Draft Sectoral Marine Plans for Offshore Renewable Energy in Scottish Waters- Strategic Environmental Assessment: Environmental Report and Appendix A

7 Recommendations, Mitigation and Monitoring

7.1.1 In accordance with Schedule 3 of the Environmental Assessment (Scotland) Act 2005, the measures proposed to manage (by preventing, reducing or offsetting) the significant adverse environmental effects of the alternatives under assessment are to be documented within an environmental report.

7.1.2 This section sets out the recommendations of the assessment. Recommendations are discussed in three stages. Firstly the general recommendations for future projects within Draft Plan Options are discussed. These highlight the environmental considerations common to development of devices and discuss the implementation, monitoring and review of the plans. Secondly, there are recommendations for specific Draft Plan Options and regions relating to specific environmental receptors. Both of these stages expand on the recommendations and mitigation identified in the Draft Plan Options assessment set out in Appendix D.

7.1.3 A final set of wider recommendations are also considered, setting out recommendations for the marine planning sector to consider to help provide information to enable greater certainty in effects prediction.

7.2 Recommendations for Renewables Projects

Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna

7.2.1 As number of Draft Plan Options have specific constraints relating to marine biodiversity and the particular location of the Options, some of which are explored in the next section. However, there are also effects that relate to all Draft Plan Options, and many of these are based on uncertainties relating to the movement of migratory and mobile marine species, and the potential interaction of all species with devices. The following mitigation has been identified:

• Designated sites for species and habitats of nature conservation interest should be avoided, and project level assessment should establish connectivity and potential risk to conservation areas. Impacts on European Protected Species, PMFs and wider biodiversity, including migratory and mobile species, should be identified and considered within the design and application stage of project development. Project level HRA work should assist in the identification of mitigation for protected European sites and species.
• Impacts on species and habitats in general, including important areas for fish, should be reduced through appropriate project design. This might include measures such as minimising the impact on the seabed and avoiding key spawning areas. Furthermore, effects might be minimised by appropriate construction and operation methods. This might include avoidance of undertaking work in key seasons ( e.g. February to June to minimise impacts to Atlantic salmon), and employing methods to minimise noise and disturbance during construction and maintenance.
• The results of hydrodynamic and sediment modelling, recommended as part of impact identification associated with the movement of water and sediments and potential changes to coastal processes, should also consider the impacts of these changes on biodiversity and individual species of interest. Project level assessment should be required to demonstrate that there will be no significant impact on protected species and habitats (see also recommendations within the water and marine environment and the marine geology and coastal processes topics).
• Further research into potential collision risks, noise and displacement effects is required to better understand potential effects on fish species such as Atlantic salmon and other diadromous fish, cetaceans, seals, elasmobranchs and some bird species. These risks may be most pertinent to the operational phase of tidal developments and some types of wave devices. At present, less is known about effects from these types of devices, and therefore the results of future research and the current research outlined in Section 7.5, should be fed into the assessment process at project level EIA.
• Furthermore, monitoring of projects as they are deployed and tested will be vital to providing greater certainty on impact prediction for subsequent development.

Population and Human Health

7.2.2 The assessment considers the potential increase in collision risk, and the potential displacement of existing recreational activities. Whilst some displacement could be permanent, leading to recreational activities being discontinued, it is likely that most activities could continue in existing or other locations. Given these potential effects the following mitigation has been suggested:

• Some impacts could be reduced through appropriate design and use of navigational aids such as marker buoys and lighting in the vicinity of the infrastructure. Furthermore the mapping of offshore energy developments and their inclusion on navigational charts could reduce collision risk. However, this might not avoid all risks, in particular collision risk between floating wave devices and small craft. Therefore, in some circumstances exclusion zones around wave and wind farms for recreational craft should also be considered. Impacts on small craft from tidal devices are considered to be minimal.
• When bringing forward specific projects, developers could work with the recreation sector to consider how recreational activities might continue within the option boundary. Early consultation can also help to reduce impacts on activities such as important cruising routes.
• There is a potential collision risk for commercial vessels with all technologies, particularly wind and wave but also potentially tidal devices in shallow waters, and as such exclusion zones and mitigation via navigational aids is likely to be required.
• Developments should avoid key shipping routes whilst ensuring that future energy generation is not compromised in its location.

