Item 5 Appendix 2 HRA 20190051DET

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Agenda Item 5 Appendix 2 16/08/2019

AGENDA ITEM 5

APPENDIX 2

2019/0051/DET

HRA

NATURA APPRAIS­AL PRO­FORMA – UTSI’S BRIDGE 2

SITE DETAILS 1a. Name of Natura site affected & cur­rent status

1. Cairngorms SAC
2. Cairngorms SPA
3. River Spey SAC

1b. Name of com­pon­ent SSSI if relevant

1. Glen­more Forest SSSI
2. The River Spey SAC does not have an SSSI at this location.
3. Allt Mor SSSI

1c. European qual­i­fy­ing interest(s) & wheth­er pri­or­ity/non-pri­or­ity:

1. Cairngorms SAC

European pri­or­ity interests (spe­cies)

• Spe­cies-rich Nar­dus grass­land, on sili­ceous sub­strates in moun­tain areas (and sub­moun­tain areas in con­tin­ent­al Europe)
• Blanket bogs
• Pet­ri­fy­ing springs with tufa form­a­tion (Cratoneur­i­on)
• Alpine pion­eer form­a­tions of the Cari­cion bicoloris-atrofuscae
• Cale­do­ni­an forest
• Bog wood­land

European interests (hab­it­ats)

• Oli­go­troph­ic to meso­troph­ic stand­ing waters with veget­a­tion of the Lit­torel­letea uni­flor­ae and/​or of the Isoëto-Nan­o­jun­cetea
• Nat­ur­al dys­troph­ic lakes and ponds
• North­ern Atlantic wet heaths with Erica tet­ralix
• European dry heaths
• Alpine and Boreal heaths
• Sub-Arc­tic Salix spp. scrub
• Juni­per­us com­munis form­a­tions on heaths or cal­careous grasslands
• Sili­ceous alpine and boreal grasslands
• Semi-nat­ur­al dry grass­lands and scrub­land facies: on cal­careous sub­strates (Fes­tuco-Bro­metalia)
• Hydro­phil­ous tall herb fringe com­munit­ies of plains and of the mont­ane to alpine levels
• Trans­ition mires and quak­ing bogs
• Sili­ceous scree of the mont­ane to snow levels (Androsacetalia alpinae and Galeop­si­etalia ladani)
• Cal­careous rocky slopes with chas­mo­phyt­ic vegetation
• Sili­ceous rocky slopes with chas­mo­phyt­ic vegetation

European interests (spe­cies)

• Lut­ra lut­ra (Otter)

• Buxbaumia virid­is (Green shield moss)

  1. Cairngorms SPA

European non-pri­or­ity interest:

• Scot­tish Crossbill
• Golden Eagle
• Per­eg­rine
• Mer­lin
• Osprey
• Caper­cail­lie
• Dot­ter­el
  1. River Spey SAC

Fresh­wa­ter pearl mus­sel (Mar­gar­i­ti­fera mar­gar­i­ti­fera)

Otter (Lut­ra lut­ra)

Sea lamprey (Pet­romyzon marinus)

Atlantic sal­mon (Salmo salar)

1^d. Con­ser­va­tion object­ives for qual­i­fy­ing interests:

1. Cairngorms SAC

A. ANNEX I HABITATS

To avoid deteri­or­a­tion of the qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­ats thus ensur­ing that the integ­rity of the site is main­tained and the site makes an appro­pri­ate con­tri­bu­tion to achiev­ing favour­able con­ser­va­tion status for the qual­i­fy­ing features.

To ensure for the qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­ats that the fol­low­ing are main­tained in the long term:

• Extent of the hab­it­ats on site
• Dis­tri­bu­tion of the hab­it­ats with­in site
• Struc­ture and func­tion of the habitats
• Pro­cesses sup­port­ing the habitats
• Dis­tri­bu­tion of typ­ic­al spe­cies of the habitats
• Viab­il­ity of typ­ic­al spe­cies as com­pon­ents of the habitats
• No sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance of typ­ic­al spe­cies of the habitats

B. ANNEX II SPECIES

To avoid deteri­or­a­tion of the hab­it­ats of the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies or sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance to the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies, thus ensur­ing that the integ­rity of the

site is main­tained and the site makes an appro­pri­ate con­tri­bu­tion to achiev­ing favour­able con­ser­va­tion status for the qual­i­fy­ing features.

