collide with turbines. However, the flight activity survey did
not detect foraging activity across the site. No flights of this species were recorded over the site at
PCH. Collision risk modelling has therefore not been completed for this species, as the result would
be negligible. As such, any potential effect as a result of collision risk is considered to be of
negligible magnitude, and so not significant.
Skylark
Baseline
7.294 During previous survey work conducted by NRP between 2002-2003, 34 skylark territories were
recorded within the buffer zone of the proposed Wind Farm site (buffer zone distance not defined
but was less than 500m). In 2005 NRP recorded 14 territories within the same survey area. Data
obtained from the Lochluichart ES indicated a total of 30-40 territories within their survey area.
7.295 In 2009, 13 skylark territories were identified within the 500m breeding bird survey study area
where access was permissible (Figure 7.12). Based on these data and results from NRP and
Lochluichart ES it is estimated that between 28-30 territories were present within the whole 500m
study area (Table 7A.13 Appendix 7A).
7.296 The estimated 28-32 breeding territories within the breeding bird survey study area in 2009
represents an average density of 5-5.7 pairs per km2. The average breeding skylark density in
Britain for moorland habitats is 12.95 pairs km2 83. At its highest estimated population density for
Corriemoillie 5.7 pairs per km2 is much less than the British average density for this habitat type
(only 44%). Unfortunately data for this species for constructed Wind Farm sites in the area,
specifically Novar Wind Farm and Fairburn Wind Farm, were not available.
7.297 The numbers involved therefore, do not approach significance in a British or Scottish context
(population approx. 1 million pairs and approx. 280,000 pairs, respectively)84. To represent even
1% of the NHZ or regional populations, these populations would need to number around 1,600 pairs
or more.
7.298 The skylark is BoCC Red-listed and is a Priority Species within the UK Biodiversity Action Plan.
Skylark is also listed as a priority species on the Highland Ross and Cromarty LBAP.
7.299 Based on the results obtained from baseline studies this species is considered to be of local
ecological importance.
7.300 Land take for the proposed Wind Farm site will be of low magnitude compared to the extent of
the application site. Skylark territories were relatively evenly spread across suitable open habitat
within the study area (where surveyed). Felling of the coniferous forestry plantation would have a
positive impact on this species, as it would create open moorland habitat for skylark to exploit
through foraging and breeding and therefore increase the local population. Any impact on this
species during the construction phase will be short-term duration and neutral magnitude therefore
not significant.
7.301 There is evidence that skylarks are relatively unaffected by the disturbance associated with
Wind Farms: a German study reviewing the effects of turbine installation at four coastal sites in
Germany found no effect on numbers and distribution of skylarks85. A review by Pearce-Higgins et
al. (2009)73 showed only marginal effects up to 200m for breeding skylarks.
Potential Operation Effects
7.302 During the operational phase, disturbance effects are likely to be of low magnitude and it is
considered that the impact of operational disturbance on the conservation status of skylark will be
negligible and therefore considered to be not significant. Birds are likely to move into the area
post-felling (refer to potential construction effects for this species on disturbance).
7.303 Conventionally, collision risk is not assessed for passerine birds due to their very low probability
of collision and tendency to fly below PCH for the vast majority of the time. On this basis there is
considered to be very little risk of turbine collisions for this species, and therefore that there will be
no significant impact on the conservation status of skylark (not significant).
Red-Listed species (other than skylark)
7.304 The following red listed species of BoCC were recorded within the proposed Wind Farm site
during the 2009 breeding birds survey:
•
•
•
three lesser redpoll territories;
one cuckoo territory; and
eight song thrush territories (also a priority species on the Highland Ross and Cromarty
LBAP).
7.305 All territories for red-listed species of BoCC are shown in Figure 7.12
7.306 All three species were recorded by NRP during point count surveys in 2005. The Lochluichart
ES does not indicate the presence of any of these species within their survey area.
