Item5Appendix3HRA20230399DETOldBridgeInnBeerGarden

Agenda Item 5 Appendix 3 CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Agenda Item 5 Appendix 3 08/03/2024 2023/0399/DET Hab­it­ats reg­u­la­tions appraisal

HAB­IT­ATS REG­U­LA­TIONS APPRAISAL

Plan­ning ref­er­ence and pro­pos­al information	2023/0399/DET
	Change of use of land to beer garden
Appraised by	Kar­en Aldridge
Date	13 Feb­ru­ary 2024
Checked by	Katie Crerar
Date	20 Feb­ru­ary 2024

page 1 of 5

INFORM­A­TION

European site details

Name of European site(s) poten­tially affected

1) River Spey SAC

Qual­i­fy­ing interest(s)

1) River Spey SAC Otter Fresh­wa­ter pearl mus­sel Sea lamprey Atlantic salmon

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

page 2 of 5

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 Spey SAC are in favour­able con­di­tion and make an appro­pri­ate con­tri­bu­tion to achiev­ing favour­able con­ser­va­tion status

page 3 of 5

APPRAIS­AL | | | | : — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — | : — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - | | STAGE 1: | | | What is the plan or pro­ject? | | | Rel­ev­ant sum­mary details of pro­pos­al (includ­ing loc­a­tion, tim­ing, meth­ods, etc) | Change of use of land adja­cent to River Spey for Old Bridge Inn beer garden. To include the erec­tion of a non-per­man­ent can­opy. The beer garden will primar­ily be used dur­ing spring/​summer/​autumn months. | | STAGE 2: | | | Is the plan or pro­ject dir­ectly con­nec­ted with or neces­sary for the man­age­ment of the European site for nature con­ser­va­tion? | | | No | | | 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) (LSE)? | | | 1) River Spey SAC | | | Atlantic sal­mon, sea lamprey, fresh­wa­ter pearl mus­sel: No LSE. | No excav­a­tion or oth­er con­struc­tion activ­it­ies which may lead to the cre­ation of silt or sed­i­ment which could pose a threat to the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies or water qual­ity of the River Spey. The area is cur­rently used as car park­ing and as access to the river banks. | | Otter: No LSE | Giv­en the cur­rent usage of the area i.e. indi­vidu­als and groups access­ing the River Spey for water sports, it is con­sidered likely that any otter using the River Spey at this loc­a­tion will be habitu­ated to noise and light from this loc­a­tion. It is not thought that the change of use, will lead to a sig­ni­fic­ant change in beha­viour of otters. | | As there is no LSE for any of the qual­i­fy­ing spe­cies, no fur­ther assess­ment of the River Spey SAC is con­sidered neces­sary. | | | STAGE 4: | | | Under­take an Appro­pri­ate Assess­ment of the implic­a­tions for the site(s) in view of the(ir) con­ser­va­tion object­ives | | | N/A | |

page 4 of 5

STAGE 5:
Can it be ascer­tained that there will not be an adverse effect on site integrity?
NIA

page 5 of 5