Item 5 Appendix 2 - HRA 20250010DET River Dee

Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity Ugh­dar­ras Pairc Nàiseanta a’ Mhon­aidh Ruaidh Item 5 Appendix 2 27 June 2025 Page 1 of 25

Agenda item 5

Appendix 2

2025/0010/DET

Hab­it­ats reg­u­la­tions appraisal

HAB­IT­ATS REG­U­LA­TIONS APPRAISAL

Plan­ning ref­er­ence and pro­pos­al information	2025/0010/DET
	Upper Dee River and flood­plain restoration.
Appraised by	Scott Shanks, Eco­lo­gic­al Advice Officer (Plan­ning)
Date	27/05/2025
Checked by	Gav­in Shaw, NatureScot Oper­a­tions Officer (North)
Date	04 June 2025

page 1 of 24

INFORM­A­TION

European site details
Name of European site(s) poten­tially affected
1) River Dee SAC
2) Bal­loch­buie SAC
3) Cairngorms SAC
4) Cairngorms SPA
Ele­ments of the pro­posed devel­op­ment are with­in 150m of the Cairngorms Mas­sif SPA, which is des­ig­nated for golden eagle. How­ever, the hab­it­ats present with­in the devel­op­ment site are unsuit­able for golden eagle (advice from Rap­tor Con­ser­va­tion Officer, Isla Gra­ham), and so this site has been scoped out.
Ele­ments of the pro­posed devel­op­ment are with­in 150m of Mor­rone Birk­wood SAC which is des­ig­nated for base-rich fens, alpine and sub­alpine heaths, high-alti­tude plant com­munit­ies asso­ci­ated with areas of water seep­age, juni­per on heaths or cal­careous grass­lands, hard-water springs depos­it­ing lime, dry grass­lands and scrub­lands on chalk or lime­stone, and Greyer’s whorl snail. How­ever, it is con­sidered that there is no con­nectiv­ity between the qual­i­fy­ing fea­tures of the SAC and the pro­ject site, and so this site has been scoped out.
Ele­ments of the pro­posed devel­op­ment are with­in 3.8km of the Bal­loch­buie SPA, which is des­ig­nated for caper­cail­lie and com­mon cross­bill. How­ever, it is con­sidered that there is no con­nectiv­ity between the qual­i­fy­ing fea­tures of this SAC and the pro­ject site, and so this site has been scoped out.
Qual­i­fy­ing interest(s)
1) River Dee SAC
Otter
Atlantic sal­mon
2) Bal­loch­buie SAC
Blanket bog
Bog wood­land
Plants in crevices on base-rich rocks
Cale­do­ni­an forest
Dry heaths
Otter
Wet heath­land with cross-leaved heath

page 2 of 24

| Plants in crevices on acid rocks | | 3) Cairngorms SAC | | Alpine and sub­alpine heaths | | High-alti­tude plant com­munit­ies asso­ci­ated with areas of water seep­age | | Blanket bog | | Bog wood­land | | Green shield-moss | | Plants in crevices on base-rich rocks | | Cale­do­ni­an forest | | Dry heaths | | Tall herb com­munit­ies | | Juni­per on heaths of cal­careous grass­lands | | Otter | | Acid peat-stained lakes and ponds | | Wet heath­land with cross-leaved heath | | Clear-water lakes or lochs with aquat­ic veget­a­tion and poor to mod­er­ate nutri­ent levels | | Hard-water springs depos­it­ing lime | | Dry grass­lands and scrub­lands on chalk or lime­stone | | Mont­ane acid grass­lands | | Plants in crevices on acid rocks | | Acid­ic scree | | Spe­cies-rich grass­lands with mat-grass in upland areas | | Moun­tain wil­low scrub | | Very wet mires often iden­ti­fied by an unstable ​‘quak­ing’ sur­face | | 4) Cairngorms SPA | | Caper­cail­lie | | Dot­ter­el | | Golden eagle | | Mer­lin | | Osprey | | Peregrine |