Water and the Marine Environment

7.2.3 The assessment has considered potential impacts to water and the marine environment relating to increased turbidity, releasing contaminants from the seabed, and from potential pollution associated with installation, maintenance and decommissioning of devices. Impacts are largely considered to be localised and temporary in nature. Given these potential effects, the following mitigation has been suggested:

• Pollution risks associated with installation, maintenance and decommissioning of devices should be reduced and limited through building mitigation into construction and operational procedures, and avoiding discharges of harmful material and substances.
• Project level assessment will be required to reduce uncertainty relating to potential changes to hydrodynamics and the associated effects of this, for marine and benthic fauna in particular. It is suggested that hydrodynamic modelling is undertaken at project level to demonstrate the potential effects and consider appropriate mitigation (see recommendations in the biodiversity, flora and fauna, and the climatic factors topics.
• Further assessment work may be required to reduce uncertainty regarding potential impacts on water quality, particularly for shellfish waters. This includes a recommendation for hydrodynamic and water quality modelling as part of project level assessment.

Climatic Factors

7.2.4 The assessment highlights the positive effects of supporting lower carbon energy generation, and no further recommendations or mitigation has been developed relating to this. However, the assessments do identify that in some areas potential changes to hydrodynamics and wave energy could be linked to changes for coastal erosion and accretion, which could interplay with the effects of climate change. Therefore, the following mitigation has been suggested:

• Project level assessment work will be required to reduce uncertainty relating to the potential changes to hydrodynamics and impacts on the coastal environment. The results of hydrodynamic modelling could be considered alongside any tangible impacts reasonably associated with climate change (See recommendations within the biodiversity, flora and fauna topic, and water and marine environment topics).

Marine Geology and Coastal Processes

7.2.5 While the assessment identified the potential for impacts resulting from erosion or deposition from changes to hydrodynamics, uncertainty remains regarding potential impacts associated with offshore development on coastal processes. Once operational, there is the potential for scour effects on the seabed where devices are located, and devices with large footprints ( e.g. gravity bases) would have a larger area for scour to occur as a result of impacts on hydrodynamics. Therefore, the greatest impacts may be associated with wind devices, although the potential for localised effects associated with wave and tidal devices will likely remain. Given these potential effects the following mitigation has been suggested:

• Project level assessment work is required for all options to reduce uncertainty regarding potential impacts on coastal processes. It is suggested that sediment dynamic modelling is undertaken at the project level to demonstrate potential effects and consider appropriate mitigation.
• When projects are in the design process, consideration should be given to the location and arrangement of devices in order to minimise and mitigate potential impacts on marine geology and coastal processes, particularly if there are sensitive receptors in proximity (see recommendations within the biodiversity, flora and fauna, and climatic factors topics).
• Device and project design should include the use of scour protection around the base of foundations, particularly gravity-based foundations and monopiles, placed on or into the seabed.

Historic Environment

7.2.6 A number of Draft Plan Options have specific constraints relating to the historic environment associated with their particular location. However, there are also more generic effects relating to potential impacts on the setting of historic features and undesignated marine features, such as some wrecks. The following mitigation has therefore been identified.

• Direct effects on features of the historic environment can be avoided through the appropriate siting of devices away from the location of historic marine features. This might include locating developments away from known and designated wrecks, or as a result of surveys identifying previously unknown archaeological remains.
• Project level assessments should consider the potential impacts on the setting of sites and seek to mitigate accordingly to minimise any such effects.

