Item 4 Appendix 3 - Support info capercaillie 20250034DET Nethy housing Redacted

Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity Ugh­dar­ras Pairc Nàiseanta a’ Mhon­aidh Ruaidh

Item 4 Appendix 3 27 June 2025 Page 1 of 15

Agenda item 4

Appendix 3

2025/0034/DET

Sup­port­ing inform­a­tion – detailed capercaillie

assess­ment

Annex II — detailed caper­cail­lie effects assessment

Q1. Is the pro­posed devel­op­ment likely to change levels of human activ­ity or pat­terns of recre­ation around the pro­posed development/​associated settlement?

Q1: This and Q2 are included as screen­ing ques­tions to fil­ter out any devel­op­ments that aren’t likely to have changed levels or pat­terns of recre­ation. Yes, in rela­tion to access to hab­it­ats in the imme­di­ate vicin­ity of the pro­posed site:

See map below for loc­a­tion of the devel­op­ment site on Lettoch road, Nethy Bridge. Based on the pro­posed 35 hous­ing units, and an estim­ate of 1.9 people per dwell­ing, we would envis­age a res­id­ent pop­u­la­tion of approx­im­ately 67 people. The site itself will provide a play area for chil­dren, some green space and private gardens.

The pro­por­tion of UK house­holds own­ing a dog was thought to be 36% in 20241. There­fore, approx­im­ately 13 of the 35 house­holds may include dogs. The dogs will need to be exer­cised and toi­leted par­tic­u­larly in the morn­ings, lunch­times and the even­ings. Some own­ers may decide to use the con­veni­ent wood­land loop to the north.

The woods dir­ectly to the north of the site offer inform­al foot­paths which con­nect to make a ~1.3km/0.8miles cir­cu­lar route and are likely to be used by the res­id­ents for short walks/​walk­ing the dog and by chil­dren playing.

There are exist­ing res­id­en­tial devel­op­ments in this part of Nethy Bridge, so the nature of people’s beha­viour is unlikely to be sig­ni­fic­antly dif­fer­ent, but we would expect some increased use of the wood­lands to the north of the site.

This site is con­sidered as a poten­tial dis­pers­al route for caper­cail­lie as it is a con­nect­ing wood between the Aber­nethy Forest SPA and Craigmore Wood­land SPA and the closest lek to the devel­op­ment in the Aber­nethy Forest SPA is expand­ing. The site is there­fore being treated as a caper­cail­lie wood­land for the pur­poses of this assessment.

1 Evid­ence from https://​www​.ukpet​food​.org/​i​n​d​u​s​t​r​y​-​i​n​f​o​r​m​a​t​i​o​n​/​s​t​a​t​i​s​t​i​c​s​-​n​e​w​/​u​k​-​p​e​t​-​p​o​p​u​l​a​t​i​o​n​.html

Annex II — detailed caper­cail­lie effects assessment

Q2. Are caper­cail­lie woods sig­ni­fic­antly more access­ible from this devel­op­ment site than from oth­er parts of the asso­ci­ated settlement?

Q2: This is included to ensure the effect of oth­er­wise small-scale devel­op­ment sites par­tic­u­larly close to caper­cail­lie woods are adequately con­sidered. Evid­ence from set­tle­ments in Strath­spey where houses are adja­cent to wood­lands indic­ates that net­works of inform­al paths and trails have developed with­in the woods link­ing back gar­dens with form­al path | net­works and oth­er pop­u­lar loc­al des­tin­a­tions (eg primary schools). Such paths are likely to be used | by vis­it­ors. Yes. Wood­land north of the pro­posed site (west of Garlyne Moss) .