page 3 of 24

| Scot­tish cross­bill | | Con­ser­va­tion object­ives for qual­i­fy­ing interests | | 1) River Dee SAC | | Con­ser­va­tion Object­ive 2. To ensure that the integ­rity of River Dee SAC is restored by meet­ing object­ives 2a, 2b and 2c for each qual­i­fy­ing fea­tures (and 2^d for | | 2b. Restore the dis­tri­bu­tion of Atlantic sal­mon through­out the site | | 2c. Restore the hab­it­ats sup­port­ing Atlantic sal­mon with­in the site and avail­ab­il­ity of food | | 2a. Restore the pop­u­la­tion of Atlantic sal­mon, includ­ing range of genet­ic types, as a viable com­pon­ent of the site | | 2b. Main­tain the dis­tri­bu­tion of otter through­out the site | | 2c. Main­tain the hab­it­ats sup­port­ing otter with­in the site and avail­ab­il­ity of food | | 2a. Main­tain the pop­u­la­tion of otter as a viable com­pon­ent of the site | | Con­ser­va­tion Object­ive I. To ensure that the qual­i­fy­ing fea­tures of the River Dee SAC are in favour­able con­di­tion and make an appro­pri­ate con­tri­bu­tion to achiev­ing favour­able con­ser­va­tion status | | 2) Bal­loch­buie SAC | | Con­ser­va­tion Object­ives for Bal­loch­buie Spe­cial Area of Con­ser­va­tion | | To avoid deteri­or­a­tion of the qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­ats (see above) 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 hab­it­ats that the fol­low­ing are main­tained in the long term: | | ‑Extent of the hab­it­at on site | | ‑Dis­tri­bu­tion of the hab­it­at with­in site | | ‑Struc­ture and func­tion of the hab­it­at | | ‑Pro­cesses sup­port­ing the hab­it­at | | ‑Dis­tri­bu­tion of typ­ic­al spe­cies of the hab­it­at | | ‑Viab­il­ity of typ­ic­al spe­cies as com­pon­ents of the hab­it­at | | ‑No sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance of typ­ic­al spe­cies of the habitat |

page 4 of 24

| AND | | To avoid deteri­or­a­tion of the hab­it­ats of the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies (otter) 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: | | ‑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 | | 3) Cairngorms SAC | | Con­ser­va­tion Object­ive 2. To ensure that the integ­rity of Cairngorms SAC is restored by meet­ing object­ives 2a, 2b and 2c for each qual­i­fy­ing fea­ture. | | 2a. Main­tain the extent and dis­tri­bu­tion of Clear-water lakes or lochs with aquat­ic veget­a­tion and poor to mod­er­ate nutri­ent levels with­in the site | | 2b. Main­tain the struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of the Clear-water lakes or lochs with aquat­ic veget­a­tion and poor to mod­er­ate nutri­ent levels | | 2c. Main­tain the dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of typ­ic­al spe­cies of the Clear-water lakes or lochs with aquat­ic veget­a­tion and poor to mod­er­ate nutri­ent levels | | 2a. Main­tain the extent and dis­tri­bu­tion of Acid peat-stained lakes and ponds with­in the site | | 2b. Main­tain the struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of Acid peat-stained lakes and ponds | | 2c. Main­tain the dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of typ­ic­al spe­cies of Acid peat-stained lakes and ponds | | 2a. Main­tain the extent and dis­tri­bu­tion of Wet heath­land with cross-leaved heath with­in the site | | 2b. Main­tain the struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of Wet heath­land with cross-leaved heath | | 2c. Main­tain the dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of typ­ic­al spe­cies of Wet heath­land with cross-leaved heath | | 2a. Main­tain the extent and dis­tri­bu­tion of European dry heaths with­in the site | | 2b. Main­tain the struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of European dry heaths |

page 5 of 24

| 2c. Main­tain the dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of typ­ic­al spe­cies of European dry heaths | | 2a. Main­tain the extent and dis­tri­bu­tion of Alpine and Boreal heaths with­in the site | | 2b. Main­tain the struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of the Alpine and Boreal heath | | 2c. Main­tain the dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of typ­ic­al spe­cies of the Alpine and boreal heath | | 2a. Restore the extent and dis­tri­bu­tion of Moun­tain wil­low scrub with­in the site | | 2b. Restore the struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of Moun­tain wil­low scrub | | 2c. Restore the dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of typ­ic­al spe­cies of Moun­tain wil­low scrub | | 2a. Main­tain the extent and dis­tri­bu­tion of Juni­per on heaths or cal­careous grass­lands with­in the site. | | 2b. Main­tain the struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of Juni­per on heaths or cal­careous grass­lands | | 2c. Main­tain the dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of typ­ic­al spe­cies of Juni­per on heaths or cal­careous grass­lands | | 2a. Main­tain the extent and dis­tri­bu­tion of Mont­ane acid grass­lands with­in the site. | | 2b. Main­tain the struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of Mont­ane acid grass­lands | | 2c. Main­tain the dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of typ­ic­al spe­cies of Mont­ane acid grass­lands | | 2a. Main­tain the extent and dis­tri­bu­tion of Dry grass­lands and scrub­lands on chalk or lime­stone with­in the site. | | 2b. Restore the struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of Dry grass­lands and scrub­lands on chalk or lime­stone. | | 2c. Main­tain the dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of typ­ic­al spe­cies of Dry grass­lands and scrub­lands on chalk or lime­stone | | 2a. Main­tain the extent and dis­tri­bu­tion of Spe­cies-rich grass­lands with mat-grass in upland areas with­in the site | | 2b. Restore, the struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of Spe­cies-rich grass­lands with mat-grass in upland areas | | 2c. Restore the dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of typ­ic­al spe­cies of Spe­cies-rich grass­lands with mat-grass in upland areas |