Landscape and Seascape

7.2.7 Recommendations relating to specific Draft Plan Options and features of interest in their locality are set out in the following section. However, there are some broader recommendations:

• Whilst devices and supporting infrastructure could be visible for all of the technologies, if not in whole then partially, the likely height of wind turbines and thus greater visibility may result in impacts of a greater significance from development within some wind Draft Plan Options. As a result, particular attention to visual effects will be required when considering projects that may come forward.
• Wave devices that sit above the water surface may have greater visual and seascape effects than those that sit in the water column. However, above water devices may be more suitable for locations further offshore and water column devices in near shore locations. In this case, the potential visual impacts in both locations may be reduced.
• Whilst below surface tidal devices may have lower significance of effects this does not mean there will be no effects.
• Given the high quality landscapes and seascapes associated with many of the Draft Plan Options, an assessment of the impacts on landscape and seascape character should form part of project level EIA and significant effects should be avoided if possible, or reduced through appropriate design and construction.
• Development that will affect NSA should avoid adverse effects on the integrity of the area or the qualities for which it has been designated.
• The use of lighting on devices has the potential to create impacts, particularly during the night. However, devices positioned several kilometres offshore may have reduced effects, with wind devices and some wave devices falling into this category. Near shore devices may therefore have a greater impact, particularly where there are sensitive receptors. However, given the likely lower levels of occupancy, the significance of these impacts may be reduced. Project level assessment will be required to consider the implications of device design, array size and location in terms of proximity to sensitive receptors.
• There is the potential for cumulative effects associated with a number of development areas. Primarily, there is the potential for effects from massing of devices with other planned and existing offshore renewable energy developments, the onshore components of the movement of generated energy and existing onshore wind developments. The capacity of landscapes to absorb change should be considered in detail within project level EIA.
• As a result of the above, a full visual impact assessment will be required at the project level to establish the significance of any effects. Visual impacts on key onshore receptors could be limited by appropriate positioning within the Draft Plan Options.

7.3 Regional Recommendations for Draft Plan Options

North East

7.3.1 The assessment of Draft Plan Options for wind energy ( OWNE1 and OWNE2) in the North East region has identified the potential for interaction with a number of marine mammals and birds, in particular mobile species associated with designated areas along Scotland's eastern coastline. This includes seabirds known to travel between many locations from the Moray Firth to the Firth of Forth. Furthermore, Atlantic salmon and Bottlenose dolphins from the Moray Firth and Grey seals from the Firth of Tay have the potential for interactions with wind devices and their foundations. Project level EIA should include detailed impact assessment on protected species identified as being present in development areas.

7.3.2 The area is busy with commercial shipping and ferries, and developments within the Draft Plan Options should demonstrate mitigation measures to avoid any increased risks from collision. It is anticipated that existing mitigation measures are available to do this.

7.3.3 Both of the Draft Plan Options overlap with the Southern Trench MPA area of search. However, as an area of search, the boundaries presented for the MPA may not necessarily be those that will represent any future proposed MPA within it. Rather than propose alteration to the boundary of the Draft Plan Options, it is recommended that projects within the Draft Plan Option will need to demonstrate through project level EIA that co-location is possible and development is compatible with the conservation objectives of the MPA. Co-location of devices and MPA designations may not result in significant effects, depending on the interaction between marine features and technologies. The Southern Trench MPA area of search has Minke whale and White-beaked dolphin interest features. As such, collision and displacement risk should be part of this consideration.

North

7.3.4 The assessment of Draft Plan Options in the North region has identified the potential for interaction with a number of marine species. For example, Draft Plan Options in the Pentland Firth, Orkney and Shetland has particular bird sensitivities and interests. Developments within Draft Plan Options across Orkney and Shetland will need to consider Grey and Harbour seals with many haul out sites and their presence within SAC designations.

7.3.5 Cetaceans and fish species are known to use these northern waters, including several commercial fish species that nurse in these waters ( e.g. Mackerel to the north and north west of Shetland). Elasmobranchs, including PMFs such as Basking Sharks, have also been sighted in northern waters.

7.3.6 Project level EIA should include a detailed assessment of impacts on PMFs and other important species when assessing potential developments within the Draft Plan Options.

7.3.7 The region has a coastline rich with landscape designations and remote and wild areas in the vicinity of several of the Draft Plan Options, including several NSAs located on the mainland and islands. Consideration of these important landscapes and character should form part of project level assessments. In particular, projects within Draft Plan Options WN3 and TN5 should demonstrate no significant adverse effects on the Shetland NSA.

7.3.8 The region contains several designated coastal features of importance to the historic environment. The potential for impacts on the setting of these features should be considered through the EIA process and demonstrate that adverse effects are avoided or minimised, not least the Heart of Neolithic Orkney WHS Site. As an international heritage designation, developments in these areas must demonstrate no significant adverse effects on its outstanding universal value. Projects that come forward within Draft Plan Options OWN1, WN2, TN2, and potentially TN3, should consider effects on this important designation through project EIA.

