Representation by Isle of Man Government (Territorial Sea Committee) (Isle of Man Government (Territorial Sea Committee))
- Date submitted
- 10 July 2024
- Submitted by
- Non-statutory organisations
The following comments are made on behalf of the Isle of Man Territorial Seas Committee: Environmental Statement Volume 3, Annex 5.2: Transboundary impacts screening 1.1.1.5 It should be noted that the Isle of Man is a Crown Dependency of the UK and not a European Economic Area (EEA) State. Therefore, Regulation 32 of the EIA Regulations does not apply to the Isle of Man. For this reason, it is not considered to be a transboundary consultee for the Morgan Generation Assets. As such, potential impacts upon environmental receptors within the Isle of Man are not considered to be transboundary. Potential impacts upon environmental receptors within the Isle of Man are fully considered in the Environmental Statement (see volume 2, Chapters 1 to 15 of the Environmental Statement). The Isle of Man Government seeks clarification on this determination. It is not clear whether the Isle of Man (as a UK Crown Dependency) is considered ‘part of the UK’ for this assessment process – and therefore automatically FULLY integrated into the process as if it was part of the UK, or whether the CD status means it is neither UK nor a Transboundary party? Noting 1.7.1.2 below, it’s perhaps less about the outcome, but understanding whether Isle of Man interests are properly considered , unequivocally as one or the other, AND NOT because the developer has chosen to include it in the process, but with no formal, or an ambiguous legal status. Environmental Statement Chapters Marine Mammals Volume 2, Chapter 4: Marine mammals Page 14 Table 4.5 This PEIR comment relates to the Isle of Man Wildlife Act 1990, not the UK Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, and sought confirmation that, due to proximity, equivalent treatment of species and sites protected under Manx legislation has been afforded during this EIA process. The apparent misunderstanding of legislation means that clarification on this matter remains outstanding, and should be explicitly provided. Pg. 43, Table 4.10 For consistency, harbour porpoise should also be listed as being protected under Manx Legislation, Wildlife Act 1990, in the ‘Conservation Importance’ column of Table 4.10 as it has been acknowledged for all other marine mammals, and also at Section 4.5.1.4. Fish and Shellfish Ecology Table 3.32, Pp. 173, 177, 200 Confirmation as to Ørsted Mooir Vannin windfarm is required, it appears to be missing from Tier 2? Commercial Fisheries Technical Report Pg. 4 Table 1.1 As previously noted, the Isle of Man Government remains concerned that these data can adequately represent the spatial distribution of fishing activity in the development area since it only includes >15 m vessels. While acknowledging that other data sources are used, but with lower levels of confidence, it is suggest that medium-term monitoring is included in the project as a mitigation to determine whether the baseline data and impacts are accurate. This may be implied on page 21; ‘As per Table 6.37, annual reviews for the first five years of the operations and maintenance phase will be undertaken (Document ref. J10)’, however it’s not specifically monitoring, which is preferable to review only. Pg 19: 1.4.2.21 Noting that Isle of Man vessels are now (since 2023) engaged in pelagic trawling for herring within Manx waters (as implied at 1.4.2.23). Note also the allocated herring quota is expected to increase on an annual basis over the three years 2023-2026. Similarly for langoustine from 2024. Data sources in several Figures are not indicated, but instead show ‘References for all data shown in the maps to be added here’. Figure 1.53: Does not appear to indicate Isle of Man vessels - as they are not Irish, Northern Irish or UK. 1.4.8.11: For information about connectivity and the importance of conservation of spawning grounds see; https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/marine-science/articles/10.3389/fmars.2023.1274136/full Chapter 6 ES: Commercial Fisheries Table 6.4, pg. 15: This is an odd statement, and requires clarification. Deployment of cable relates to depth being fished, not to nationality. As such, any vessel fishing for scallops within the array area at depths around 30-35m would be able to fish between turbines, not just Manx. See also 6.8.1.62. Table 6.7 The is no particular correlation between the fishing techniques and the regulations, rather the practices were developed and adopted by industry then regulation, as appropriate, followed; not the converse. Table 6.38 No Future Monitoring appears to be proposed for Commercial Fisheries. Noting: Pg. 21 The Isle of Man Government considers that a monitoring component, based around specific metrics/parameters, in addition to review of the other data indicated, would provide a more accurate and useful assessment as to whether the assumptions and assessments of commercial fisheries impacts are accurate. This would be expected to be included within the DCO as a condition or as agreed prior to Examination with relevant parties. Benthic Ecology Noting pg. 128: 2.9.7.8 Many of the vessels used during the construction phase of the Morgan Generation Assets are likely to be from the region, therefore, the introduction of species from outside the region is unlikely. Please note that Ficopotamus enigmaticus has now been recorded on the Isle of Man (as of 2023) https://www.gov.im/media/1380838/isle-of-man-harbours-and-tubeworms-2023.pdf and likely transported from Whitehaven Marina in Cumbria, NW England. As such, the threats form INNS are regional and current. INNS are now a higher priority for the Isle of Man Government, and their potential introduction into Manx waters via offshore developments must be managed