7.307 Although song thrush, lesser redpoll and cuckoo are priority species within the UKBAP, and are
Red-listed species of BoCC, their presence reflects a decline in numbers rather than rareness; they
are still relatively common and widespread in the UK.
Potential Construction Effects
7.308 It is assumed that as these are forestry species all territories will be lost when the forest is felled
during the construction phase. Forestry felling should take place outwith the breeding season.
However it is unlikely that the birds will be lost to the local population as there is a large amount of
suitable woodland within this locality.
83 Browne, S., Vickery, J., & Chamberlain, D. Densities and population estimates of breeding Skylarks Alauda
arvensis in Britain in 1997. Bird Study (2000) 47, pp 52-65.
84 http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/species/BirdsInEuropeII/BiE2004Sp3024.pdf
85 Langston, R.H.W. & Pullan, J.D. 2003 Wind farms and birds: an analysis of the effects of Wind Farms on birds,
and guidance on environmental assessment criteria and site selection issues. Report by Birdlife International on
behalf of the Bern Convention. RSPB, Sandy.
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
Chapter 7 – Page 25
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
7.309 Approximately 7,500-15,000 lesser redpoll breed in Scotland. Using the lower population
estimate, the loss of three pairs represents 0.04% of the population. Approximately 2,100-4,400
common cuckoo breed in Scotland. Using the lower population estimate, the loss of one pair
represents 0.05% of the population. Approximately 250,000-260,000 song thrushes breed in
Scotland. Using the lower population estimate, the loss of eight pairs represents 0.003% of the
population. Based on these data if the birds are lost to the local population then the loss will be less
than 1% of the breeding populations. This impact is considered to be permanent in duration
negligible in magnitude and therefore not significant.
Waterfowl
7.310 Two wigeon flights and three teal flights were recorded during flight activity surveys. All flights
were recorded in close proximity to Lochan Dubh Beag (Figure 7.13). None of the flights recorded
were at PCH and all flights are on the edge of the site boundary. Neither species was recorded by
either NRP or during ornithology surveys for the Lochluichart Wind Farm. Neither species was
believed to be holding territories during breeding bird surveys.
7.311 The three teal flights were recorded during the breeding season. It is probable that birds were
breeding on the adjacent moorland and feeding at Lochan Dubh Beag. The two wigeon flights were
observed in April 2009 and the same day. It is probable that this was a single bird moving through
the area as no further observations were recorded.
7.312 Both species are listed on the amber list of BoCC. Wigeon are a priority species listed on the
Highland Ross and Cromarty LBAP.
7.313 The worst case scenario is that during construction teal will be displaced from their feeding area.
However if the birds are breeding on the adjacent moorland to the west then they will have been
displaced by the Lochluichart Wind Farm prior to the construction of Corriemoillie. There are no
predicted impacts on wigeon. It is considered that there will be a negligible magnitude of impact on
both species i.e. not significant.
7.314 In terms of operational effects, no birds were observed at PCH thus collision risk modelling was
no carried out for either species. There is therefore no pathway for effect during the operational
phase as identified in this assessment.
Crossbill & Bullfinch
7.315 Crossbill and Bullfinch were recorded during winter walkover surveys in both 2008 and in 2005
and 2006 by NRP.
7.316 A total of 19 bullfinch observations were recorded in 2008, over half of which consisted of just a
single bird. A maximum flock size of nine birds was recorded. In 2005 and 2006 only one
observation of a single bird was recorded.
7.317 A total of eight crossbill observations were recorded in 2008, three of which were individual
birds. Maximum flock size was 17 birds. In 2005 and 2006 four observations of crossbill were
recorded, two of which were of individual birds. The maximum flock size was eight birds.
7.318 Neither species was recorded during any breeding bird survey work.
7.319 These data suggest that the proposed Wind Farm site is not important to these species during
the breeding season. The infrequent number of records suggests that at the most the site is of
Chapter 7 – Page 26
marginal importance for both these species for winter foraging. Therefore the loss of the forestry
after felling represents a marginal loss of winter foraging habitat for these species.