To ensure for the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies that the fol­low­ing are main­tained in the long term:

• Pop­u­la­tion of the spe­cies as a viable com­pon­ent of the site
• Dis­tri­bu­tion of the spe­cies with­in site
• Dis­tri­bu­tion and extent of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing the species
• Struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing the species
• No sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance of the species

1. Cairngorms SPA

To avoid deteri­or­a­tion of the hab­it­ats of the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies or sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance to the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies, thus ensur­ing that the integ­rity of the site is maintained.

To ensure for the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies that the fol­low­ing are main­tained in the long term:

• Pop­u­la­tion of the spe­cies as a viable com­pon­ent of the site
• Dis­tri­bu­tion of the spe­cies with­in site
• Dis­tri­bu­tion and extent of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing the species
• Struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing the species
• No sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance of the species

1. River Spey SAC

To avoid deteri­or­a­tion of the hab­it­ats of the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies (lis­ted below), or sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance to the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies, thus ensur­ing that the integ­rity of the site is main­tained and the site makes an appro­pri­ate con­tri­bu­tion to achiev­ing favour­able con­ser­va­tion status for each of the qual­i­fy­ing fea­tures; and to ensure for the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies that the fol­low­ing are main­tained in the long term:

• Dis­tri­bu­tion of the spe­cies with­in site
• Dis­tri­bu­tion and extent of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing the species
• Struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing the species
• No sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance of the species
• Pop­u­la­tion of the spe­cies, includ­ing range of genet­ic types, as a viable com­pon­ent of the site

Atlantic sal­mon (Salmo salar)

To avoid deteri­or­a­tion of the hab­it­ats of the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies (lis­ted below), or sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance to the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies, thus ensur­ing that the integ­rity of

the site is main­tained and the site makes an appro­pri­ate con­tri­bu­tion to achiev­ing favour­able con­ser­va­tion status for each of the qual­i­fy­ing fea­tures; and to ensure for the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies that the fol­low­ing are main­tained in the long term:

• Dis­tri­bu­tion of the spe­cies with­in site
• Dis­tri­bu­tion and extent of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing the species
• Struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing the species
• No sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance of the species
• Pop­u­la­tion of the spe­cies as viable com­pon­ent of the site

Sea lamprey (Pet­romyzon marinus)

Otter (Lut­ra lut­ra)

To avoid deteri­or­a­tion of the hab­it­ats of the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies (lis­ted below), or sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance to the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies, thus ensur­ing that the integ­rity of the site is main­tained and the site makes an appro­pri­ate con­tri­bu­tion to achiev­ing favour­able con­ser­va­tion status for each of the qual­i­fy­ing fea­tures; and to ensure for the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies that the fol­low­ing are main­tained in the long term:

• Dis­tri­bu­tion of the spe­cies with­in site
• Dis­tri­bu­tion and extent of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing the species
• Struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing the species
• No sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance of the species
• Dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of fresh­wa­ter pearl mus­sel host species
• Struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing fresh­wa­ter pearl mus­sel host species

Fresh­wa­ter pearl mus­sel (Mar­gar­i­ti­fera mar­gar­i­ti­fera)

PRO­POS­AL DETAILS 2a. Pro­pos­al title 2019/00470/FUL — Tem­por­ary replace­ment of bridge slightly down­stream of the cur­rent bridge, at Land 1300M NW of Ranger Base Office, Cairngorm Moun­tain, Glen­more, Aviemore – Utsi’s bridge

2b. Date con­sulta­tion sent: 5 June 2019 2c. Date con­sulta­tion received 5 June 2019 2^d. Name of con­sul­tee High­land Coun­cil, then CNPA 2^e. Name of com­pet­ent author­ity CNPA – called in the plan­ning applic­a­tion 2f. Type of Case: Planning