Des­pite there being no caper­cail­lie records the site is a con­nect­ing wood­land between Aber­nethy Forest SPA and Craigmore SPA, con­nect­ing with Cul­stank Moss and School Wood so likely serves as part of a dis­pers­al cor­ridor and is there­fore con­sidered a caper­cail­lie wood­land. It is neces­sary that sites with poten­tial to accom­mod­ate caper­cail­lie move­ment are conserved/​remain avail­able to main­tain con­nectiv­ity (caper­cail­lie frame­work 2015, p21-22). This wood­land site is approx­im­a­tel expand­ing caper­cail­lie lek, and well with­in range for dis­pers­ing male caper­cail­lie (max dis­pers­al dis­tance 5km) and female dis­pers­al (max dis­pers­al dis­tance 30km). Fur­ther jus­ti­fic­a­tion for includ­ing this site as a caper­cail­lie wood­land is provided in the final ​‘Reas­ons mit­ig­a­tion needed’ sec­tion below.

No. Forest Lodge/​Dell Wood area with­in Aber­nethy Forest SPA.

The pro­posed devel­op­ment site on Lettoch Road is sep­ar­ated from Aber­nethy Forest by the River | Nethy. The site is approx­im­ately 900m from the edge of the Aber­nethy Forest SPA (Dell Woods area), if accessed via a foot­bridge over the River Nethy near Lyn­stock Cres­cent. The foot­bridge is ~450 – 500m from the site. Approx­im­ately 140 exist­ing Nethy Bridge prop­er­ties on the north/​east side of the River Nethy are with­in 500m of the foot bridge. A fur­ther 90 prop­er­ties along Dell Road are significantly

Annex II — detailed caper­cail­lie effects assessment

closer to the edge of the Aber­nethy Forest SPA on the south side of the River Nethy. There­fore, the wood­land would not be sig­ni­fic­antly more access­ible from the devel­op­ment than from exist­ing parts of the asso­ci­ated settlement.

The main lek area con­firmed by RSPB is to away from the devel­op­ment as the crow flies). One area likely to be impacted by dis­turb­ance would be to the east of the main path. See fur­ther inform­a­tion provided in Q7.

No, Craigmore Woods Oth­er caper­cail­lie woods at Nethy Bridge are not as close and would require a much more com­mit­ted jour­ney from the devel­op­ment so are not con­sidered bey­ond ques­tion 2. These include Craigmore SPA and Garten woods with­in the Aber­nethy Forest SPA . Whilst Craigmore Wood con­tains an act­ive caper­cail­lie lek site and is oth­er walk loc­a­tions are avail­able closer by, so Criagmore Wood is not sig­ni­fic­antly more access­ible from the loc­a­tion on Lettoch Road. Garten Woods is 1.7miles walk from Lettoch Road. It does not con­tain an act­ive caper­cail­lie lek site and access is via Nethy vil­lage centre so this is not con­sidered sig­ni­fic­antly more access­ible from the devel­op­ment site and no detect­able change to exist­ing levels/​patterns of use are expected.

If Q1 & Q2 = No, con­clu­sion is no sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance to caper­cail­lie and assess­ment ends here If Q1 or Q2 = Yes, con­tin­ue to Q3 Q3. Which caper­cail­lie woods are likely to be used reg­u­larly for recre­ation by users of the devel­op­ment site at detect­able levels? (list all)

Q3: This is included to identi­fy which caperca. woods are likely to be used for recre­ation by users of non-hous­ing devel­op­ment sites at levels that would be detect­able. The answer will be assessed using pro­fes­sion­al judge­ment based on know­ledge of exist­ing pat­terns of recre­ation around set­tle­ments and in the loc­al area, the rel­at­ive appeal of the caper­cail­lie woods con­cerned com­pared to oth­er recre­ation­al oppor­tun­it­ies in the area, the volume of recre­ation­al vis­its likely to be gen­er­ated by the devel­op­ment site, and informed by nation­al Aber­nethy Forest SPA (Dell Woods area)– medi­um length walks, medi­um length dog walk­ing, cross coun­try MTB

Wood­land north of pro­posed site – activ­it­ies here by res­id­ents could include play­ing by chil­dren, short walks and short dog walks.