page 6 of 24

| 2a. Main­tain the extent and dis­tri­bu­tion of Tall herb com­munit­ies with­in the site | | 2b. Main­tain the struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of Tall herb com­munit­ies | | 2c. Main­tain the dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of typ­ic­al spe­cies of Tall herb com­munit­ies | | 2a. Main­tain the extent and dis­tri­bu­tion of Blanket bog with­in the site | | 2b. Restore the struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of Blanket bog | | 2c. Restore the dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of typ­ic­al spe­cies of Blanket bog | | 2a. Main­tain the extent and dis­tri­bu­tion of Very wet mires often iden­ti­fied by an unstable ​‘quak­ing’ sur­face with­in the site | | 2b. Main­tain the struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of Very wet mires often iden­ti­fied by an unstable ​‘quak­ing’ sur­face | | 2c. Main­tain the dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of typ­ic­al spe­cies of Very wet mires often iden­ti­fied by an unstable ​‘quak­ing’ sur­face | | 2a. Main­tain the extent and dis­tri­bu­tion of Hard water springs depos­it­ing lime with­in the site | | 2b. Main­tain the struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of Hard water springs depos­it­ing lime | | 2c. Main­tain the dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of typ­ic­al spe­cies of Hard water springs depos­it­ing lime | | 2a. Main­tain the extent and dis­tri­bu­tion of High alti­tude plant com­munit­ies asso­ci­ated with water seep­age with­in the site | | 2b. Main­tain the struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of High alti­tude plant com­munit­ies asso­ci­ated with water seep­age | | 2c. Main­tain the dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of typ­ic­al spe­cies of High alti­tude plant com­munit­ies asso­ci­ated with water seep­age | | 2a. Main­tain the extent and dis­tri­bu­tion of Acid­ic scree with­in the site | | 2b. Main­tain the struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of Acid­ic scree | | 2c. Main­tain the dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of typ­ic­al spe­cies of Acid­ic scree | | 2a. Main­tain the extent and dis­tri­bu­tion of Plants in crevices on acid rocks with­in the site | | 2b. Main­tain the struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of Plants in crevices on acid |

page 7 of 24

| rocks | | 2c. Main­tain the dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of typ­ic­al spe­cies of Plants in crevices on acid rocks | | 2a. Main­tain the extent and dis­tri­bu­tion of Plants in crevices on base-rich rocks with­in the site | | 2b. Restore the struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of Plants in crevices on base-rich rocks | | 2c. Restore the dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of typ­ic­al spe­cies of Plants in crevices on base-rich rocks | | 2a. Restore the extent and dis­tri­bu­tion of Cale­do­ni­an forests with­in the site | | 2b. Restore the struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of Cale­do­ni­an forests | | 2c. Restore the dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of typ­ic­al spe­cies of Cale­do­ni­an forests | | 2a. Main­tain the extent and dis­tri­bu­tion of Bog wood­land with­in the site | | 2b. Main­tain the struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of Bog wood­land | | 2c. Main­tain the dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of typ­ic­al spe­cies of Bog wood­land | | 2b. Main­tain the dis­tri­bu­tion of otter through­out the site | | 2c. Main­tain the hab­it­ats sup­port­ing otter with­in the site and avail­ab­il­ity of food | | 2a. Restore the pop­u­la­tion of otter as a viable com­pon­ent of the site | | 2b. Main­tain the dis­tri­bu­tion of Green shield-moss through­out the site | | 2c. Main­tain the hab­it­ats sup­port­ing Green shield-moss with­in the site | | 2a. Main­tain the pop­u­la­tion of Green shield-moss as a viable com­pon­ent of the site | | Con­ser­va­tion Object­ive I. To ensure that the qual­i­fy­ing fea­tures of Cairngorms SAC are in favour­able con­di­tion and make an appro­pri­ate con­tri­bu­tion to achiev­ing favour­able con­ser­va­tion status. | | 4) Cairngorms SPA | | To avoid deteri­or­a­tion of the hab­it­ats of the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies (caper­cail­lie, dot­ter­el, golden eagle, mer­lin, osprey, per­eg­rine, and Scot­tish cross­bill) or sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance to the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies, thus ensur­ing that the integ­rity of the site is main­tained; | | AND |

