Representation by The Wildlife Trusts (The Wildlife Trusts)
- Date submitted
- 27 January 2020
- Submitted by
- Non-statutory organisations
Introduction: The Wildlife Trusts (TWT), with more than 800,000 members, is the largest UK voluntary organisation dedicated to conserving the full range of the UK’s habitats and species. TWT has engaged in the East Anglia Two Marine Mammals Expert Topic Group and as such, this representation mainly focuses on marine mammals. Comments on onshore ecology have been provided separately by Suffolk Wildlife Trust. Comments on the East Anglia Two application: TWT has concerns regarding the impact of underwater noise from construction on marine mammals. In particular, we are concerned about cumulative underwater noise disturbance impacts on the harbour porpoise North Sea Management Unit and in-combination disturbance within the Southern North Sea SAC. - Assessment methodology Underwater noise management in the Southern North Sea SAC: Although we welcome that progress has been made on the assessment of underwater noise disturbance within the Southern North Sea SAC, TWT still has concerns regarding the proposed SNCB advice. The science underpinning the advice is weak and we believe the proposed approach will be difficult to deliver. We also disagree with SNCB advice that the assessment of impacts on harbour porpoise populations in the Southern North Sea SAC is against the Management Unit. The European Commission has made clear in guidance that the expression ‘integrity of the site’ should be on the specific site . Therefore, to understand the impact on the integrity of the Southern North Sea SAC, a site-based assessment based on an estimated population number is required rather than an assessment on the Management Unit. Inclusion of fishing in all cumulative/in-combination assessments: Fishing has not been included in any cumulative/in-combination assessments within any chapters of the application. As a principle, fishing should not be considered in any assessments as part of the baseline. It is a licensable ongoing activity that has the potential to have an adverse impact on the marine environment. This is supported in the leading case C-127/02 Waddenzee [2004] ECR I-7405, the CJEU held at para. 6. In addition, Defra policy requires existing and potential fishing operations to be managed in line with Article 6 of the Habitats Directive. This approach further supports that fishing is considered a plan or a project and therefore must be included in the in-combination assessment in line with Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive. Following the commencement of judicial review proceedings by TWT against Dogger Bank Offshore Wind farms, TWT was given assurances that fishing would be included in future offshore wind farm assessments. We have raised this issue with the Planning Inspectorate over several planning applications (Hornsea 3, Norfolk Vanguard, Norfolk Boreas) and have also raised the issue with Defra and BEIS. We make this case for all MPAs assessed in this application. - Southern North Sea SAC TWT agrees that mitigation is required to ensure no adverse effect on the Southern North Sea SAC from underwater noise impacts. We are pleased that the applicant has committed to the production of a Site Integrity Plan (SIP) and Marine Mammal Mitigation Protocol (MMMP) for piling and UXO clearance. There are a number of outstanding issues which means that TWT cannot conclude for the East Anglia Two application that there will be no adverse effect beyond reasonable scientific doubt on the Southern North Sea SAC. Firstly, the SIP lacks detail and therefore in its current form it is not adequate. More detail should be provided on the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation as outlined in the SIP. This should include referenced examples of how the implementation of mitigation will reduce underwater noise disturbance impacts within the Southern North Sea SAC. Noise modelling should also be undertaken to demonstrate the degree of noise reduction which could be achieved through mitigation. Secondly, we cannot conclude no adverse effect on the Southern North Sea SAC due to the lack of regulatory mechanism to manage in-combination underwater noise impacts. Defra and the Southern North Sea Regulators Working Group are taking positive steps to develop effective management for in-combination underwater noise impacts and TWT will continue to work closely with all stakeholders on this. However, as management mechanisms are currently not in place, we suggest the Planning Inspectorate and the Secretary of State considers what controls need to be put in place to ensure no adverse effect on the Southern North Sea SAC at this current time. - Development Consent Order (DCO) – UXO clearance We welcome that the applicant has included conditions in relation to UXO clearance in the draft DCO and has committed to a UXO MMMP and SIP. We would like to raise with the Planning Inspectorate that there is inconsistency on the inclusion of UXO clearance in draft DCOs alongside associated mitigation documents. Due to the cumulative impact of underwater noise impacts from offshore wind farm development, UXO clearance and associated mitigation must be secured across all DCOs to ensure site integrity of the Southern North Sea SAC. - Monitoring – Southern North Sea SAC There is a great deal of uncertainty regarding the impacts of underwater noise on harbour porpoise in UK waters; very few studies have been undertaken. Generally, current monitoring included in Development Consent Orders for offshore wind farms is not fit for purpose to provide adequate information to confirm the effectiveness of mitigation methods. In addition, the monitoring included in the In-Principle Monitoring Plan is not fit for purpose for harbour porpoise or the Southern North Sea SAC. To provide more confidence, TWT recommends that all offshore wind farm developments should contribute funding and participate in the delivery of strategic monitoring. Developers all agree that a strategic approach to monitoring is the most effective approach but consistently highlight that a mechanism for delivery is lacking. - Post-consent engagement TWT values the relationship developed with applicants during the pre-application stage. However, due to the uncertainties regarding marine mammal mitigation and monitoring at examination, we wish to be named on any associated documents for consultation post-consent including MMMPs, Marine Mammal Monitoring Plans and EPS licences. We welcome being named in the SIP but request to be consulted rather than just be provided information throughout the development of the document post-consent. SPR leads by example on post-consent engagement and has confirmed that they are happy to name TWT as consultee in the above documents. We will be working with the applicant through examination on how this is achieved, and we are happy to provide an update as the application progresses. - Conclusions TWT welcomes that significant progress has taken place over the past few months on underwater noise management in the Southern North Sea SAC. However, as a regulatory mechanism is still not in place to manage the in-combination effects of underwater noise disturbance impacts, we cannot agree that there will be no adverse effect on the Southern North Sea SAC. We appreciate that the development of the regulatory mechanism is outside the control of this examination. However, we urge the Planning Inspectorate and Secretary of State to consider the risk associated with the lack of current management in the final decision and what extra controls can be put in place to ensure no adverse effect on the Southern North Sea SAC.