Des­pite there being no caper­cail­lie records the site is a con­nect­ing wood­land between Aber­nethy Forest SPA and Craigmore SPA, con­nect­ing with Cul­stank Moss and School Wood so likely serving as part of a dis­pers­al cor­ridor and is there­fore con­sidered a caper­cail­lie wood­land. It is neces­sary that sites with poten­tial to accom­mod­ate caper­cail­lie move­ment are conserved/​remain avail­able to main­tain con­nectiv­ity (caper­cail­lie frame­work 2015, p21-22). The site is approx­im­ately of an expand­ing caper­cail­lie lek near and well with­in range for dis­pers­ing male caper­cail­lie (max dis­pers­al dis­tance 5km) and female dis­pers­al (max dis­pers­al dis­tance 30km). A map show­ing poten­tial con­nectiv­ity and a map demon­strat­ing dis­pers­al dis­tances are shown below. Fur­ther jus­ti­fic­a­tion for includ­ing this site as a caper­cail­lie wood­land is provided in the final ​‘Reas­ons mit­ig­a­tion needed’ sec­tion below.

Annex II — detailed caper­cail­lie effects assess­ment sur­vey data (eg on the dis­tances people travel recre­ation­al visits).

Annex II — detailed caper­cail­lie effects assessment

Con­tin­ue to Q4 Q4. Are res­id­ents / users of this devel­op­ment site pre­dicted to under­take any off path recre­ation­al activ­it­ies in any of the woods iden­ti­fied at Q3 at detect­able levels?

Q4: This is included because any off path Yes, Aber­nethy Forest SPA There is poten­tial for dogs to be let off their leads by dog­walk­ers. How­ever, the use by dogs in this area is cur­rently low (see inform­a­tion provided for Q7). The low level of dog walk­ing activ­ity may be due to oth­er dog walk­ing routes around the vil­lage being pre­ferred for early morning/​late even­ing walks, and/​or inhib­i­tion due to the pres­ence of ranger patrols and suc­cess­ful mes­saging from the Lek It Be cam­paign (Ref: Lek It Be) rais­ing aware­ness about the impacts of recre­ation­al dis­turb­ance on caper­cail­lie. There are over 140 exist­ing prop­er­ties in the east of Nethy Bridge which are a sim­il­ar dis­tance or closer recre­ation­al use in caper­cail­lie woods will res­ult in | to Aber­nethy, so it is unlikely that res­id­ents of the pro­posed devel­op­ment site would under­take a

Annex II — detailed caper­cail­lie effects assess­ment sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance and require mit­ig­a­tion. dif­fer­ent pat­tern of use com­pared to exist­ing res­id­ents. No oth­er off-path activ­it­ies are pre­dicted — cross coun­try MTB activ­ity / gravel rid­ing may increase in Aber­nethy, but this activ­ity is more likely to use exist­ing trails. Aber­nethy Forest is not a pop­u­lar down­hill moun­tain bik­ing area.

An area of Aber­nethy Forest close to the devel­op­ment called Thompson’s Brae includes at least two hand-built / inform­al moun­tain bik­ing trails. These are included in the Moun­tain Bik­ing Recre­ation Man­age­ment Plan which was developed with the moun­tain bik­ing com­munity as part of the Cairngorms Caper­cail­lie Pro­ject. It is con­sidered unlikely that more trails will be built by res­id­ents of the devel­op­ment as inform­al trail build­ing is a rel­at­ively niche activ­ity and the Moun­tain Bik­ing Recre­ation Man­age­ment Plan is in place to man­age this issue and reduce impacts caused by inform­al trail building.

Yes, Wood­land north of pro­posed site Poten­tial for dogs to be let off their leads by dog­walk­ers. Chil­dren may roam off paths. It is expec­ted there would be a detect­able level of change to off path activ­it­ies here.

If Q4 = No for any woods, con­tin­ue to Q5 If Q4 = Yes for any woods, mit­ig­a­tion is needed. Note and con­tin­ue to Q5.