page 8 of 24

| 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 |

page 9 of 24

APPRAIS­AL

STAGE 1:
What is the plan or project?
Rel­ev­ant sum­mary details of pro­pos­al (includ­ing loc­a­tion, tim­ing, meth­ods, etc)
Pro­posed Upper Dee and flood­plain res­tor­a­tion at the River Dee from NO 1446 9203 up to the con­flu­ence with the Quoi­ch Water at NO 1226 9068, and part of its asso­ci­ated north bank flood­plain, the Allan flood­plain. The pro­pos­als cov­er­ing approx­im­ately 10.5 hec­tares, include remov­al of embank­ment and hard bank pro­tec­tion, wet­land enhance­ment, ripari­an tree plant­ing and addi­tion of wood in the river and on the flood­plain. These meas­ures will aim to restore nat­ur­al river pro­cesses, rein­state channel/​floodplain con­nectiv­ity and improve the qual­ity of riv­er­ine and flood­plain hab­it­at at the land­scape scale.
STAGE 2:
Is the plan or pro­ject dir­ectly con­nec­ted with or neces­sary for the man­age­ment of the European site for nature conservation?
1) River Dee SAC
Yes,
i) Has the effect on all qual­i­fy­ing interests been considered?
Yes. Atlantic sal­mon, and otter, the qual­i­fy­ing interests (QIs) of the River Dee SAC, have been con­sidered dur­ing the devel­op­ment of this river res­tor­a­tion and hab­it­at improve­ment pro­pos­al. Exist­ing hab­it­at con­di­tion, and the dis­tri­bu­tion and extents of the Qls, as well as their con­ser­va­tion object­ives were used to inform the res­tor­a­tion design and pro­posed con­struc­tion works (i.e. meth­od­o­logy and tim­ing) to mit­ig­ate against impacts on these spe­cies. The poten­tial impacts, design and mit­ig­a­tion meas­ures under­taken and resid­ual impacts on the Qls are fur­ther dis­cussed in Stage 4.
ii) Is the pro­pos­al part of a fully assessed and agreed man­age­ment plan
Yes, this pro­pos­al forms part of the Cairngorms 2030 Pro­gramme led by the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity, and help­ing to deliv­er the object­ives of the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Part­ner­ship Plan 2022 – 2027 actions for fresh­wa­ter sys­tems, eco­lo­gic­al res­tor­a­tion and spe­cies recov­ery (Cairngorms Nation­al Park Part­ner­ship Plan 2022 – 27 — Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity). The pro­gramme aims to restore func­tion­ing flood­plains and enhanced wet­lands that will assist flood man­age­ment and deliv­er hab­it­at improve­ments, as well as tar­get­ing action for the recov­ery of CNPA pri­or­ity species.
iii) Is there a clear rationale to jus­ti­fy the con­nec­tion with the con­ser­va­tion objectives?
Yes. The con­ser­va­tion object­ives for Atlantic sal­mon, and otter seek to improve the pop­u­la­tion, dis­tri­bu­tion, and avail­ab­il­ity of sup­port­ing hab­it­ats for these protected