2g. Details of pro­posed oper­a­tion (inc. loc­a­tion, tim­ing, meth­ods): As described in the sup­port­ing state­ment sub­mit­ted with the plan­ning application:

Utsi’s Bridge is a steel beam and tim­ber decked struc­ture loc­ated at the begin­ning of the Chala­main Gap trail in the Cairngorms Nation­al Park. The cur­rent bridge was built in 1979 to replace a pre­vi­ous struc­ture installed by Mikel Utsi as part of the rein­tro­duc­tion of reindeer to Scot­land. The bridge and sur­round­ing land are now owned by Forestry Com­mis­sion Scot­land and the area is pop­u­lar with walk­ers and tour­ists vis­it­ing the Glen­more area.

The reindeer herd is now well estab­lished, with loc­al tours to vis­it the herd occur­ring twice a day dur­ing the major­ity of the year. On occa­sion, reindeer are taken into the Reindeer Centre at Glen­more as part of the rota­tion of the anim­als and to allow for wel­fare to be managed.

Slightly upstream from the bridge loc­a­tion, the river splits into two chan­nels with an islet in the centre. The main water­course usu­ally travels on the left hand chan­nel with the nar­row­er right hand chan­nel usu­ally only act­ive in the high­er flows of winter and spring. The exist­ing struc­ture is a simple con­struc­tion, involving steel beams which span from stone abut­ments to a cent­ral pier loc­ated on the islet, which are over­decked with tim­ber. The water­course is very act­ive and has scoured much of the islet behind the cent­ral pier.

As a tem­por­ary meas­ure, Forestry Com­mis­sion Scot­land have used gabi­on bas­kets in the past to try and deflect the worst of the flow and give some pro­tec­tion to the pier. The bas­kets are no longer suit­able and the cent­ral pier is now sub­ject to scour from the watercourse.

The access from the pub­lic road to the site is a basic trod­den path that var­ies from around 600mm to 1m wide and which cuts down a steep hill­side. Access for con­struc­tion plant is extremely dif­fi­cult and as such we pro­pose to install two aer­i­al mast type bridges as shown in the accom­pa­ny­ing draw­ings. This type of bridge is sup­plied in light­weight sec­tions that can be car­ried by hand to the loc­a­tion where the struc­ture is to be erec­ted pre­vent­ing the need to build a wider access track that would not be in keep­ing with the sur­round­ing area. Min­im­al plant is required to man­age the con­struc­tion and the exist­ing struc­ture can be cut down into smal­ler sec­tions for removal.

The pro­posed struc­ture has been designed to ensure a deck level well above that of a 1:100 year flood return peri­od for the water­course. Due to con­cerns for the remain­ing lifespan of the cur­rent bridge, Forestry Com­mis­sion Scot­land are keen to install the pro­posed bridging arrange­ments as soon as pos­sible. How­ever, we recog­nise that build­ing a cent­ral sup­port­ing pier will, in time, provide sim­il­ar prob­lems to those cur­rently being exper­i­enced. We are pro­pos­ing to modi­fy the pro­posed struc­ture to intro­duce a cable stayed ele­ment that will sup­port the total span and remove the need for a cent­ral pier. The adap­ted struc­ture is still under design, with our Struc­tur­al Engin­eer col­lab­or­at­ing with the man­u­fac­turer to under­stand how the final struc­ture will look and perform.

Once a fully designed and cer­ti­fied ver­sion is avail­able along with the addi­tion­al fund­ing, we will re- apply for per­mis­sion to amend the pro­posed struc­ture and remove the cent­ral pier. At the time of writ­ing it is unknown how long this will take to achieve and there is con­cern for the cur­rent struc­ture hence this ini­tial pro­pos­al. Kelly McK­el­lar IEng MICE Recre­ation Civil Engin­eer 04/02/2019 Fur­ther inform­a­tion provided in second consultation:

“Utsi’s Bridge Out­line Con­struc­tion Meth­od Statement

The fol­low­ing is an out­line con­struc­tion meth­od state­ment for the install­a­tion of a new struc­ture and remov­al of the exist­ing struc­ture known as Utsi’s Bridge loc­ated at grid ref­er­ence NH 9841 0715 in Glen­more Forest Park.