7.3.9 The region's seas are busy with commercial and recreational vessels, and activities such as fishing, angling, cruising, sailing, diving and surfing present within the region. Developments should avoid cumulative impacts of displacement on recreational activities and identify through project EIA the means to enable impacts on such activities (and human health) to be minimised.

7.3.10 The boundaries of several Draft Plan Options were identified as overlapping with designated nature conservation sites. These include: Draft Plan Options WN1 overlapping with Strathy Point SAC; WN2 overlapping with the Marwick SPA, Stromness Heath and Coast SPA and the Hoy SPA; TN1 overlapping with the North Caithness Cliffs SPA, Hoy SPA and Pentland Firth Island SPA; TN2 overlapping with Rousay SPA; TN3 overlapping with Papa Westray SPA; TN4 overlapping with East Sanday Coast SPA and Ramsar and Sanday SAC; WN3 and TN5 overlapping with the Sumburgh Head SPA; TN6 overlapping with Yell Sounds Coast SAC; TN7 overlapping with the Hermaness, Saxa Vord and Valla Field SPA, and the northern perimeter of OWN2 overlapping with the Pobie Bank c SAC. Whilst the development of wind and wave devices may be possible within these designations, it must be demonstrated through project level HRA that any development does not adversely affect the integrity of the designations. The number of designations illustrates the importance of biodiversity and nature conservation to the region.

7.3.11 Additionally, several of the region's Draft Plan Options are also in proximity to or overlapping with proposed MPAs. These include Draft Plan Options OWN1, TN4 and WN2 overlapping with the North West Orkney MPA, with sand eel and geomorphology interest; WN2 and TN3 overlapping with the Papa Westray MPA, proposed for Black guillemot and the Marine Geomorphology of the Scottish Shelf Seabed; and TN2 overlapping with Wyre and Rousay Sounds MPA, proposed for kelp and seaweed communities on sublittoral sediment, maerl beds and marine geomorphology. Collision and displacement risk with PMFs, and the potential for impacts on the seabed and benthic communities should therefore be considerations when ascertaining the links between development within the Draft Plan Options and the MPAs. Developments within the Draft Plan Options will need to demonstrate through project level EIA that co-location is possible and development is compatible with the conservation objectives of the MPA.

North West

7.3.12 As with all of the regions, the Draft Plan Options in the North West have potentially significant interactions with cetaceans, seals, birds, fish and elasmobranchs, and project level assessment should include a detailed impact assessment on protected species.

7.3.13 Similarly given the high quality landscapes and seascapes within this region, many of which are identified as wildness, both on the mainland and on the isle of the Lewis, development within the Draft Plan Options should demonstrate measures to avoid and reduce significant effects. Project level assessment should identify the appropriate locations within Draft Plan Options and distance from the shoreline to minimise and avoid significant seascape and visual effects.

7.3.14 Commercial shipping routes are popular in and around the Draft Plan Options, and any impacts on safety from renewables development should be considered in project level EIA.

7.3.15 The region has many designated areas and the potential for impacts on these will form an important part of project level EIA and HRA. WNW1 in particular includes the Flannan Isles SPA, overlaps with the proposed Eye Peninsula and Butt of Lewis MPA and its boundaries are in proximity to St Kilda, which is designated as a SPA, SAC and WHS. As an international heritage designation, developments in the areas must demonstrate no significant adverse effects on its outstanding universal value.

7.3.16 Whilst the development of wind and wave devices may be possible within these designations, it must be demonstrated through project level HRA that development does not adversely affect the integrity of SPAs and SACs, and project EIA will need to demonstrate that co-location is possible and any development is compatible with the conservation objectives of the MPA.

West

7.3.17 The large West region contains several Draft Plan Options and has many valued environmental features. There will be a wide array of interest features including marine mammals, birds, fish, elasmobranchs, heritage and landscape features to consider when undertaking project level assessment within the Draft Plan Options.