page 10 of 24

| spe­cies. The pro­ject design fea­tures are pro­posed primar­ily to remove his­tor­ic embank­ments and bank armour pro­tec­tion (installed from the 1700s onwards) and will restore nat­ur­al dynam­ism of the river sys­tem, which will help to improve and diver­si­fy hab­it­ats present for sal­mon and oth­er spe­cies along this stretch of the River Dee. The pro­pos­al aims to bet­ter con­nect the river to its flood­plain which will improve the qual­ity of hab­it­ats with­in the river and on the flood­plain. Improv­ing in-river hab­it­at for Atlantic sal­mon, which is a host spe­cies for the flood­plain wet­land hab­it­ats will bene­fit for­aging otter as well as waders and oth­er spe­cies. | | iv) If there is a clear rationale to jus­ti­fy the con­nec­tion with the con­ser­va­tion object­ives, will any bene­fits arising from the pro­pos­al out­weigh any neg­at­ive impacts? | | Yes. Steps have been taken dur­ing the scop­ing and design devel­op­ment to mit­ig­ate against impacts to either of this SAC’s qual­i­fy­ing interests. As noted in the response at 2ii) the pro­posed river and flood­plain res­tor­a­tion works along the Upper Dee River have the poten­tial to improve hab­it­at pro­vi­sion and diversity for all Qls, con­trib­ut­ing towards improv­ing the con­di­tion of the des­ig­nated site. The design and con­struc­tion meth­od­o­logy have been developed with mit­ig­a­tion meas­ures in place (see Design Meth­od State­ment and Spe­cies Pro­tec­tion Plan) to lim­it neg­at­ive impacts on the Qls. These mit­ig­a­tion meas­ures and resid­ual risk will be dis­cussed fur­ther in Stage 4. Con­struc­tion super­vi­sion is to be under­taken by a mem­ber of the river res­tor­a­tion design team and an exper­i­enced aquat­ic Eco­lo­gic­al Clerk of Works will be on site dur­ing con­struc­tion to ensure that the con­struc­tion is under­taken with sens­it­iv­ity to the Qls. | | v) Have any altern­at­ive meth­ods of imple­ment­ing the pro­pos­al been explored, includ­ing build­ing in any rel­ev­ant mit­ig­a­tion, to demon­strate that this is a the least dam­aging option? | | Yes. Dur­ing both the design devel­op­ment and con­struc­tion plan­ning stages. The Plan­ning Design and Access State­ment out­lines two design options that were assessed. Mit­ig­a­tion meas­ures includ­ing silt and fine sed­i­ment man­age­ment meas­ures have been con­sidered in Design Con­struc­tion State­ment. These mit­ig­a­tion meas­ures must be employed dur­ing con­struc­tion to pre­vent this mater­i­al from being mobil­ised into the chan­nel. | | vi) Give a Yes/​No con­clu­sion in terms of wheth­er the plan or pro­ject is con­sidered to dir­ectly con­nect with or neces­sary to site man­age­ment for nature con­ser­va­tion. | | Yes. The pro­ject site is covered by the River Dee SAC des­ig­na­tion. There­fore, river |

page 11 of 24

| res­tor­a­tion work along this sec­tion of the River Dee will dir­ectly impact the SAC. How­ever, the pro­pos­al aims to rein­state nat­ur­al dynam­ic pro­cesses along the water­course, enhance hab­it­at pro­vi­sion and diversity both in the river and the flood­plain, as well as con­trib­ut­ing to nat­ur­al flood risk man­age­ment and improv­ing cli­mate change resi­li­ence. There­fore, it is deemed that this river res­tor­a­tion work is neces­sary for nature con­ser­va­tion and should improve suit­able hab­it­at diversity and poten­tially increase dis­tri­bu­tion of Atlantic sal­mon, and otter with­in the site. | | 2) Bal­loch­buie SAC | | No, this pro­ject is not dir­ectly con­nec­ted with or neces­sary for the man­age­ment of the European site for nature con­ser­va­tion | | 3) Cairngorms SAC | | No, this pro­ject is not dir­ectly con­nec­ted with or neces­sary for the man­age­ment of the European site for nature con­ser­va­tion | | 4) Cairngorms SPA | | No, this pro­ject is not dir­ectly con­nec­ted with or neces­sary for the man­age­ment of the European site for nature con­ser­va­tion | | STAGE 3: | | Is the plan or pro­ject (either alone or in-com­bin­a­tion with oth­er plans or pro­jects) likely to have a sig­ni­fic­ant effect on the site(s)? | | 1) River Dee SAC | | Atlantic sal­mon: Yes, there will be a LSE from short term effects arising dur­ing con­struc­tion activ­ity includ­ing dis­turb­ance of exist­ing hab­it­at with­in the River Dee through release of sed­i­ment mobil­ised from banks and river­bed dur­ing install­a­tion of large woody struc­tures that could smoth­er Atlantic sal­mon spawn­ing gravels down­stream of the site, pol­lu­tion from con­struc­tion activ­ity such as fuel spills and dis­turb­ance dur­ing spawn­ing peri­ods. There could be post-con­struc­tion impacts from improved nat­ur­al dynam­ism of the river sys­tem and improved hab­it­at for Atlantic sal­mon. | | Otter: Yes, there will be a LSE from short term effects arising dur­ing con­struc­tion activ­ity. There could be long term impacts through improved nat­ur­al­isa­tion of the riverb­anks and wetland |