7.320 It is considered that based on this data there will be permanent duration but of negligible
magnitude of impact on both these species during the construction phase of the Wind Farm i.e. not
significant.
7.321 Collision risk modelling is not carried out for passerines. There is therefore no pathway for
effect during the operational phase as identified in this assessment.
Access Track Bird Assemblage
7.322 This section discusses those birds observed within the breeding bird survey study areas of the
northern access track that have not already been discussed.
7.323 There were no Annex 1 or Schedule 1 protected raptors breeding within the 1km buffer of the
access track in 2009 or 2010.
7.324 The following species of BoCC were recorded within the proposed northern access track
breeding bird survey area:
•
•
three skylark territories (Highland Ross and Cromarty LBAP species) (Figure 7.12); and
three meadow pipit territories (Amber-listed, not shown).
7.325 Construction of the access track is predicted to have a lower magnitude of impact on this
breeding bird assemblage than is predicted for the construction of the proposed Wind Farm.
Impacts on SPAs’ and Need for Appropriate Assessment
7.326 The Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994, as amended (the Habitats
Regulations) require an Appropriate Assessment to be carried out by the competent authority, to
determine whether or not a development, either alone or in combination with other plans and
projects, risks having an adverse impact on the integrity of an SPA.
7.327 Table 7.9 provides details of all current and proposed SPAs within 10km (and 25km for geese)
of the proposed Corriemoillie Wind Farm. In relation to SPA’s within 10km, none of the qualifying
species for Achanalt SPA, Beinn Dearg SPA or Ben Wyviss SPA were recorded during any of the
ornithology surveys conducted by RPS between September 2008 to August 2009, April to June
2010, or by NRP between 2002 to 2006. It is therefore concluded that the proposed Wind Farm will
have no impact on the integrity of these SPAs’ from an ornithological perspective.
7.328 Greylag geese are a qualifying species of the Cromarty Firth SPA. During Ornithology survey
work a low level of activity of greylag geese and pink footed geese was recorded. It was however
concluded that the proposed Wind Farm site and adjacent area was of marginal use during the
migratory period and was not used at all for daily foraging or roosting activities. It is therefore
concluded that the proposed Wind Farm will have no impact on the integrity of the Cromarty Firth
SPA goose population.
7.329 The proposed turbine locations, access track and their 500m buffers are all more than 6km from
the range of the closest pair of golden eagles within the Glen Affric and Strathconon pSPA.
Based on territory modelling for SNH, the boundary of the pSPA was drawn to include the actual
hunting range of this pair of eagles (SNH letter, 3 June 2010). SNH concluded that it was unlikely
that the pair would expand their range to include the Wind Farm area. Although eagles have been
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
recorded flying over the development site, standard collision risk calculations predict a collision rate
of one bird every 98 years (breeding seasons), and this risk is likely to be of a realistic magnitude of
impacts on breeding pSPA pairs. SNH also consider the impacts on immature and juvenile birds to
be very low, with a worst-case scenario using a weighted average collision risk model (Appendix 7A,
Table 7A.69) where eagles expand their territory to include the proposed Wind Farm site during the
non-breeding season, of one bird every 86 years.
7.330 As the Wind Farm site is considered to be of unsuitable feeding habitat, there will be no
displacement of breeding birds or non-breeding birds from favoured feeding areas.
7.331 In summary, SNH advised in their letter to Highland Council that in light of the above information
(presented in their June 2010 letter and summarised here), that “based on the appraisal carried out
to date, the proposal will not adversely affect the integrity of the site [the Glen Affric and Strathconon
pSPA]”.
7.332 In light of these conclusions it is our professional opinion that an Appropriate Assessment to
assess the impacts of the proposed Wind Farm on the aforementioned SPAs and pSPA will not be
required.
