Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity Ugh­dar­ras Pàirc Nàiseanta a’ Mhon­aidh Ruaidh

Item 5 Appendix 2 09 Octo­ber 2026 Page 1 of 34

Agenda item 5

Appendix 2

2026/0160/DET

Hab­it­ats reg­u­la­tions appraisal

---

HAB­IT­ATS REG­U­LA­TIONS APPRAISAL

	2026/0160/DET
Plan­ning ref­er­ence and pro­pos­al information	Slu­gain Burn Res­tor­a­tion Pro­ject: River chan­nel realign­ment, hab­it­at res­tor­a­tion, road realign­ment, revised river cross­ing and install­a­tion of cul­vert Land 1.4km South-west of Inver­laid­nan Sta­tion Road, Dal­na­hait­nach, Car­rbridge, Highland
Appraised by	Scott Shanks, Eco­lo­gic­al Advice Officer
Date	06 July 2026
Checked by	Kirsty North NatureScot Oper­a­tions Officer
Date	15 July 2026

page 1 of 33

---

INFORM­A­TION

Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity Ugh­dar­ras Pàirc Nàiseanta a’ Mhon­aidh Ruaidh

Item 5 Appendix 2 09 Octo­ber 2026 Page 1 of 34

Agenda item 5

Appendix 2

2026/0160/DET

Hab­it­ats reg­u­la­tions appraisal

---

HAB­IT­ATS REG­U­LA­TIONS APPRAISAL

	2026/0160/DET
Plan­ning ref­er­ence and pro­pos­al information	Slu­gain Burn Res­tor­a­tion Pro­ject: River chan­nel realign­ment, hab­it­at res­tor­a­tion, road realign­ment, revised river cross­ing and install­a­tion of cul­vert Land 1.4km South-west of Inver­laid­nan Sta­tion Road, Dal­na­hait­nach, Car­rbridge, Highland
Appraised by	Scott Shanks, Eco­lo­gic­al Advice Officer
Date	06 July 2026
Checked by	Kirsty North NatureScot Oper­a­tions Officer
Date	15 July 2026

page 1 of 33

---

INFORM­A­TION

European site details
Name of European site(s) poten­tially affected
1) River Spey SAC (pro­pos­al is partly with­in site) 2) Kin­veachy Forest SPA¹ (pro­pos­al is partly with­in site) 3) Kin­veachy Forest SAC (pro­pos­al is partly with­in site) 4) Aber­nethy Forest SPA¹,² 5) Anagach Woods SPA¹,² 6) Cairngorms SPA¹,² 7) Craigmore Wood SPA¹,²
¹ It is recog­nised that effects on caper­cail­lie at any one of the Badenoch and Strath­spey caper­cail­lie SPAs or asso­ci­ated wood­lands shown on the map in Annex I has the poten­tial to affect the wider caper­cail­lie meta­pop­u­la­tion of Badenoch and Strath­spey. While oth­er caper­cail­lie SPAs are con­sidered in this HRA, atten­tion has been focused in this HRA on the caper­cail­lie woods likely to be used reg­u­larly for recre­ation by users of the pro­posed devel­op­ment site, which in this case is Kin­veachy Forest SPA (includ­ing Wood I- Kin­veachy Forest) (see Annex2- Detailed Caper­cail­lie Assess­ment). ² Con­sid­er­a­tion of indir­ect effects on the qual­i­fy­ing interests of these European sites has been focused on capercaillie.
Qual­i­fy­ing interest(s)
1) River Spey SAC Otter Atlantic sal­mon Sea lamprey Fresh­wa­ter pearl mus­sel (FWPM) 2) Kin­veachy Forest SPA Caper­cail­lie (breed­ing) Scot­tish cross­bill 3) Kin­veachy Forest SAC Cale­do­ni­an forest Bog wood­land 4) Aber­nethy Forest SPA Caper­cail­lie (breed­ing) Scot­tish cross­bill Osprey

page 2 of 33

---

5) Anagach Woods SPA Caper­cail­lie (breed­ing)