7.3.18 Within a number of Draft Plan Option area assessments, it has been noted that effects on some aspects of biodiversity and on landscapes could be reduced by appropriate location of devices within the Draft Plan Option. This should be balanced with project level assessment, available mitigation and technical feasibility. However, opportunities to reduce the scale of potential effects should be sought in subsequent locational project planning.

7.3.19 The region contains a number of shellfish waters and although it is considered that mitigation to reduce and avoid impacts on these is available, they will remain a consideration for the scoping of project level EIA.

7.3.20 Across the region's mainland and islands there are many valued and important landscapes, both designated ( e.g. South Uist Machair and Loch Na Keal NSAs) and undesignated, including those considered to be remote and wild land. Project level EIA should give consideration to these important landscapes and character. This applies to all options but particular landscape value has been considered for Draft Plan Options in proximity to islands and remote peninsulas. The assessment of Draft Plan Option WW2 in particular recommends that projects in this area should only be developed where significant landscape effects are demonstrated to be minimised and avoided, based on the potential for landscape and cultural impacts.

7.3.21 The region contains many designated coastal features of importance to the historic environment. The potential for impacts on the setting of these features should be considered through the EIA process and it should be demonstrated that adverse effects are avoided or minimised.

7.3.22 Given the volume of mobile species in the area, all of the Draft Plan Options may impact on PMFs and designations. These are important issues to be explored at the project level. However, given the overlap of several Draft Plan Options with SPA, SAC or MPA search locations, boundaries should be kept under review as this consultation progresses.

7.3.23 The boundary of OWW2 was identified as overlapping with the Stanton Banks SAC. Furthermore WW4 overlaps with Mingulay and Berneray SPA. Whilst the development of wind and wave devices may be possible within these designations, it must be demonstrated through project level HRA that development does not adversely affect the integrity of the designations.

7.3.24 Draft Plan Options OWW2, WW2 and WW3 overlap with the Skye to Mull MPA search area, and Draft Plan Option TW2 has a small overlap with the Clyde Sea Sill MPA. As an area of search, the boundaries presented for the Skye to Mull MPA may not necessarily represent the final proposed MPA, and both MPA are presently at the consultation stage. The Skye to Mull MPA area of search has Basking shark and Minke whale interest features and the Clyde Sea Sill MPA Black guillemot interests. It should be noted that co-location of devices and MPA designations may be possible, depending on the interaction between marine features and devices. Collision and displacement risk will be particular considerations.

7.3.25 Development within Draft Plan Option will need to demonstrate through project level EIA that co-location is possible and that the development is compatible with the conservation objectives of the MPA.

South West

7.3.26 As with other regions the three Draft Plan Options in the South West region have potentially significant interactions with marine mammals, elasmobranchs, birds and fish, and project level assessment should include detailed impact assessment on protected species. Species such as Basking sharks, Atlantic salmon, Sea lamprey and Harbour porpoise in particular will require consideration.

7.3.27 Designated biodiversity sites are important considerations for potential developments within the region, and these should be considered at the project level. It is recommended that modelling and project level work may be required to demonstrate that there will be no significant impacts on Luce Bay SAC habitats, particularly as a result of changes to hydrology and sedimentation from the construction of devices in TSW1 and/or OWSW1. Similarly it is recommended that the assessments of developments in the Draft Plan Options should seek to minimise landscape effects on Luce Bay.

7.3.28 A small section of the boundary of Draft Plan Option TSW1 overlaps with the Luce Bay and Sands SAC and Mull of Galloway SAC. The boundary of this Draft Plan Option should be kept under review as consultation progresses. Location of tidal devices within the boundary may be possible if project level HRA can demonstrate development does not adversely affect the integrity of the SACs.

7.4 Wider Recommendations

7.4.1 In addition, the assessment has identified wider questions and considerations for improving knowledge of the effects of renewable energy developments in the marine environment.

7.4.2 Whilst this assessment provides focus for the potential effects of renewable energy technologies located within the Draft Plan Options, there are wider considerations in terms of the delivery of new development. Connections to the onshore electricity grid and across the marine environment are a major part of delivering commercial scale renewable development, demonstrated by their inclusion as a national development within the Main Issues Report for the National Planning Framework 3 ( NPF3) ^[71] . However, grid connections, and the identification of locations for these, do not form part of this plan process and assessment. It is recommended that provisions should be made for the strategic planning of the marine grid in order consider potential effects arising from the provision of grid infrastructure, and that strategic assessment of potential environmental effects is also undertaken.