7.333 Golden plover, greenshank, snipe and dunlin were all recorded within the ornithology study
areas in the 2009 and 2010 breeding seasons. These species are included (as part of an upland
breeding bird assemblage) as qualifying species for the Achnalt SSSI, Fannich Hills SSSI, Beinn
Dearg SSSI and Ben Wyviss SSSI (Table 7.9). It is highly unlikely that the birds observed within the
Corriemoillie study areas are associated with any of these SSSI populations as they are all greater
than 5km from the site. It is therefore concluded that there is no pathway for the proposed Wind
Farm to have an impact on these populations.
Cumulative Impacts
7.334 The above sections have considered the implications of the proposed Wind Farm at
Corriemoillie in isolation from other potential effects. The EIA regulations also require that the
proposed Wind Farm be assessed cumulatively with other plans or projects.
7.335 Currently there is no agreed method for determining significant adverse cumulative impacts.
SNH (2005a)86 guidance on cumulative effects on Wind Farms recommends a five-stage process to
aid in the ornithological assessment:
•
•
•
•
•
Define the species to be considered;
Consider the limits or ‘search area’ of the study;
Decide the methods to be employed;
Review the findings of existing studies; and
Draw conclusions of cumulative effects within the study area.
7.336 The main focus of considering cumulative effects should be an attempt to identify any situation
where effects that are minor in isolation have a greater additive effect. This could occur in a
situation where there is more than one Wind Farm (or other development) proposal that in isolation
affects either a single pair of birds, or a population of birds of high conservation value at a minor
level.
7.337 In line with SNH guidance, target species considered in this assessment are:
•
•
species found at Corriemoillie that are considered of high conservation importance; and
species found at Corriemoillie that are considered to be vulnerable to Wind Farms by virtue
of their behaviour or ecology.
7.338 Species therefore considered are geese and other waterfowl, raptors and waders, which may
have extensive ranges that may potentially include more than one development. Although some UK
BAP priority passerine species found at Corriemoillie are considered to be of local conservation
value, due to their small territory ranges and relatively low breeding density, no cumulative effects
on these species are predicted.
7.339 The proposed Wind Farm is assessed as having no more than a low impact on any target
species.
7.340 Existing and proposed developments were considered within 10km of the proposed Wind Farm
site. There is one known proposed project that has the potential to interact with the ornithological
interests of the proposed Wind Farm in such a way as to result in potential cumulative impacts. This
is Lochluichart Wind Farm.
7.341 Table 7.11 details the predicted effects after mitigation (where required) has been considered.
As decommissioning activities are of a similar type and intensity as construction activities, the
assessment considers that the potential effects of decommissioning will be similar in nature to the
potential effects of construction. In the case of this development, mitigation measures during
construction would also apply to the decommissioning phase and so are not repeated. This is likely
to be a precautionary approach as in practice many of the decommissioning impacts are likely to be
of a smaller scale than the construction impact.
Table 7.11 Summary of Proposed and Current Projects within 10km of Corriemoillie Wind
Farm
Lochluichart Wind Farm
Consented
Status
Number of turbines 17
Approximately 390m
Distance from
Corriemoillie
proposed wind
turbines
Wet modified bog (9.6ha), wet dwarf shrub heath (11.9ha), mixed
Main habitats
plantation woodland (4.8)ha and semi improved acid grassland (0.8)ha.
affected
Significant impacts A medium to low significant impact on golden plover through the
displacement of 2 pairs. Golden eagle activity was noted during the
original ES. The second addendum states that collision risk to this
species will not be significant.
Golden eagle
Potential
cumulative impacts
with Corriemoillie
Impact significance Any difference to overall golden eagle collision risk when assessed in
combination with the results presented in the Lochluichart result would
with Corriemoillie
be trivial.