Q5: Are each of the woods iden­ti­fied at Q3 already estab­lished loc­a­tions for recreation?

Q5: This is included because if users of the devel­op­ment site are likely to access pre­vi­ously infre­quently-vis­ited caper­cail­lie woods, or parts of these woods, for recre­ation, sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance is likely and mit­ig­a­tion is needed. This will be answered on the basis of pro­fes­sion­al know­ledge. Yes, Aber­nethy Forest SPA People already walk, exer­cise dogs and moun­tain bike in Aber­nethy Forest. A look on Strava shows exist­ing activ­ity levels by run­ners (see map below).

Annex II — detailed caper­cail­lie effects assess­ment The Dell of Aber­nethy is a ven­ue for events, hosts hol­i­day makers and encour­ages people to bene­fit from vis­it­ing the woods (see google maps snip below). It is loc­ated close to a sens­it­ive area of Aber­nethy forest. The hol­i­day rent­als have a total capa­city of 30 people and wel­come dogs. Along with vis­its by loc­als and tour­ists, the wood­lands here are already likely to be receiv­ing vis­its. The Strava image (above) helps to identi­fy the routes used.

Annex II — detailed caper­cail­lie effects assess­ment The CNPA and oth­er part­ners work­ing to safe­guard the remain­ing caper­cail­lie pop­u­la­tion have access to com­pre­hens­ive data on path usage. Fur­ther inform­a­tion on this is provided in Q7.

Yes, Woods north of the site. The major­ity of activ­ity here occurs in the west part of the wood­land, asso­ci­ated with prox­im­ity to Mack­en­zie Cres­cent and Lyn­stock Cres­cent. Activ­ity is indic­ated by the num­ber of inter­con­nect­ing paths and dens here by loc­al chil­dren using the wood­land. The area of wood­land to the east appears to be rel­at­ively undis­turbed with a high-qual­ity field and shrub lay­er includ­ing blae­berry, heath­er and juni­per. See pho­tos from April 2025 below. An eco­lo­gic­al sur­vey for a pre­vi­ous plan­ning applic­a­tion con­sidered this area to be of good qual­ity. (Fur­ther inform­a­tion provided in final sec­tion Reas­on for mitigation’)

Annex II — detailed caper­cail­lie effects assess­ment If Q5 = No for any woods, mit­ig­a­tion is needed. Note and con­tin­ue to Q6.

If Q5 = Yes for any woods, con­tin­ue to Q6 Q6: For each of the woods iden­ti­fied at Q3, are users of the devel­op­ment site pre­dicted to have dif­fer­ent tem­por­al pat­terns of recre­ation­al use to any exist­ing vis­it­ors, or to under­take a dif­fer­ent pro­file of activ­it­ies? (eg. more dog walk­ing, or early morn­ing use)

Q6: This is included because some types of recre­ation are par­tic­u­larly dis­turb­ing to caper­cail­lie; and increased levels of these types of recre­ation will cause sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance and require mit­ig­a­tion. This will be answered on the basis of pro­fes­sion­al know­ledge on exist­ing pat­terns of recre­ation­al use and wheth­er each loc­a­tion is suf­fi­ciently close and/​or con­veni­ent in rela­tion to the devel­op­ment site and pat­terns of travel from there, to be used by users of the devel­op­ment for dif­fer­ent recre­ation­al activ­it­ies or at dif­fer­ent times of day. For example, caper­cail­lie woods with safe routes for dogs that are loc­ated close to devel­op­ment sites are likely to be used for early morn­ing &/or after work dog walk­ing. Yes, Wood­land north of devel­op­ment site: While the most west­erly area of this wood appears to be well used by res­id­ents of Nethy Bridge, the prox­im­ity to the new devel­op­ment site may res­ult in addi­tion­al early morn­ing and even­ing use by dog own­ers for short walks. Dogs not on leads may stray fur­ther into the good qual­ity hab­it­at to the east, mak­ing this wood­land less attract­ive for poten­tial dis­pers­ing capercaillie.