7.4.3 The assessment process has highlighted difficulties in providing certainty in the prediction of effects. This reflects a number of issues, including uncertainty of the precise type of technology and the foundations and/or anchoring that would be developed in any individual Draft Plan Option, and hence the difficulty in predicting particular effects associated with devices and their receiving environment.

7.4.4 Furthermore, there remains uncertainty over the scale and significance of interactions between devices and species. Mobile species including cetaceans, seals, fish, elasmobranchs and birds may all interact with devices and all may be impacted through collision and displacement, which in turn may impact on their populations and patterns of movement.

7.4.5 This SEA, where appropriate, has attempted to consider and incorporate information on the effects of emerging projects identified in project level EIA. As many of these assessments are currently live applications with Marine Scotland Licensing Operations Team, the key outputs could not be considered in depth or certainty within this SEA process as they are still to receive regulatory acceptance. Future iterations of plans for offshore renewables would benefit from an understanding of the recorded environmental effects of project deployment.

7.4.6 It is therefore recommended that a co-ordinated approach to reviewing approved EIA and project monitoring should be developed. Any such approach would need to produce a framework in which effects prediction and monitoring information can be compiled and presented in order to provide greater certainty on effects, inform future iterations of the plan making process and potentially assist in the Scoping of project EIA. Furthermore, where uncertainty remains, further research within the existing frameworks should be considered and continue to be commissioned. A co-ordinated and collaborative approach should also help to direct future research to areas of value for the plan making and development process.

7.4.7 It is further recommended that a steering group is established for the monitoring of this SEA to discuss how this co-ordinated approach may be taken forward. It is anticipated that an established group might oversee the framework to collate monitoring environmental information, potentially input into project level assessment review and review of mitigation, and identify opportunities for research to close gaps in the certainty of impact assessment. The group could include a wide range of representatives but should include expertise for scientific accountability. It is proposed that during the consultation period the membership of the group is considered. Wider stakeholders and consultees are requested to share their thoughts on the potential for the development of a collaborative group.

7.4.8 Given existing uncertainties regarding some of the potential effects, it is recommended that further plan iterations may be required, particularly if research indicates environmental effects that are currently unforeseen. The recommendation for a steering group and plan review is in line with the recommendation in the HRA that a project steering group oversee monitoring review work of initial projects as part of iterative plan review ( IPR). An opportunity exists to establish a coordinated approach to meet the recommendations of both this SEA and the HRA.

7.5 Current and Ongoing Research

7.5.1 The results of the assessment, including the assumptions required to reach these, alongside the limitations and gaps in the evidence base, highlight the need for on-going research and information gathering regarding the marine environment and its interaction with renewable energy devices. Section 3.5 of this report sets out some of the difficulties encountered in undertaking the assessment.

7.5.2 Whilst there are existing limitations, in particular relating to baseline data, many areas of uncertainty are also the focus of current or planned research projects promoted through the Scottish Marine Renewables Research Group ( SMRRG), and undertaken by organisations including SNH, the Joint Nature Conservation Committee ( JNCC), Offshore Wind Developer Groups and the Crown Estate, amongst others.

7.5.3 Additionally, a number of related research activities and frameworks are also currently in place including: the Marine Mammal Scientific Support Research Programme managed by the Sea Mammal Research Unit ( SMRU) and focused on filling gaps in knowledge between marine mammal distribution and interactions with renewable energy; the Co-ordinated Agenda for Marine, Environment and Rural Affairs Science ( CAMERAS) which provides an overall framework for marine science in Scotland; and the Scottish Marine Science Strategy ^[72] .

7.5.4 Marine Scotland's Research Implementation Strategy ^[73] , produced to identify research to inform the development of offshore renewable energy, seeks to fill various gaps in current knowledge identified via their ongoing programme of work. It sets out research priorities and lists a wide range of projects being undertaken to fill these gaps, including projects relating to seabirds, marine mammals and migratory fish, amongst others.