86 SNH (2005a). Cumulative Effects on Windfarms: Version 2. Scottish Natural Heritage.
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
Chapter 7 – Page 27
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
7.342 The authors are aware of the proposed Western Isle Connection route that will pass through the
Corriemoillie Forest. It is not possible at this stage to make an assessment on the cumulative
impacts of this development as it has not been confirmed whether the route will by overland
transmission lines or underground cables. Once this is confirmed suitable mitigation measure as
approved by consultees will be implemented to reduce any potential effects on birds.
Mitigation
Site Design/ Layout
7.343 The layout of the proposed Wind Farm has incorporated specific mitigation measures into the
design, in order to account for the presence of specific sensitive species within the site boundary.
Due to the sensitive nature of these species this can not be discussed further in this chapter.
However full details of the mitigation and its incorporation into the proposed Wind Farm design are
described in the Ornithology Confidential Annex.
Best Practice Regarding Breeding Birds
7.344 Under the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) as amended by the Nature Conservation
(Scotland) Act (2004), it is an offence, with only limited exceptions, to:
•
•
•
intentionally or recklessly take, interfere with, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird
whilst it is in use or being built;
intentionally or recklessly take, interfere with or destroy the egg of any wild bird; and
intentionally or recklessly disturb any wild bird listed on Schedule 1 while it is nest building,
or at (or near) a nest containing eggs or young, or disturb the dependent young of such a
bird.
7.350 Post consent bird monitoring will be carried out as stipulated in the SNH (2009) guidance note87,
and will focus primarily on red-throated diver and golden eagle impacts, and breeding wader
mitigation effects.
7.351 There is a possibility that after forestry felling the site will become more suitable for breeding
waders. Chapter 8 (Forestry) discusses the option of mulching some of the forestry on site. If
forestry was mulched around all turbines to a distance of 200m this would mean the habitat around
the turbines would be unsuitable for breeding waders thus reducing any risk of collision. Habitat
beyond the 200m turbine buffer zones could then be enhanced and bog habitat reinstated that
would be suitable and benefit a variety of waders as well as local/regional biodiversity.
7.352 Anecdotal evidence from local birders indicates that black grouse are starting to expand their
range in a westerly direction from Strathbran forest. In recent decades this species has suffered a
large population decline and a contraction in the extent of its range throughout Scotland. It is also
the object of several conservation projects in Scotland specifically in Dumfries and Galloway and
Argyll and Bute.
7.353 In order to encourage the expansion of this species local range and population in the local of
Corriemoillie it is proposed that black grouse is a target species of any HMP. A suitable amount of
land either within the Corriemoillie estate or neighbouring estates where landowner agreements can
be secured, should be managed or enhanced for the benefit of the species. Any such management
agreement would be designed following consultation with RSPB Scotland, SNH and The Highland
Council Biodiversity Officer.
7.345 Best practice will be necessary to reduce the possibility of illegal damage, destruction or
disturbance to occupied bird nests during the construction phase. Three best practice measures will
be adopted: timing, pre-construction surveys, and the use of an Environmental Clerk of Works.
7.346 If site clearance and construction activities are required to take place during the main breeding
bird season, from mid-March to July inclusive, pre-commencement survey work will be required to
ensure that nest destruction and disturbance to breeding birds are avoided. Where applicable
construction will not take place within disturbance buffer zones set by SNH for certain sensitive
species, during the breeding season.
7.347 Compliance with the law will also be achieved by the appointment of a suitably experienced
ornithologist as Environmental Clerk of Works during the bird breeding season (mid-March to July,
inclusive). Among other tasks, this will involve locating any active nests close to construction works
shortly before these commence. Any active nests found will be cordoned off to a suitable distance
for the species concerned (up to 50m for open-ground nesting species and 20 m for woodland and
scrub nesters) and construction operations delayed within the cordon until the young have fledged
and the nest becomes vacant.