page 12 of 24

| improve­ment works which could provide increased hab­it­at for otters and their prey. | | 2) Bal­loch­buie SAC | | Blanket bog: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Bog wood­land: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject sites, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Plants in crevices on base-rich rocks: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Cale­do­ni­an forest: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Dry heaths: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Otter: Yes, there will be a LSE. There is poten­tial con­nectiv­ity between the otter qual­i­fy­ing interest of the Bal­loch­buie SAC, and the devel­op­ment site (which is with­in the River Dee SAC, which is also des­ig­nated for otter). The dis­tance between the Bal­loch­buie SAC and the pro­ject site is approx­im­ately 3.8km, which is well with­in the for­aging and home range of otter. There will be a LSE from short term effects arising dur­ing con­struc­tion activ­ity. There could be long term impacts through improved nat­ur­al­isa­tion of the riverb­anks and wet­land improve­ment works which could provide increased hab­it­at for otters and their prey. | | Wet heath­land with cross-leaved heath: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Plants in crevices on acid rocks: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | 3) Cairngorms SAC | | Alpine and sub­alpine heaths: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | High-alti­tude plant com­munit­ies asso­ci­ated with areas of water seep­age: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Blanket bog: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther |

page 13 of 24

| con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Bog wood­land: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Green shield-moss: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Plants in crevices on base-rich rocks: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Cale­do­ni­an forest: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Dry heaths: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Tall herb com­munit­ies: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Juni­per on heaths of cal­careous grass­lands: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Otter: Yes, there will be a LSE. There is poten­tial con­nectiv­ity between otter qual­i­fy­ing interest of the Carin­gorms SAC, and the devel­op­ment site (which is with­in the River Dee SAC, which is also des­ig­nated for otter). The dis­tance between the Cairngorms SAC and ele­ments of the pro­ject site is approx­im­ately 600, which is well with­in the for­aging range of otter. There will be a LSE from short term effects arising dur­ing con­struc­tion activ­ity. There could be long term impacts through improved nat­ur­al­isa­tion of the riverb­anks and wet­land improve­ment works which could provide increased hab­it­at for otters and their prey. | | Acid peat-stained lakes and ponds: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Wet heath­land with cross-leaved heath: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Clear-water lakes or lochs with aquat­ic veget­a­tion and poor to mod­er­ate nutri­ent levels: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Hard-water springs depos­it­ing lime: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this |

page 14 of 24

| qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Dry grass­lands and scrub­lands on chalk or lime­stone: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Mont­ane acid grass­lands: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Plants in crevices on acid rocks: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Acid­ic scree: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Spe­cies-rich grass­lands with mat-grass in upland areas: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Moun­tain wil­low scrub: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Very wet mires often iden­ti­fied by an unstable ​‘quak­ing’ sur­face: No LSE, as there is no poten­tial con­nectiv­ity of this qual­i­fy­ing hab­it­at interest with the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | 4) Cairngorms SPA | | Caper­cail­lie: No LSE, as the hab­it­ats present with­in the devel­op­ment site are unsuit­able for caper­cail­lie there is no con­nectiv­ity between this qual­i­fy­ing fea­ture and the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Dot­ter­el: No LSE, as the hab­it­ats present with­in the devel­op­ment site are unsuit­able for caper­cail­lie there is no con­nectiv­ity between this qual­i­fy­ing fea­ture and the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Golden eagle: No LSE, advice from Isla Gra­ham, Rap­tor Con­ser­va­tion Officer, CNPA (Ref: Eco­logy File Note for River Dee Res­tor­a­tion 2025/0010/DET). Hab­it­ats present with­in the devel­op­ment site are unsuit­able for golden eagle there is no con­nectiv­ity between this qual­i­fy­ing fea­ture and the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Mer­lin: No LSE, advice from Isla Gra­ham, Rap­tor Con­ser­va­tion Officer, CNPA (Ref: Eco­logy File Note for River Dee Res­tor­a­tion 2025/0010/DET). Hab­it­ats present with­in the devel­op­ment site are not used by for­aging Mer­lin, there is no con­nectiv­ity between this qual­i­fy­ing fea­ture and the project |