No, Aber­nethy Forest SPA: A safe and attract­ive loop south of Dell Lodge in Aber­nethy Forest is access­ible for longer walks (6.6km/3.9miles) from devel­op­ment site, which would be ideal for dog walk­ers. There is likely to be some increased use of this area of Aber­nethy Forest as access has recently been made easi­er through the replace­ment of a stile with a gate. The Strava image (see Q5 above) con­firms that this route is used by run­ners. Over 140 exist­ing prop­er­ties in the east of Nethy Bridge are of a sim­il­ar dis­tance or closer to this walk­ing route, so there is likely to be an exist­ing low level of dis­turb­ance from dog walk­ing in this area. It is unlikely that res­id­ents of the pro­posed devel­op­ment site would under­take a dif­fer­ent tem­por­al pat­tern of use com­pared to exist­ing residents.

Annex II — detailed caper­cail­lie effects assess­ment If Q6 = yes for any woods, mit­ig­a­tion is needed. Note and con­tin­ue to Q7 If Q6 = No for any woods, con­tin­ue to Q7

Q7: For each of the woods iden­ti­fied at Q3, could the pre­dicted level of use by res­id­ents / users of the devel­op­ment site sig­ni­fic­antly increase over­all levels of recre­ation­al use?

Q7: This is included because a sig­ni­fic­ant increase in recre­ation­al use could res­ult in sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance to caper­cail­lie, even in situ­ations where the caper­cail­lie wood is already pop­u­lar for recre­ation, and no changes to cur­rent recre­ation­al pat­terns / activ­it­ies or off path activ­it­ies are pre­dicted. The answer was assessed on the basis of pro­fes­sion­al judge­ment of cur­rent levels of use and wheth­er the increase is likely to be more than approx­im­ately 10%. Yes, Woods north of site Due to its prox­im­ity the recre­ation­al use of this wood­land by res­id­ents of the pro­posed devel­op­ment is likely to sig­ni­fic­antly increase the over­all levels of recre­ation­al use. The key issue is likely to be addi­tion­al recre­ation­al use by dog walk­ers early in the morn­ing, at lunch­times and in the even­ing. Dogs are a great­er cause of dis­turb­ance to wild­life than people alone. Even if dogs are on a lead their pres­ence can have an impact on caper­cail­lie. There are approx­im­ately 77 exist­ing prop­er­ties neigh­bour­ing the wood­land, which is very access­ible for them (see area high­lighted in map below), this pro­posed devel­op­ment will be adding 35 more houses, which would be a 45% increase.

Yes, Aber­nethy Forest SPA The CNP A Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan (2021) estim­ated that there were 361 occu­pied dwell­ings in Nethy Bridge in 2020, with an estim­ated pop­u­la­tion of 747 (LDP 2020 Hab­it­ats reg­u­la­tion Apprais­al report). Like a num­ber of oth­er com­munit­ies with­in the CNP area the pop­u­la­tion of Nethy Bridge was pro­jec­ted to decline between 2020 and 2029, with a pro­jec­ted decline of 36 people by 2029 (See Table 30 of LDP 2021, page 119).

Dwell­ing num­bers alone do not serve as a use­ful indic­at­or of populations/​human activ­ity in vil­lages in the

Annex II — detailed caper­cail­lie effects assess­ment high­lands, but if the 35 prop­er­ties at Lettoch Road remain as occu­pied dwell­ings they may house approx­im­ately 67 people (aver­age occu­pancy in the CNP is 1.9 – Nation­al Records of Scot­land). This would be an increase of ~8.9% (based on the estim­ated 2020 Nethy Bridge population).