6) Cairngorms SPA Caper­cail­lie (breed­ing) Golden eagle Dot­ter­el Mer­lin Per­eg­rine Scot­tish cross­bill Osprey

7) Craigmore Wood SPA Caper­cail­lie (breed­ing)

Con­ser­va­tion object­ives for qual­i­fy­ing interests

1) River Spey SAC Con­ser­va­tion Object­ive 2. To ensure that the integ­rity of the River Spey SAC is restored by meet­ing object­ives 2a, 2b, 2c for each qual­i­fy­ing fea­ture (and 2^d for fresh­wa­ter pearl mus­sel): 2b. Restore the dis­tri­bu­tion of fresh­wa­ter pearl mus­sel through­out the site 2c. Restore the hab­it­ats sup­port­ing fresh­wa­ter pearl mus­sel with­in the site and avail­ab­il­ity of food 2^d. Restore the dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of fresh­wa­ter pearl mus­sel host spe­cies and their sup­port­ing hab­it­ats 2a. Restore the pop­u­la­tion of fresh­wa­ter pearl mus­sel as a viable com­pon­ent of the site 2b. Main­tain the dis­tri­bu­tion of sea lamprey through­out the site 2c. Main­tain the hab­it­ats sup­port­ing sea lamprey with­in the site and avail­ab­il­ity of food 2a. Main­tain the pop­u­la­tion of sea lamprey as a viable com­pon­ent of the site 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 1. To ensure that the qual­i­fy­ing fea­tures of the River Spey SAC are in favour­able con­di­tion and make an appro­pri­ate con­tri­bu­tion to achiev­ing favour­able con­ser­va­tion status.

page 3 of 33

---

2) Kin­veachy Forest SPA To avoid deteri­or­a­tion of the hab­it­ats of the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies (Caper­cail­lie (breed­ing) and Scot­tish Cross­bill), or sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance to the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies, thus ensur­ing that the integ­rity of the site is main­tained; 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) Kin­veachy Forest SAC Con­ser­va­tion Object­ive 1. To ensure that the qual­i­fy­ing fea­tures of Kin­veachy Forest are in favour­able con­di­tion and make an appro­pri­ate con­tri­bu­tion to achiev­ing favour­able con­ser­va­tion status Con­ser­va­tion Object­ive 2. To ensure that the integ­rity of Kin­veachy Forest is restored by meet­ing object­ives 2a, 2b and 2c for each qual­i­fy­ing fea­ture. 2a. Main­tain the extent and dis­tri­bu­tion of Cale­do­ni­an forest with­in the site 2b. Restore the struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of Cale­do­ni­an forest 2c. Main­tain the dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of typ­ic­al spe­cies of Cale­do­ni­an forest 2a. Main­tain the extent and dis­tri­bu­tion of Bog wood­land with­in the site 2b. Restore the struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of Bog wood­land 2c. Main­tain the dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of typ­ic­al spe­cies of Bog wood­land

4) Aber­nethy Forest SPA ‑To avoid deteri­or­a­tion of the hab­it­ats of the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies: Caper­cail­lie (breed­ing), Osprey, Scot­tish Cross­bill, or sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance to the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies, thus ensur­ing that the integ­rity of the site is main­tained; 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

5) Anagach Woods SPA

page 4 of 33

---

To avoid deteri­or­a­tion of the hab­it­ats of the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies: Caper­cail­lie (breed­ing), or sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance to the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies, thus ensur­ing that the integ­rity of the site is main­tained; 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

6) Cairngorms SPA To avoid deteri­or­a­tion of the hab­it­ats of the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies: Golden eagle, Dot­ter­el, Mer­lin, Per­eg­rine, Scot­tish cross­bill, Osprey, Caper­cail­lie (breed­ing), or sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance to the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies, thus ensur­ing that the integ­rity of the site is main­tained; 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

7) Craigmore Wood SPA To avoid deteri­or­a­tion of the hab­it­ats of the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies: Caper­cail­lie (breed­ing) or sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance to the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies, thus ensur­ing that the integ­rity of the site is main­tained; 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

page 5 of 33

---

APPRAIS­AL

STAGE 1: What is the plan or project?