page 15 of 24

| site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | Osprey: Yes, there is a LSE. advice from Isla Gra­ham, Rap­tor Con­ser­va­tion Officer, CNPA (Ref: Eco­logy File Note for River Dee Res­tor­a­tion 2025/0010/DET). Hab­it­ats with­in the pro­ject site could poten­tially be used by for­aging Osprey from the Cairngorms SPA, and there may be a short-term dis­turb­ance effect from con­struc­tion activ­ity, and long-term effects arising from the river res­tor­a­tion which could improve hab­it­at for Osprey prey spe­cies. | | Per­eg­rine: Yes, there is a LSE. advice from Isla Gra­ham, Rap­tor Con­ser­va­tion Officer, CNPA (Ref: Eco­logy File Note for River Dee Res­tor­a­tion 2025/0010/DET). Hab­it­ats with­in the pro­ject site could poten­tially be used by for­aging Per­eg­rine from the Cairngorms SPA, and there may be a short-term dis­turb­ance effect from con­struc­tion activ­ity, and long-term effects arising from the river res­tor­a­tion which could improve hab­it­at for Per­eg­rine prey spe­cies. | | Scot­tish cross­bill: No LSE, as the hab­it­ats present with­in the devel­op­ment site are unsuit­able for caper­cail­lie there is no con­nectiv­ity between this qual­i­fy­ing fea­ture and the pro­ject site, and so this qual­i­fy­ing interest has been scoped out from fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. | | STAGE 4: | | Under­take an Appro­pri­ate Assess­ment of the implic­a­tions for the site(s) in view of the(ir) con­ser­va­tion object­ives | | 1) River Dee SAC | | Con­ser­va­tion Object­ive 2. To ensure that the integ­rity of River Dee SAC is restored by meet­ing object­ives 2a, 2b and 2c for each qual­i­fy­ing fea­tures (and 2^d for | | 2b. Restore the dis­tri­bu­tion of through­out the site |

page 16 of 24

| 2c. Restore the hab­it­ats sup­port­ing with­in the site and avail­ab­il­ity of food | | 2^d. Restore the dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of and their sup­port­ing hab­it­ats | | 2a. Restore the pop­u­la­tion of as a viable com­pon­ent of the site |

page 17 of 24

| 2b. Restore the dis­tri­bu­tion of Atlantic sal­mon through­out the site | | The pro­posed works will con­trib­ute towards achiev­ing this Con­ser­va­tion Object­ive. The works have been designed in part­ner­ship with the Dee Rivers Trust and the Dee Dis­trict Sal­mon Fish­ery Board with a key aim of the pro­ject to improve Atlantic sal­mon hab­it­ats. In 2024, a sal­mon redd sur­vey under­taken along a 2.2km stretch of the River Dee next to the pro­ject site iden­ti­fied a max­im­um of 164 redds clustered in 4 sec­tions of the chan­nel (Ref: Sal­mon Redd Sur­vey, Septem­ber 2024). This rel­at­ively high num­ber of sal­mon redds with­in the main river chan­nel was thought to relate to 7 weeks of low rain­fall redu­cing access to trib­u­tar­ies. The res­tor­a­tion of the Upper River Dee will increase hab­it­at avail­ab­il­ity and diversity for Atlantic sal­mon with­in this sec­tion of the SAC. This increase in suit­able hab­it­at should in turn pro­mote an increase in the pop­u­la­tion of Atlantic Sal­mon with­in the SAC. | | Mit­ig­a­tion Meas­ures included in the pro­pos­al (Refs: Design Meth­od State­ment; Spe­cies Pro­tec­tion Plan) will min­im­ise the con­struc­tion phase risks of dis­turb­ance dur­ing spawn­ing time, mobil­isa­tion of sed­i­ments that could smoth­er redds, and release of pol­lu­tion or spread of dis­ease that could impact Atlantic sal­mon with­in the River Dee SAC. | | 2c. Restore the hab­it­ats sup­port­ing Atlantic sal­mon with­in the site and avail­ab­il­ity of food | | The prosed works will con­trib­ute towards achiev­ing this Con­ser­va­tion Object­ive. The works have been designed in part­ner­ship with the Dee Rivers Trust and the Dee Dis­trict Sal­mon Fish­ery Board with a key aim of the pro­ject to improve Atlantic sal­mon hab­it­ats. The pro­posed works will increase mor­pho­lo­gic­al diversity with­in this sec­tion of the SAC, pro­mot­ing the devel­op­ment of hab­it­ats suit­able for Atlantic Sal­mon. The addi­tion of large woody struc­tures in the chan­nel should also provide loc­al­ised shad­ing and shel­ter for sal­mon. The pro­posed wet­land enhance­ment works and improved con­nec­tions with the flood­plain should also provide a source of nutri­ents and food for sal­mon. | | Mit­ig­a­tion Meas­ures included in the pro­pos­al will min­im­ise the con­struc­tion phase risks of dis­turb­ance dur­ing spawn­ing time, mobil­isa­tion of sed­i­ments that could smoth­er spawn­ing sites, tem­por­ary loss of parr hab­it­at, and release of pol­lu­tion or spread of dis­ease that could impact Atlantic sal­mon with­in the River Dee SAC. | | 2a. Restore the pop­u­la­tion of Atlantic sal­mon, includ­ing range of genet­ic types, as a viable com­pon­ent of the site |