7.348 There will be a clear line of responsibility for ensuring these measures are adhered to.
Habitat Management Plan (HMP)
7.349 The following section discusses possible HMP proposals for the proposed Wind Farm.
87 SNH Guidance note. (2009). Monitoring the impacts of onshore Wind Farms on birds.
Chapter 7 – Page 28
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
Summary of Residual Effects
Table 7.12 Summary of Residual Effects
VER
Value
Potential Effect
Construction and Decommissioning Impacts
Displacement
Red-throated National
diver
(breeding).
Displacement
Greenshank National
(breeding).
Golden
eagle
National
Red kite
Regional
Hen harrier
Regional
Displacement
(breeding).
Displacement
(non-breeding).
Mitigation
Magnitude
Duration
Nature
Significance
Level of Certainty/Comments
Ornithology
Confidential Annex
Negligible
Short-term
Negative
Not significant
A measurable effect on the local or regional population is
considered to be highly unlikely.
Restrictions on
construction activities
will apply within
300m buffers
None required
Negligible
Short-term
Negative
Not significant
A measurable effect on the local or regional population is
considered to be highly unlikely.
Negligible
Short-term
Negative
Not significant
A measurable effect on the local or regional population is
considered to be highly unlikely.
None required
Negligible
Short-term
Negative
Not significant
A measurable effect on the local or regional population is
considered to be highly unlikely.
None required
Negligible
Short-term
Negative
Not significant
A measurable effect on the local or regional population is
considered to be highly unlikely.
None required
Negligible
Short-term
Negative
Not significant
A measurable effect on the local or regional population is
considered to be highly unlikely.
None required
Negligible
Short-term
Negative
Not significant
A measurable effect on the local or regional population is
considered to be highly unlikely.
A measurable effect on the local or regional population is
considered to be highly unlikely.
A measurable effect on the local or regional population is
considered to be highly unlikely.
A measurable effect on the local or regional population is
considered to be highly unlikely.
A measurable effect on the local or regional population is
not considered to likely. However due to the large decline in
this species across Scotland it should be a priority in the
HMP.
A measurable effect on the local or regional population is
considered to be highly unlikely.
A measurable effect on the local or regional population is
considered to be highly unlikely.
A measurable effect on the local or regional population is
considered to be highly unlikely.
A measurable effect on the local or regional population is
considered to be highly unlikely.
A measurable effect on the local or regional population is
considered to be highly unlikely.
Osprey
Regional
Merlin
Regional
Displacement
(non-breeding).
Displacement
(breeding).
Displacement
(non-breeding).
Disturbance
(breeding)
Displacement
Peregrine
falcon
Black
Grouse
Regional
Displacement
None required
Negligible
Short-term
Negative
Not significant
Local
Displacement
(spring lek)
None required but
will be part of HMP
Negligible
Short-term
Negative
Not significant
Snipe
Local
None required
Negligible
Negative
Not significant
Skylark
Local
None required
Low
Short-term
Neutral
Not significant
Red-listed
species
Crossbill &
Bullfinch
Access track
breeding
bird
assemblage
Local
Displacement
(breeding)
Displacement
(breeding)
Displacement
(breeding)
Displacement (nonbreeding)
Displacement
(breeding)
None required
Negligible
Permanent
Negative
Not significant
None required
Negligible
Permanent
Negative
Not significant
None required
Negligible
Short-term.
Neutral
Not significant
Local
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
None required
Negligible
Short-term
Negative
Not significant
None required
Negligible
Short-term
Negative
Not significant
Chapter 7 – Page 29
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
VER
Value
Operational Effects
International
Pink-footed
goose
Greylag
goose
Red-throated
diver
Greenshank
Potential Effect
Mitigation
Magnitude
Duration
Nature
Significance
Level of Certainty/Comments
Collision
None required
Negligible
Short-term
Negative
Not significant
International
Collision
None required
Negligible
Short-term
Negative
Not significant
National
Displacement
None required
Negligible
Permanent
Negative
Not significant
Collision
Site layout / design
includes corridor to
allow unimpeded use
of flyway
Negligible
Mediumterm
Negative
Not significant
Displacement
Negligible
Permanent
Positive
Not significant
Collision
Site layout/design.