Rel­ev­ant sum­mary details of pro­pos­al (includ­ing loc­a­tion, tim­ing, meth­ods, etc)

The Slu­gain Burn res­tor­a­tion pro­ject aims to restore nat­ur­al river pro­cesses, improve and cre­ate hab­it­ats and cre­ate a low-main­ten­ance and resi­li­ent water­course. The pro­pos­al will also replace an old bridge with a new cross­ing able to with­stand future flood­ing and cli­mate change impacts. The pro­posed site is with­in the River Spey SAC and the Kin­veachy Forest SPA and SAC. The pro­pos­al aims to improve and lengthen the Slu­gain Burn where it crosses the Dal­na­hait­nach flood­plain from approx­im­ately 200 m of can­al­ised, perched and embanked water­course to approx­im­ately 1.5km long chan­nel with nat­ur­al geo­morph­ic pro­cesses allowed to evolve. This will cre­ate a diversity of hab­it­ats with­in the chan­nel and deliv­er bet­ter flood­plain con­nectiv­ity. This will be achieved by divert­ing the Slu­gain Burn into a new chan­nel to con­nect with an exist­ing ditch that then con­nects to the River Dul­nain. The cur­rent road will be realigned with a new cross­ing, which is required to facil­it­ate the burn’s new course. The diver­ted burn will be allowed to evolve nat­ur­ally across the flood­plain and there­fore is likely to be more pref­er­en­tial to juven­ile sal­mon than the cur­rent can­al­ized sec­tion and will cre­ate more suit­able hab­it­at for for­aging otters.

The pro­posed con­struc­tion tim­ings will be to avoid the breed­ing bird sea­son (Feb­ru­ary to end of August) and key Atlantic sal­mon spawn­ing sea­son (Mid-Octo­ber to end of February).

STAGE 2: Is the plan or pro­ject dir­ectly con­nec­ted with or neces­sary for the man­age­ment of the European site for nature conservation?

1) River Spey SAC Yes, the Slu­gain Burn is a des­ig­nated trib­u­tary of the River Spey SAC. There­fore, realign­ment works along this his­tor­ic­ally straightened sec­tion of the Slu­gain Burn will dir­ectly impact the River Spey SAC. 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 could be argued that this river realign­ment work is neces­sary for nature con­ser­va­tion and should improve suit­able hab­it­at diversity and poten­tially increase the dis­tri­bu­tion of qual­i­fy­ing interests (Atlantic sal­mon, fresh­wa­ter pearl mus­sel, sea lamprey and otter) with­in the site.

i) Has the effect on all qual­i­fy­ing interests been considered? Yes, effects on Atlantic sal­mon, fresh­wa­ter pearl mus­sel (FWPM), sea lamprey and otter, the qual­i­fy­ing interests (QIs) of the River Spey SAC, have been con­sidered dur­ing the devel­op­ment of this river res­tor­a­tion and hab­it­at improve­ment pro­pos­al. Exist­ing hab­it­at con­di­tion and the extent of the QIs, as well as their con­ser­va­tion object­ives were used to inform the res­tor­a­tion design and pro­posed construction