It’s been estim­ated that 36% of house­holds owned a dog in 2024, and so approx­im­ately 13 of the 35 future house­holds of the devel­op­ment site might include a dog or mul­tiple dogs. Not every­one from the devel­op­ment will choose to walk or moun­tain bike every day, or choose to do so in Aber­nethy Forest, but dogs require reg­u­lar daily exer­cise, and there­fore an increased level of use of trails closest to the devel­op­ment site by dog walk­ers would be expected.

An increase in the use of MTB cross coun­try / gravel rid­ing use might also be expec­ted, espe­cially with the new gate mak­ing it more access­ible for them.

Ranger patrol data for the sens­it­ive caper­cail­lie area of Aber­nethy Forest closest to the devel­op­ment recor­ded just 10 dog walk­ers (and 3 in less sens­it­ive areas, mak­ing a total of 13) over a 5‑week peri­od from April to mid-May 2025. This is an aver­age of 2.6 dog walks/​week in the morn­ings dur­ing the caper­cail­lie lekking season.

This low level of dog walk­ing activ­ity seen dur­ing the lekking peri­od may be due to oth­er dog walk­ing routes around the vil­lage being pre­ferred for early morning/​late even­ing walks, or inhib­i­tion due to the pres­ence of ranger patrols and suc­cess­ful mes­saging from the Lek It Be cam­paign (Ref: Lek It Be) rais­ing aware­ness about the impacts of recre­ation­al dis­turb­ance on capercaillie.

With the cur­rent low level of dog walk­ing activ­ity, the addi­tion of small num­ber of early morning/​late even­ing dog walk per week dur­ing the sens­it­ive lekking peri­od could poten­tially increase dis­turb­ance. How­ever, as there are over 140 exist­ing prop­er­ties in the east of Nethy Bridge which are a sim­il­ar dis­tance or closer to Aber­nethy, it is unlikely that res­id­ents of the pro­posed devel­op­ment site would under­take a dif­fer­ent pat­tern of use com­pared to exist­ing residents.

No neg­at­ive impacts were pre­dicted for caper­cail­lie in the HRA for the cur­rent LDP (2021) for pro­posed devel­op­ments in Nethy Bridge, which included the Lettoch Road devel­op­ment, and these con­clu­sions are con­sidered to remain val­id. How­ever, since the cur­rent LDP was pub­lished the caper­cail­lie pop­u­la­tion has decreased by over 50% to 532 birds and a Caper­cail­lie Emer­gency Plan is now in place reques­ted by the Scot­tish Gov­ern­ment. The num­ber of lekking male caper­cail­lie at the lek site in Aber­nethy closest to the devel­op­ment has been increas­ing while many oth­er leks have been declining.

If Q4‑7 = No for all woods, con­clu­sion is no sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance to caper­cail­lie and assess­ment ends here

Annex II — detailed caper­cail­lie effects assess­ment If Q4, 5, 6 and/​or 7 = Yes for any woods, mit­ig­a­tion is needed Con­clu­sion: Is mit­ig­a­tion needed as a con­sequence of this devel­op­ment site in rela­tion to each wood lis­ted at Q3? Yes, addi­tion­al mit­ig­a­tion is needed as con­sequence of this devel­op­ment site. Pro­posed Mit­ig­a­tion: Dog exer­cise area with­in the devel­op­ment site Layout/​design for dog exer­cise area and asso­ci­ated access/​path routes to be sub­mit­ted by developer and approved by CNPA. See map below, this area is approx­im­ately 60m wide and 120m long. Use of this space by res­id­ents with dogs will reduce pres­sure on the wood­land to the north dur­ing early morn­ing and even­ing times for short dog walks. This meas­ure is to reduce dis­turb­ance pres­sure on the wood to the north to main­tain it as a dis­pers­al cor­ridor for caper­cail­lie. To ensure no impact to the integ­rity of the River Spey SAC, safe­guard­ing the object­ives for Otter, the design is to include fen­cing to main­tain the ripari­an buf­fer recom­men­ded by SEPA for the River Nethy, remov­al of the corner gate and/​or addi­tion of screen­ing to dis­cour­age res­id­ents from walk­ing along the river to the west of the site from the dog exer­cise area.