7.5.5 Within the large array of research activities there are a number of projects that will help to add greater certainty to future assessment and iterations of marine planning. Studies such as the Joint Cetacean Protocol and tagging projects for Atlantic salmon are aimed at delivering greater understanding of species distributions and migratory routes. The monitoring projects for seals, cetaceans and elasmobranchs outlined in the Research Implementation Strategy have similar aims to improve the understanding of mobile species.

7.5.6 Aerial survey and modelling projects developed by TCE seek greater understanding of the movements of seabirds, and are complemented by existing Marine Scotland Science and TCE studies looking at displacement and disturbance effects on seabirds from offshore wind energy devices. The outcomes of other projects, such as the FAME project, may also provide further understanding of these issues.

7.5.7 Regional studies may also help to supplement the information that might inform future iterations of marine planning. For example research into monitoring seabird behaviour associated with offshore renewable developments in the vicinity of the protected North and East Caithness Cliff SPAs, which provide important habitats for seabirds, will help to inform the wider understanding of individual seabird species interactions with renewable devices. Other regional and project specific studies include bathymetry and habitat studies undertaken for specific renewables developments in the Pentland Forth and Orkney Waters.

7.5.8 Many such studies have been specifically developed to fill knowledge gaps in relation to interactions and the identification of effects between species and habitats, and renewables technologies. Planned research projects include: impacts of wave technology on benthic habitats and species, including seaweed; the potential for underwater noise and EMF from wave and tidal devices to affect marine mammals and other biota; the consideration of collision and entanglement risk for marine fauna with submerged renewables infrastructure; and the investigation of collision risk and modelling of device avoidance by diving birds associated with submerged tidal devices.

7.5.9 The findings from ongoing and future research programmes and projects, alongside academic studies and monitoring of deployed marine devices, have the potential to inform both the appropriate location of future development and potentially the design of renewables technology. The results of the research programmes are expected to inform future iterations of the plan making process.

7.6 Proposed Monitoring

7.6.1 The Environmental Assessment (Scotland) Act 2005, Part 3 (19) requires monitoring of the potential significant effects of the plans. The SEA of 'Blue Seas, Green Energy' ^[74] set out initial proposals for monitoring and included the enacted recommendation to commission the Marine Monitoring Network Review ^[75] . This sought to identify gaps in marine environmental data required to inform offshore wind, wave and tidal energy planning and assessment. The review included: identifying the current capabilities of the existing marine monitoring network in Scotland; examining the suitability of marine monitoring data to report on trend information; and recommendations on changes to the current monitoring network. This project has informed the identification of appropriate programmes to monitor the significant effects of the plans.

7.6.2 Initial proposals for the monitoring framework are set out in table below. Consultation on this Environmental Report provides an opportunity to refine the proposals before final measures are set out in the SEA post adoption statement. The views of consultees are now sought on the draft framework.