page 6 of 33

---

works (i.e. meth­od­o­logy and tim­ing) to mit­ig­ate against impacts on these spe­cies. The poten­tial impacts, design meas­ures and mit­ig­a­tion meas­ures under­taken and resid­ual impacts on the QIs 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 of long-term pro­jects lead by the CNPA work­ing with over 80 part­ners which aims to deliv­er trans­form­a­tion­al change to tackle the twin nature and cli­mate emer­gen­cies. The pro­ject will sup­port deliv­ery of object­ives of the River Spey Catch­ment Man­age­ment Plan 2023 – 2030 (Spey-Catchment-Management-Plan.pdf) and will also deliv­er key fresh­wa­ter object­ives of the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Part­ner­ship Plan (Ref: A9. Fresh­wa­ter sys­tems – Cairngorms Nation­al Park Part­ner­ship Plan). 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. This will help to achieve the Con­ser­va­tion Object­ives of the SAC’s qual­i­fy­ing interests i.e. to improve the hab­it­at pro­vi­sion and restore/​expand the dis­tri­bu­tion of these spe­cies with­in the River Spey. The pro­pos­al will also deliver

iii) Is there a clear rationale to jus­ti­fy the con­nec­tion with the Con­ser­va­tion Objectives? Yes. The Con­ser­va­tion Object­ives for all QIs seek to improve the pop­u­la­tion, dis­tri­bu­tion, and avail­ab­il­ity of sup­port­ing hab­it­ats for these spe­cies. The chan­nel realign­ment and sup­port­ing design fea­tures are pro­posed primar­ily to restore nat­ur­al river pro­cesses and to improve and diver­si­fy the exist­ing in-chan­nel hab­it­at present along the can­al­ised lower sec­tion of the Slu­gain Burn, which is largely homo­gen­ous. Increas­ing in-chan­nel mor­pho­lo­gic­al diversity has the poten­tial to increase the avail­ab­il­ity of hab­it­at suited to dif­fer­ent stages of the Atlantic sal­mon life cycle, help­ing to expand the area of suit­able hab­it­at through­out this sec­tion of the water­course. While FWPM are not cur­rently present in either the Slu­gain Burn or the ditch that become it’s new con­flu­ence with the River Dul­nain, improv­ing hab­it­at for Atlantic sal­mon (one of the host spe­cies for FWPM glochidia), may help with the pop­u­la­tion expansion/​colonisation of the FWPM into the Slu­gain Burn. Improved mor­pho­lo­gic­al diversity and sed­i­ment sort­ing across the chan­nel caused by the inclu­sion of large woody struc­tures in the design may also bene­fit FWPM dir­ectly by encour­aging the depos­ition of sand between exist­ing cobbles and boulders, expand­ing suit­able hab­it­at for this spe­cies. Sea lamprey are not con­sidered to be present in this area of the catch­ment, how­ever, the pro­posed river res­tor­a­tion works will res­ult in an increase in sig­ni­fic­ant increase in length and hab­it­at diversity with­in the water­course which may provide more oppor­tun­it­ies for breed­ing sea lamprey than the cur­rent can­al­ised lower sec­tion of the Slu­gain Burn. Otter are likely to bene­fit from the improved and diver­si­fied in-chan­nel hab­it­at and bet­ter con­nec­tion of the water­course with it’s flood plain which will provide increased oppor­tun­it­ies for for­aging and through the pro­vi­sion of large woody struc­tures, this may increase shel­ter opportunities.

page 7 of 33

---

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 on the SAC’s qual­i­fy­ing interests. As noted in the response at 2iii) the pro­posed river res­tor­a­tion works on the Slu­gain Burn have the poten­tial to improve hab­it­at pro­vi­sion and diversity for QIs, con­trib­ut­ing towards improv­ing the con­di­tion of the des­ig­nated site. The final design and con­struc­tion meth­od­o­logy have been developed with mit­ig­a­tion meas­ures in place to lim­it neg­at­ive impacts on the QI. How­ever, dur­ing the con­struc­tion pro­cess resid­ual risks remain, such as best prac­tice con­struc­tion meth­od­o­lo­gies being ignored or imple­men­ted incor­rectly, or dis­turb­ance of a pre­vi­ously unknown pop­u­la­tion of FWPM. These mit­ig­a­tion meas­ures and resid­ual risk will be dis­cussed fur­ther in Stage 4. An exper­i­enced aquat­ic Eco­lo­gic­al Clerk of Works will be on site dur­ing con­struc­tion to ensure that the con­struc­tion is under­taken with sens­it­iv­ity to the QIs.