page 18 of 24

| The pro­posed works will partly con­trib­ute towards achiev­ing this Con­ser­va­tion Object­ive. The res­tor­a­tion of this stretch of the River Dee will increase hab­it­at diversity suit­able for Atlantic sal­mon. This increase in suit­able hab­it­at should in turn pro­mote an increase in the pop­u­la­tion of Atlantic sal­mon with­in this stretch of the River Dee SAC. How­ever, the pro­posed works will not influ­ence the range of genet­ic types with­in the SAC. | | Mit­ig­a­tion Meas­ures included in the pro­pos­al will min­im­ise the con­struc­tion phase risks of dis­turb­ance dur­ing spawn­ing time, mobil­isa­tion of sed­i­ments that could smoth­er spawn­ing sites, dis­turb­ance and tem­por­ary loss of parr hab­it­at, and release of pol­lu­tion or spread of dis­ease that could impact Atlantic sal­mon with­in the Rive Dee SAC. | | 2b. Main­tain the dis­tri­bu­tion of otter through­out the site | | The pro­posed works will con­trib­ute towards achiev­ing this Con­ser­va­tion Object­ive. A pro­tec­ted spe­cies sur­vey (Ref: Pro­tec­ted Spe­cies Sur­vey, Septem­ber 2024) of the applic­a­tion site plus a 500m buf­fer zone found four otter spraint­ing sites, and a single otter spraint next to a pred­ated mal­lard, How­ever, no holts (enclosed otter dens) or couches (open otter rest­ing sites) where found across the sur­vey area. This was a single sur­vey, but it sug­gests that there is low otter activ­ity across the applic­a­tion site, which is part of the River Dee SAC. A fur­ther pre-con­struc­tion sur­vey is pro­posed to check for otter and oth­er pro­tec­ted spe­cies. This will be under­taken no more than 3 months pri­or to start­ing works. | | As no holts or rest­ing areas were detec­ted with­in 500m of the pro­ject site, it appears that the site is primar­ily used for for­aging. Dur­ing the con­struc­tion phase, otter may be a tem­por­ary inhib­ited from for­aging across the site. Otters can have very large home ranges of around 32km for males and 20km for females (Otter | NatureScot), and there­fore tem­por­ary con­struc­tion work at this loc­a­tion is unlikely to res­ult in sig­ni­fic­ant impact on for­aging otter. | | The pro­posed river res­tor­a­tion work will seek to restore nat­ur­al geo­mor­pho­lo­gic­al pro­cesses with­in this stretch of the River Dee, enhance wet­land hab­it­ats with­in the flood­plain and improve con­nectiv­ity between the chan­nel and its flood­plain. The works should increase the qual­ity and extent of wet­land hab­it­ats suit­able for for­aging otter, and the install­a­tion of large woody struc­tures may provide suit­able sites for otter holts or rest­ing areas. There­fore, this applic­a­tion will con­trib­ute towards main­tain­ing and poten­tially expand­ing the dis­tri­bu­tion of otter with­in the River Dee SAC. | | 2c. Main­tain the hab­it­ats sup­port­ing otter with­in the site and avail­ab­il­ity of food | | The pro­posed works will con­trib­ute towards achiev­ing this Con­ser­va­tion Object­ive. The applic­a­tion site is used by for­aging otter. No holts or rest­ing areas were detec­ted dur­ing a pro­tec­ted spe­cies sur­vey in Septem­ber 2024 (Ref: Pro­tec­ted Spe­cies Sur­vey, Septem­ber 2024). The pro­posed river res­tor­a­tion works includ­ing the install­a­tion of large woody struc­tures should improve the dynam­ism of the river sys­tem, which should improve the diversity of hab­it­ats with­in the River Dee that sup­port prey spe­cies such as Atlantic sal­mon. The pro­posed wet­land enhance­ment work includ­ing wader scrapes, installation