Item7Appendix2HRA20220242DETAltnachriche

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Agenda Item 7 Appendix 2 23/09/2022

AGENDA ITEM 7

APPENDIX 2

2022/0242/DET

HAB­IT­ATS REG­U­LA­TIONS APPRAISAL

HAB­IT­ATS REG­U­LA­TIONS APPRAISAL

Plan­ning ref­er­ence and pro­pos­al inform­a­tion	2022/0242/DET pri­or approv­al for forest track works at Alt­nac­riche, near Lyn­wilg, Aviemore
Appraised by	Nina Caudrey, Plan­ning Officer (Devel­op­ment Man­age­ment and Envir­on­ment­al Advice)
Date	I Septem­ber 2022
Checked by	NatureScot
Date	XX Septem­ber 2022

Due to the dif­fer­ent sec­tions of works and lack of num­ber­ing on the loc­a­tion plan, extracts of the numbered site plans have been included below, to make it clear which location/​section of works is being referred to in the advice. Site detail plan I (ramps) Site detail plan 2 (cul­verts) Site detail plan 3 (scrape, drain) Site detail plan 4 (scrape, drain)

page 1 of 4

INFORM­A­TION

European site details
Name of European site(s) poten­tially affected	River Spey SAC
Qual­i­fy­ing interest(s)
River Spey SAC	Atlantic sal­mon, fresh water pearl mus­sel, sea lamprey and otter
Con­ser­va­tion object­ives for qual­i­fy­ing interests
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 2d 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
	2d. 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 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 2 of 4

APPRAIS­AL

STAGE 1:
What is the plan or project?
Rel­ev­ant sum­mary details of pro­pos­al (includ­ing loc­a­tion, tim­ing, meth­ods, etc)	Pro­pos­al to scrape and drain exist­ing hill and ATV tracks, cre­ation of two machinery ramps, cul­vert­ing, at the loc­a­tions iden­ti­fied in the plans shown on the first page of this doc­u­ment and plans sub­mit­ted with the pri­or approv­al application.
	Site plan I: The north­ern most area of works is in prox­im­ity to a mapped water­course that flows in to the River Spey SAC, the bound­ary of which is approx­im­ately 750m downstream.
	(Site plan 2 and Site plan 3: no con­nectiv­ity with the SAC, so these are not con­sidered further.)
	Site plan 4: The east­ern branches of the areas to be scraped and drained are in prox­im­ity to and one crosses a mapped water­course that flows in the River Spey SAC, the bound­ary of which is approx­im­ately 360m downstream.
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)?
	Site plan I and Site plan 4:
	Yes, there would be LSE for all qual­i­fy­ing interests due to the poten­tial for short term effects arising dur­ing ground works through sed­i­ment release enter­ing water­courses con­nec­ted with the River Spey SAC.
	Otter: there is poten­tial for fur­ther LSE on otter due to dis­turb­ance dur­ing works.
STAGE 4:
Under­take an Appro­pri­ate Assess­ment of the implic­a­tions for the site(s) in view of the(ir) con­ser­va­tion objectives	Although the scale of the earth works is small, without appro­pri­ate pol­lu­tion pre­ven­tion and con­trol (ppc) meas­ures, there is a risk of sed­i­ment release due to exposed soils, which if washed into water­courses con­nec­ted to the SAC could adversely affect water qual­ity and smoth­er hab­it­ats and prey relied upon by the qual­i­fy­ing interests. This could pre­vent the fol­low­ing con­ser­va­tion object­ives being met:
	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

page 3 of 4

| | 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 | | | In addi­tion, the poten­tial for dis­turb­ance to otter could pre­vent the last three con­ser­va­tion object­ives from being met. | | | Com­bined, this could pre­vent the qual­i­fy­ing fea­tures of the River Spey SAC from being in favour­able con­di­tion or from mak­ing an appro­pri­ate con­tri­bu­tion to achiev­ing favour­able con­ser­va­tion status. | | | How­ever, the imple­ment­a­tion of the meas­ures in the pol­lu­tion pre­ven­tion and con­trol sched­ule and accom­pa­ny­ing pre-com­mence­ment pol­lu­tion con­trol plan sub­mit­ted to CNPA on 31 August 2022 would min­im­ise the risk of sed­i­ment reach­ing water­courses con­nec­ted to the SAC. There­fore the con­ser­va­tion object­ives would be met. | | STAGE 5: | | | Can it be ascer­tained that there will not be an adverse effect on site integ­rity? | Provided the fol­low­ing con­di­tion is applied, then the con­ser­va­tion object­ives should be met and there should not be an adverse effect on site integ­rity: | | | Con­di­tion: The pol­lu­tion pre­ven­tion and con­trol sched­ule and the accom­pa­ny­ing pre- com­mence­ment pol­lu­tion con­trol plan, both sub­mit­ted to CNPA on 31 August 2022, to be imple­men­ted in full. | | | Reas­on: To ensure pol­lu­tion does not enter the River Spey SAC and so avoid an adverse effect on site integrity. |

page 4 of 4