appropriately. Didemnum vexillum (carpet sea squirt) and Crepidula fornicata (slipper limpet), as noted on page 128 are particular concerns for the Isle of Man. Offshore Ornithology We have a particular interest in Manx shearwaters, with a site on the Calf of Man, where a rat eradication project has resulted in a resurgence of the population from their first reappearance being noted about 25 years ago. The ornithological baseline chapter (Volume 4, Annex 5.1) references ‘The most recent count of breeding Manx shearwater at the Calf of Man, Isle of Man undertaken in 2014 was 424 breeding pairs’. This is now, of course, very out of date, as the numbers have been increasing year on year. Manx National Heritage, the owners of the site, cite that in 2019 there was an estimated 650 pairs, and that there are now thought to be 1000+. This is clearly still relatively low compared with long-established, predator-free shearwater islands, but shows a consistent recovery and is the closest breeding site to the Morgan proposal site. However, we see that this will not affect their conservation status (international) or impact predictions (as no LSE), so we note it only for clarity and correctness, should further discussions develop regarding Manx shearwaters. With regard to designated sites, we have previously noted that there are Areas of Special Scientific Interest with designated costal cliff breeding bird interest, including seabirds, which haven’t been listed as sites of national interest for ornithology, but we also pointed out that some of our biggest seabird colonies are not currently designated as ASSIs, as this programme is not completed, though they do have the protection of Manx National Heritage byelaws. The applicant has therefore included all of the Manx colonies in coastal sections within the apportioning chapter on ornithology (Volume 4, Annex 5.5). We are content that a view has been given to these colonies within the Statement, which indicates no LSE. We further note the applicant’s consideration of the great black-backed gull impacts with specific regard to the Isle of Man population (one bird per annum), and status on the Isle of Man (IoM red list) which has been accounted for within the Statement. We welcome and note the adopted measures, of a minimum lower blade tip height (air draught) of 34 m above LAT, which raises it above the usual minimum standards, which is expected to result in a reduction of risk to many (lower-flying) seabirds, and the development of an offshore EMP that will include measures to minimise disturbance to rafting birds from transiting vessels and including a MPCP which will include planning for accidental spills, address all potential contaminant releases and include key emergency details. Other Sea Users Manx Utilities owns and operates, through its subsidiary company Manx Cable Company Limited [MCC] the electrical interconnector subsea cable between the Isle of Man and the North West of England. The Isle of Man interconnector [Manx 1], runs between Douglas Head in the Isle of Man and Bispham, Blackpool, and is an essential means of maintaining secure supplies of electricity to the Isle of Man; and therefore must be recognised as part of the Isle of Man Governments Critical National Infrastructure. Approximately 20km of the IOM interconnector is positioned approx. 800 meters from the northern boundary of the Morgan Wind farm [Order Limits and grid co-ordinates plan MRCNS-J3303-RPS-10005]. In addition to the risk of third-party damage during the construction phase, the introduction of fixed structures and associated collector and/or array cables on or buried in the seabed, can through their proximity present an ongoing operational risk to maintenance and repair works over the life of the asset. Considering the interconnector’s asset value and strategic importance to the Isle of Man, representation on issues and risks associated with the wind farm have formed part of the early stakeholder’s engagement processes with discussions ongoing regarding agreement on proximity of fixed structures from Manx 1; however until a formal “Proximity Agreement” is agreed and signed by both parties, Manx Utilities and the Isle of Man Government strongly requests Interested Party status and continued engagement to ensure adequate representation of our concerns and risks can be considered as appropriate in the examination process. Shipping and Navigation As an Island nation, any significant risk of interference with marine navigation remains a concern to the TSC with regard to transport to and from the island, and the shipping lanes in our Territorial waters which are used to connect the UK and Ireland. These are strategic, lifeline routes that the Island depends on and it is essential that these are not impacted upon as part of these proposals. The economy of the Island is highly reliant on the regular, safe shipping for its goods, and any deviations from well-established timetables and routes would not support the Island’s business community relying on daily deliveries via the Isle of Man Steam Packet Company. The TSC also amplifies the consideration alongside the cumulative impacts from all of the proposed windfarms awarded as part of The Crown Estate’s Round 4 project in the Irish sea such as Mona as well as the proposed Mooir Vannin windfarm within IOM Territorial waters which will affect strategic lifeline services to the Isle of Man as reflected in Appendix A of the EIA and in particular during weather events that will require the vessels to be weather routed with further additional time to the current weather routes. NOTE - 7.9.4.23 – This states that the Heysham – Douglas normal crossing time is two hours 45 minutes. This should read three hours 45 minutes. Aviation Request continued engagement to ensure that any offshore wind farms do not compromise the safety of the Island’s air travel.