This meth­od may be sub­ject to minor changes fol­low­ing appoint­ment of a suit­able Con­tract­or to under­take the works. Once a Con­tract­or has been appoin­ted, the updated Con­struc­tion Meth­od State­ment and Pro­gramme can be passed to Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity (CNPA) for approv­al pri­or to works com­men­cing on site.

Envir­on­ment Pre-con­struc­tion envir­on­ment­al checks are to be car­ried out pri­or to com­mence­ment of con­struc­tion in the area by the loc­al Forestry and Land Scot­land (FLS) Envir­on­ment­al Forester.

Any recom­mend­a­tions will be strictly adhered to. A copy of the report will be sent to CNPA for inform­a­tion pri­or to works com­men­cing on site.

The FLS Envir­on­ment For­est­er has already imposed day­light work­ing hours only to mit­ig­ate dis­turb­ance to mam­mals and birds.

Pol­lu­tion Con­trol Anti-pol­lu­tion booms and anti-silt booms will be placed across the water­course and anchored to the bank using tim­ber pegs. Debris/​silt net­ting will be place across the front face of each abut­ment pos­i­tion and extend bey­ond by min­im­um 2m either side. All silt and pol­lu­tion pro­tec­tion will be mon­itored for the dur­a­tion of the works and removed on com­ple­tion. All plant required will have a suit­able spill kit and refuel­ing will take place at least 25m away from any water­course or tributary/​drain etc.

An action plan for fuel spillage will be required by the Employ­er and sup­plied to CNPA for agree­ment pri­or to works being car­ried out.

Plant Plant is anti­cip­ated to be mainly hand tools with a pos­sib­il­ity of micro excav­at­ors and power bar­rows depend­ent of an approved Con­tract­ors meth­od. It is anti­cip­ated that heli­copters will be used to trans­port the main sec­tions of the new struc­ture and tonne bags of stone for the gabi­on bas­kets into the site and to remove the redund­ant bridge on com­ple­tion. Use of heli­copters would involve around 6 – 8 fly­ing hours spread out over the 2 – 3 week con­struc­tion peri­od and would rep­res­ent min­im­al dis­turb­ance to the loc­al wildlife.

To fur­ther mit­ig­ate this, con­struc­tion of the bridge will be restric­ted to a peri­od between Septem­ber and Feb­ru­ary (likely September/​October) and not dur­ing the early sum­mer months as pre­vi­ously stated.

The Con­tract­or will also be respons­ible for man­aging mem­bers of the pub­lic and mar­shalling the area dur­ing each flight with a team respons­ible for coordin­at­ing each lift.

Man­aging the Site Once an approved Con­tract­or has been appoin­ted, the site will be marked and an exclu­sion zone estab­lished to pro­tect mem­bers of the pub­lic and to indic­ate the bound­ary of the work site. Advanced warn­ing signs will be dis­played around the area and in loc­al car parks and on the FLS website.

Install­a­tion of new struc­ture The foot­ings of the new bridge will be excav­ated. The excav­ated mater­i­al will be set aside loc­ally for use in back­filling around the new abut­ments and in rein­stat­ing the old abut­ments when removed. A lay­er of sub-base will be laid fol­lowed by the first lay­er of gabi­on bas­kets. The bas­kets will be filled in a way which min­im­izes voids. Sub­sequent course of bas­kets to be laid with gal­van­ized hold­ing down plate installed before final course as per the Con­struc­tion Draw­ings. Back­fill around the base to exist­ing ground level.

Assembly of bridge trusses in car park and then lif­ted to site via heli­copter. Trusses can then be placed straight on to abut­ments and fixed to hold­ing down plates.

Access steps to be installed and tim­ber deck and rail­ings installed. End plates fixed and then struc­ture securely bolted to tim­ber sleepers.