HMP will ensure that
habitat within 200m
of turbines is
unsuitable for
breeding
greenshank. Habitat
suitability beyond
200m will be
improved for this
species.
None required
Collision risk to this species is considered to be negligible.
A measurable effect on international or national populations
is considered to be highly unlikely.
A measurable effect on international or national population
is considered to be highly unlikely.
It is considered possible that territories will be retained.
However, as there is uncertainty regarding the behaviour of
red-thoated divers in this situation a precautionary approach
has been adopted.
This assessment considers the risk of collision in the event
that the breeding territory associated with the flyway is
retained. If red-throated diver are displaced from this
territory, the residual collision risk to non-breeding birds
would be trivial and not significant.
It is considered likely that territories will be retained through
mitigation. However, as this mitigation is untested and due
to the paucity of studies specific to greenshank, a highly
precautionary approach has been adopted. The HMP will
improve suitability for this species, while ensuring that
habitat within 200m of turbines remains unsuitable.
Therefore a negligible but positive effect is predicted for this
species.
Negligible
Short-term
Negative
Not significant
National
Golden
eagle
Red kite
National
Collision
Non required
Negligible
Short-term
Negative
Not significant
Regional
Collision
None required
Negligible
Short-term
Negative
Not significant
Hen harrier
Regional
Collision
None required
Negligible
Short-term
Negative
Not significant
Osprey
Regional
Collision
None required
Negligible
Short-term
Negative
Not significant
Merlin
Regional
Collision
None required
Negligible
Short-term
Negative
Not significant
Peregrine
falcon
Regional
Collision
None required
Negligible
Short-term
Negative
Not significant
Chapter 7 – Page 30
This assessment considers the risk of collision in the event
that territories are retained through mitigation. If
greenshank are displaced from the site, there will be no
effect as a result of collision mortality.
A measurable effect on the national or regional population is
considered unlikely and any collision risk is trivial
A measurable effect on the regional or local population is
considered to be highly unlikely.
A measurable effect on the regional or local population is
considered to be highly unlikely.
A measurable effect on the regional or local population is
considered to be highly unlikely.
A measurable effect on the regional or local population is
considered to be highly unlikely.
A measurable effect on the regional or local population is
considered to be highly unlikely.
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
VER
Golden
plover
Value
Regional
Potential Effect
Collision
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement
Mitigation
HMP will ensure that
habitat within 200m
of turbines is
unsuitable for
breeding golden
plovers. Habitat
suitability beyond
200m will be
improved for this
species.
Magnitude
Negligible
Duration
Permanent
Nature
Positive
Significance
Not significant
Level of Certainty/Comments
Collision risk was modelled assuming golden povers will
occupy all available suitable habitat within the site after
construction. The HMP will improve suitability for this
species, while ensuring that habitat within 200m of turbines
remains unsuitable. Therefore a negligible but positive
effect is predicted for this species. A measurable effect on
the regional or local population is considered to be highly
unlikely.
Chapter 7 – Page 31
Chapter 7 - Ornithology
Statement of Significance
7.354 An assessment has been made of the likely effects of the proposed Wind Farm during the
construction, operation and decommissioning stages. It is concluded that, provided best practice is
followed to avoid disturbance to breeding birds, including exclusion zones, avoiding damage or
destruction to their occupied nests, there will be no major or moderate impacts on any valued
ornithological receptor. Mitigation is recommended to minimise potential effects on VERs identified.
After mitigation is considered, the impact on VERs is assessed as not significant.
7.355 A HMP would have a positive impact on breeding moorland birds including black grouse, golden
plover, skylark and greenshank and local biodiversity.
Chapter 7 – Page 32
Corriemoillie Wind Farm Environmental Statement