Annex II — detailed caper­cail­lie effects assess­ment Reas­ons mit­ig­a­tion needed: House­hold­er advice pack/​biod­iversity note: To be sub­mit­ted by the developer and approved by CNPA. To include inform­a­tion on altern­at­ive walk­ing routes e.g. https://​cairngorms​.co​.uk/wp- content/uploads/2020/01/NETHY-BRIDGE-CPL_screen‑1.pdf raise awareness/​encourage dog own­ers of the import­ance of keep­ing dogs on leads dur­ing the caper­cail­lie breed­ing sea­son March – August. expli­cit men­tion of the sens­it­iv­it­ies near The Dell dur­ing breed­ing sea­son so people can make informed decisions. This approach has been cent­ral to the Cairngorms Caper­cail­lie Pro­ject. expli­cit men­tion of the poten­tial func­tion of the wood to the north by dis­pers­ing caper­cail­lie before and after the lekking sea­son in April and encour­age­ment to keep dogs on leads.

Without such mit­ig­a­tion meas­ures, it is pos­sible that the Hab­it­ats Reg­u­la­tions Apprais­al would not be able to con­clude that the pro­pos­al would not have an adverse effect on site integ­rity of the Aber­nethy Forest SPA.

Exist­ing Mit­ig­a­tion for Aber­nethy Forest Some mit­ig­a­tion already exists through sig­nage, ranger patrols and the Lek It Be cam­paign led by the Park Author­ity, how­ever the Lek It Be cam­paign is tar­geted spe­cific­ally at bird­watch­ers, guided groups and pho­to­graph­ers rather than dog walk­ers or moun­tain bikers and is only in place for the most sens­it­ive lekking peri­od (April – May).

Wood north of the site – value/​function to caper­cail­lie Inform­a­tion gathered through the course of com­plet­ing this HRA indic­ates that the wood to the north of the site is unlikely to be used by caper­cail­lie cur­rently, how­ever caper­cail­lie activ­ity is dynam­ic, the extent of the act­ive lek near the Dell in Aber­nethy is increas­ing (last assessed con­di­tion was ​‘favour­able main­tained’). The con­di­tion of the breed­ing caper­cail­lie pop­u­la­tion at Craigmore Wood has been assessed as ​‘unfa­vour­able declin­ing’. Pres­ence and move­ment of caper­cail­lie has changed, increas­ing the sig­ni­fic­ance of this area and it is import­ant to safe­guard any poten­tial dis­pers­al cor­ridor for caper­cail­lie dur­ing Autumn and Spring (time­frames either side of lekking/​nesting/​brood rear­ing). In accord­ance with the Caper­cail­lie frame­work 2015 and giv­en the prox­im­ity to the expand­ing lek at Aber­nethy, the site has

Annex II — detailed caper­cail­lie effects assess­ment the poten­tial to sup­port dis­pers­ing males and females. Aber­nethy Forest area – value/​function to caper­cail­lie Inform­a­tion is provided in Q7. Giv­en the sens­it­iv­ity of the east­ern part of Aber­nethy Fores any addi­tion­al dis­turb­ance from human activ­ity, par­tic­u­larly if accom­pan­ied with dogs, could impact lekking, egg incub­at­ing, and brood rear­ing, pro­du­cing a sig­ni­fic­ant effect on caper­cail­lie pro­ductiv­ity here and for the over­all pop­u­la­tion of caper in Badenoch and Strath­spey. The cur­rent UK pop­u­la­tion is estim­ated to be 532 with B&S hold­ing 85%- nation­al caper­cail­lie sur­vey res­ults 2021/2022). See NatureScot inform­a­tion on dis­turb­ance here and in the Caper­cail­lie Emer­gency Plan here(page 6). Mit­ig­a­tion as pro­posed above would help to reduce effects to a min­im­al level such that recov­ery of caper­cail­lie would not be hindered by the pro­posed development.