Short length of new path to be pre­pares and 100mm thick lay­er of Type 1 mater­i­al placed and com­pacted fol­lowed by a 50mm lay­er of 20mm to dust mater­i­al. This should match the exist­ing path in colour.

FLS Bridge Engin­eer to attend site and sign off new struc­ture before remov­al begins.

Remov­al of exist­ing struc­ture Divert mem­bers of the pub­lic to use new struc­ture. Re-define the site area and move temporary

fen­cing as necessary.

Begin by remov­ing any loose mater­i­al or com­pon­ents from the struc­ture. Work­ing from one side, tim­ber hand­rails and deck to be removed and bundled for heli­copter lift to car park.

Hard con­nec­tions to be broken and lon­git­ud­in­al steel lif­ted via heli­copter to car park.

Pier broken up using sledge­ham­mer and pieces decan­ted into one tonne bags for fly­ing off site. Gabi­on bas­kets removed. Stone spread loc­ally if CNPA approve.

Mater­i­als broken down and removed off site to skip. Con­tract­or will need to sup­ply FLS with waste trans­fer cer­ti­fic­ates before final pay­ment is released.

Old path grubbed up and any arisings spread loc­ally in a neat and tidy man­ner or removed off site.”

Kelly McK­el­lar IEng MICE Recre­ation Civil Engin­eer 22/5/19

APPRAIS­AL IN RELA­TION TO REG­U­LA­TION 48 3a. Is the oper­a­tion dir­ectly con­nec­ted with or neces­sary to con­ser­va­tion man­age­ment of the site?

No

3b. Is the oper­a­tion likely to have a sig­ni­fic­ant effect on the qual­i­fy­ing interest? Con­sider each qual­i­fy­ing interest in rela­tion to the con­ser­va­tion object­ives. Some of the fol­low­ing boxes include sum­mar­ies of guid­ance rel­ev­ant to that stage. Once con­sidered the text should be deleted as it is not part of the audit trail.

Sev­er­al key hab­it­ats and spe­cies are present, and should be con­sidered fur­ther. See below.

Cairngorm SPA Scot­tish cross­bill (Lox­ia scot­ica) — present in this area but not likely to be affected by the pro­posed works because they feed in the Scots pine trees and are mobile, so can eas­ily avoid dis­turb­ance. The path is already used, so already dis­turbed by people. Heli­copter use will dis­turb them. Dot­ter­el (Charad­ri­us mor­inel­lus) — not present at this loc­a­tion. Golden eagle (Aquila chry­sae­tos) — may fly over this loc­a­tion but not likely to be affected by the pro­posed works. Heli­copters pose a risk to golden eagle so there is a likely sig­ni­fic­ant effect. Per­eg­rine (Falco per­eg­rinus) — may fly over this loc­a­tion but not likely to be affected by the pro­posed works. Heli­copters pose a risk to per­eg­rine fal­con, so there is a likely sig­ni­fic­ant effect. Osprey (Pan­di­on hali­aetus) — not likely to be present, river too small to fish in. Mer­lin (Falco colum­bari­us) — not likely to be present — hab­it­at here is wood­land not open heath pre­ferred by mer­lin. Caper­cail­lie (Tet­rao urogal­lus) — likely to be present.

River Spey SAC Sea lamprey (Pet­romyzon marinus) — not likely to be present this high in the catch­ment. Otter (Lut­ra lut­ra) — likely to be present and to hunt along the river. Atlantic sal­mon (Salmo salar) — could be present but high in the catch­ment. Fresh­wa­ter pearl mus­sel (Mar­gar­i­ti­fera mar­gar­i­ti­fera) — not likely to be present at this loc­a­tion — too high and hab­it­at not suitable.

Cairngorms SAC Clear-water lakes or lochs with aquat­ic veget­a­tion and poor to mod­er­ate nutri­ent levels — not present at this loc­a­tion. High-alti­tude plant com­munit­ies asso­ci­ated with areas of water seep­age (Pri­or­ity) — not present at this loc­a­tion. Plants in crevices on acid rocks- not present at this location.