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. Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity pre­vi­ously com­mis­sioned CВЕС Eco-engin­eer­ing UK Ltd with input from McGow­an Envir­on­ment­al Engin­eer­ing to under­take a feas­ib­il­ity study and options apprais­al for the res­tor­a­tion of the Slu­gain Burn, and com­mis­sioned Mox­on Archi­tects to devel­op a con­cep­tu­al design of a replace­ment bridge. The pro­ject team selec­ted an option to be taken for­ward to Out­line and Detailed Design stages. This option involved the fol­low­ing actions: • Realign a sec­tion of the Slu­gain Burn upstream of the exist­ing vehicle bridge, along a new chan­nel to the east, to even­tu­ally con­verge with an exist­ing drain­age ditch • Relo­cate the vehicle bridge to span the new chan­nel • Nat­ur­al­ise the new chan­nel and the exist­ing ditch that will con­vey the Slu­gain Burn • Remove embank­ments, the exist­ing high­way bridge and infill the exist­ing chan­nel, down­stream of the diver­sion point • Enhance hab­it­ats in the chan­nel and flood­plain JBA were com­mis­sioned by The High­land Coun­cil to devel­op an out­line design and detailed design for the chosen option. The relo­ca­tion of the cross­ing aims to avoid the cur­rent situ­ation where a build-up of depos­ited sed­i­ment at the cur­rent bridge requires reg­u­lar dredging/​interventions to avoid flood­ing of the road and dam­age to infra­struc­ture. The gradi­ent and design of the water­course has been designed to fol­low the Out-of-chan­nel mod­el­ling indic­ated that flood waters would fol­low what was likely the ori­gin­al course of the lower Slu­gain before it was straightened. There­fore, the design realigned the river along these flow path­ways to be based on the nat­ur­al pro­cesses of water and sed­i­ment movement.

page 8 of 33

---

vi) The ​‘Spe­cies Pro­tec­tion Plan for the Slu­gain Burn Res­tor­a­tion Pro­ject’ doc­u­ment (uploaded to CNPA Plan­ning Portal 22 May 2026) out­lines site-spe­cif­ic mit­ig­a­tion meas­ures that are to be included in a Con­struc­tion Envir­on­ment­al Man­age­ment Plan (CEMP) required to ensure that all Con­ser­va­tion Object­ives of con­nec­ted European Sites can be met.

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 Slu­gain Burn and river cor­ridor are covered by the River Spey SAC des­ig­na­tion. There­fore, realign­ment of the lower sec­tion of the Slu­gain Burn will dir­ectly impact the SAC. How­ever, the pro­pos­al aims to rein­state nat­ur­al geo­morph­ic pro­cesses, enhance hab­it­at pro­vi­sion and diversity 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 for all QIs.

2) Kin­veachy Forest SPA No, this pro­ject is not dir­ectly con­nec­ted with or neces­sary for the man­age­ment of the European site for nature conservation.

3) Kin­veachy Forest SAC No, this pro­ject is not dir­ectly con­nec­ted with or neces­sary for the man­age­ment of the European site for nature conservation.

4) Aber­nethy Forest SPA No, this pro­ject is not dir­ectly con­nec­ted with or neces­sary for the man­age­ment of the European site for nature conservation.

5) Anagach Woods SPA No, this pro­ject is not dir­ectly con­nec­ted with or neces­sary for the man­age­ment of the European site for nature conservation.

6) Cairngorms SPA No, this pro­ject is not dir­ectly con­nec­ted with or neces­sary for the man­age­ment of the European site for nature conservation.

7) Craigmore Wood SPA No