Dry grass­lands and scrub­lands on chalk or lime­stone- not present at this loc­a­tion. Acid peat-stained lakes and ponds- not present at this loc­a­tion. Blanket bog (Pri­or­ity)- not present at this loc­a­tion. Very wet mires often iden­ti­fied by an unstable ​‘quak­ing’ sur­face- not present at this loc­a­tion. Hard-water springs depos­it­ing lime (Pri­or­ity)- not present at this loc­a­tion. Moun­tain wil­low scrub- not present at this loc­a­tion. Mont­ane acid grass­lands- not present at this loc­a­tion. Alpine and sub­alpine heaths- not present at this loc­a­tion. Acid­ic scree- not present at this loc­a­tion. Tall herb com­munit­ies- not present at this loc­a­tion. Plants in crevices on base-rich rocks- not present at this loc­a­tion. Wet heath­land with cross-leaved heath- not present at this loc­a­tion. Dry heaths- not present at this loc­a­tion. Spe­cies-rich grass­land with mat-grass in upland areas (Pri­or­ity) — not present at this loc­a­tion. Cale­do­ni­an forest (Pri­or­ity) — present at this loc­a­tion Bog wood­land (Pri­or­ity) — not present at this loc­a­tion. Juni­per on heaths or cal­careous grass­lands- not present at this loc­a­tion. Green shield-moss (Buxbaumia virid­is) ‑not present at this loc­a­tion. Otter (Lut­ra lut­ra) — likely to be present.

Con­clu­sion Likely sig­ni­fic­ant effect on caper­cail­lie and Scot­tish cross­bill (Cairngorms SPA), otter (Cairngorms SAC and River Spey SAC), sal­mon (River Spey SAC), Cale­do­ni­an Forest and green shield-moss (Cairngorms SAC), if present at this location.

3c. Apprais­al of the implic­a­tions for the site in view of the site’s con­ser­va­tion objectives.

We note that the pro­pos­al is to replace an exist­ing bridge, but at a slightly dif­fer­ent loc­a­tion, down­stream of the exist­ing bridge. They intend to use heli­copters to trans­port the main sec­tions of the new struc­ture and tonne bags of stone for the gabi­on bas­kets, and to remove the redund­ant bridge on com­ple­tion. Use of heli­copters would involve around 6 – 8 fly­ing hours spread out over the 2 – 3 week con­struc­tion peri­od. Con­struc­tion of the bridge will be restric­ted to a peri­od between Septem­ber and Feb­ru­ary (likely September/​October).

They also intend to scat­ter the exist­ing stone in the area around the bridge.

Cairngorm SPA Caper­cail­lie (Tet­rao urogal­lus) — likely to be present in the gen­er­al area, but not at this loc­a­tion very often because of exist­ing dis­turb­ance from people using the path. Con­struc­tion the new bridge would cause very sig­ni­fic­ant addi­tion­al dis­turb­ance where heli­copters are used. Although this would unques­tion­ably be dis­turb­ing, it is con­cluded that there would be no impact on any of the con­ser­va­tion object­ives because there would be no loss of Scots pine hab­it­at, or effects on the struc­ture or func­tion of the pine wood, and dis­turb­ance small scale and tem­por­ary. The fact that the works are planned for Septem­ber – Octo­ber is help­ful because young caper­cail­lie will be fly­ing and feed­ing them­selves, but the hard winter weath­er would not have star­ted. Con­clude no likely impact on integ­rity for capercaillie.

Golden eagle (Aquila chry­sae­tos) the tim­ing of the works for winter would elim­in­ate the risk of dis­turb­ance of birds at or near the nest. Adult birds could avoid a heli­copter if they wish to do so. It is con­cluded that there would be no impact on the integ­rity of the site for golden eagle.

Per­eg­rine (Falco per­eg­rinus) as with golden eagle, the tim­ing of the works avoids any risk of impacts on the nest. It is con­cluded that there would be no impact on the integ­rity of the sites for per­eg­rine falcon.

River Spey SAC Otter (Lut­ra lut­ra) — likely to be present and to hunt along the river. Otter are robust and can be tol­er­ant of dis­turb­ance. In this case because the addi­tion­al dis­turb­ance would be small scale and tem­por­ary, they would avoid the area while the bridge was being built. There would be no impact on

prey avail­ab­il­ity or the otters’ abil­ity to move around the catch­ment. Con­clude no likely impact on integ­rity for otter.

Atlantic sal­mon (Salmo salar) — could be present but high in the catch­ment. The water course itself would not be impacted by the pro­posed works, which are all on dry land. Duncan Fer­guson of the Spey Fish­ery Board has advised that there would be no impact on sal­mon. Spread­ing the stone may res­ult in some stone in the water course, but this has been on site for a num­ber of years and the intro­duc­tion of a small amount of stone is unlikely to have any meas­ur­able effect on the hab­it­at. Con­clude no impact on the integ­rity of the site for salmon.

Cairngorms SAC Cale­do­ni­an forest (Pri­or­ity) — present at this loc­a­tion. This is the hab­it­at around the bridge, and import­ant both for its own sake and also as a hab­it­at for caper­cail­lie and Scot­tish cross­bill. There would be no felling of trees and the replace­ment bridge is slightly down­stream of the exist­ing one, so very little addi­tion­al path works to link it to the path. The wood­land would still func­tion as it does at the moment, and there would be no impact on any of the oth­er con­ser­va­tion object­ives. Con­clude no impact on the integ­rity of the site for Cale­do­ni­an forest.

Otter (Lut­ra lut­ra) — likely to be present but already assessed above and con­cluded no impact on the integ­rity of the site for otter.

Green shield moss this spe­cies is not known from this loc­a­tion. The bridge is extremely unlikely to impact on this spe­cies as it is very unlikely to be present, but to be cer­tain, a recom­mend­a­tion will be made to sur­vey for this spe­cies pri­or to con­struc­tion of the bridge or link­ing path.

Con­clu­sion No impact on the integ­rity of any of the Natura sites.

1. Con­di­tions or modi­fic­a­tions required.

Con­di­tion: That sur­vey should be car­ried out Reas­on: To be cer­tain that there is no impact on for green shield moss and otter and if found, either of these spe­cies. that loc­a­tion should be avoided.

1. Advice sought.

Duncan Fer­guson, Spey Fish­ery Board, on impacts on Atlantic salmon.

1. RESPONSE a) Natura Com­ments Likely sig­ni­fic­ant effect but no adverse effect on site integ­rity. b) SNH Com­ments For SNH advice to oth­er author­it­ies: No objec­tion to plan­ning applic­a­tion. For SNH response to request for opin­ion on effects of per­mit­ted devel­op­ment: For SNH response to applic­a­tion for consent/​licence:

Appraised by Anne Elli­ott Date 20 June 2019 Checked by Date

SSSI The area is also SSSI for the fol­low­ing fea­tures which are included here to record the decisions made. This is not part of the Natura assessment.

Allt Mor SSSI — Flu­vi­al geo­mor­pho­logy of Scot­land It is import­ant that the new bridge does not inter­fere with the nat­ur­al func­tion­ing of the river. It would involve the con­struc­tion of a cent­ral pier in the short term, but this would be removed when the bridge is updated. There would be no addi­tion­al inter­fer­ence in the func­tion­ing of the river over and above the cur­rent situ­ation. Con­clude no impact.

Glen­more Forest SSSI — Qua­tern­ary geo­logy and geo­mor­pho­logy: Qua­tern­ary of Scot­land see above. Bio­lo­gic­al Birds: Caper­cail­lie Tet­rao urogal­lus — see above. Birds: Scot­tish cross­bill Lox­ia scot­ica — see above Inver­teb­rates: Nar­row-headed ant Formica exsecta — add a con­di­tion to sur­vey for wood ants includ­ing this spe­cies before the bridge is built. If any nests are found they should be avoided or moved. Vas­cu­lar plants: Vas­cu­lar plant assemblage — not sens­it­ive at this loc­a­tion. Wood­lands: Nat­ive pine­wood — see above