Table 7.1: Initial Monitoring Framework

SEA Topic	Significant Environmental Effects	Summary of Current Monitoring	Monitoring Required
Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna	Seabird and diving bird collision and displacement risk.	A number of seabird monitoring programmes are currently being undertaken by several organisations, including those by JNCC and Scottish Association for Marine Science ( SAMS), largely targeting taxonomy, migratory routes population, breeding information and population trends. These are complemented by survey and modelling studies undertaken for specific locations, such as that for TCE, characterising seabird use of the PFOW in areas considered for potential renewables development. Research into the connectivity between seabirds and offshore renewables developments is ongoing, and has involved numerous studies undertaken for Marine Scotland and TCE, amongst others. Like previous research to date, this work largely looks at measuring the risk of collision, potential effects on breeding at SPAs, and the likelihood of avoidance of some seabird species with specific technologies, including devices at operating test sites in Scottish waters. Other potential impacts such as the effects of underwater noise are also the subject of current research, including several studies being undertaken by SAMS and TCE.	Further understanding of seabird and diving bird collision risk and likelihood of impacts, particularly relating to emerging wave and tidal technologies. Further understanding of potential displacement effects associated with offshore renewables technologies, particularly emerging wave and tidal technologies. Collision and displacement modelling and monitoring as part of project level EIA for specific renewable technologies may also be beneficial.
	Marine mammal and fish collision and displacement risk.	Most research undertaken to date has targeted species distributions. Continuing cetacean distribution monitoring has been largely based upon sighting and survey information obtained from sources such as specific sightings programmes and by-catch monitoring ( e.g. Sea Mammal Research Unit ( SMRU), Seawatch, SNH). Similar programmes have been undertaken for seals, including species abundance and behaviour assessments undertaken by SNH in SAC site conditioning surveys, and Grey and Harbour seal population and behaviour research being undertaken by SMRU. Fish monitoring is undertaken by MSS, with important programmes involving catch, trawler and pelagic surveys amongst others. Programmes such as WFD assessments undertaken by SEPA, also investigate river basin fish abundance and morphology in water bodies. Surveys for other species such as Basking sharks, seals and Marine turtles, are based upon both reported sightings in Scottish waters and targeted surveys. For example, the MCS Basking shark project identified a number of surface feeding 'hotspots', and complements similar Marine Scotland and TCE programmes working towards determining the distribution of these important creatures. Current research programmes are more wide reaching, with several including both encounter rate modelling and cetacean entanglement with renewables devices in their remit. However, there remain significant data gaps and uncertainties in relation to the potential for adverse effects on mammal and fish species from marine renewables technologies.	Improved understanding of distribution and migratory routes of marine species in Scottish waters, particularly cetaceans, elasmobranchs and migratory fish ( e.g. Atlantic salmon). Improved understanding of the potential for collision and displacement impacts for marine fauna, particularly relating to emerging wave and tidal technologies.
	EMF effects on elasmobranchs and fish from submerged transmission infrastructure.	Little evidence into the EMF sensitivity of species such as elasmobranchs and migratory fish has been developed to date. There may be the potential to expand future studies into the population and distribution features of Basking sharks in Scottish waters to include issues such as sensitivity to EMF, disturbance and construction noise.	Research and project monitoring to improve understanding of the potential effects of EMF on marine fauna, particularly Basking sharks and fish species ( i.e. Atlantic salmon).
	Impacts to benthic habitats.	SNH currently undertake Site Condition Monitoring of protected areas ( e.g. SACs) to detect trends in the condition of threatened marine habitats and benthic species within the national and international site series. These surveys complement targeted benthic survey programmes such as those by Marine Scotland looking at seabed disturbance from marine activities ( e.g. dredging, trawling, etc.), the Deep Sea Benthic Biodiversity and Northern UK Intertidal Communities Surveys by SAMS, the Marine Biodiversity and Climate Change ( MarClim) programme, and WFD operation and surveillance monitoring by SEPA, each with benthic monitoring components. Project level assessments ( i.e. HRA and EIA) and ongoing monitoring programmes will have the potential to determine on-site effects of a particular development, and inform future assessments and located in proximity whilst also aiding the understanding of impacts associated with specific renewable technologies.	Targeted monitoring of impacts on benthic habitats at the project level for proposed renewables development. Improved understanding of the potential benthic effects associated with of construction and operation of renewables development, and the extent of adaptation of benthic communities to such works.
	Effects on protected areas and species.	SNH currently undertake Site Condition Monitoring of protected areas ( e.g. SACs) to detect trends in the condition of threatened habitats and species within the national and international site series. These surveys are complemented by other surveys such as the Deep Sea Benthic Biodiversity Survey by SAMS, the MarClim programme, and WFD Operation and Surveillance Monitoring by SEPA, which may facilitate the identification of impacts associated with renewables development on designated areas and species. Ongoing project level assessments and monitoring ( i.e. HRA and EIA) would add to these overarching programmes. Project monitoring has the potential to provide evidence of effect, if any, from offshore renewables development on nearby protected features.	Targeted monitoring of effects, either beneficial or adverse, of renewables technologies on protected sites and species. Improved understanding of the potential effects on habitats and species due to the construction and operation of renewables developments, and the extent of adaptation of these habitats and species to such works.
Population and Human Health	Displacement of recreational boating.	Royal Yachting Association Scotland ( RYAS) currently monitor recreational cruising and sailing activities in Scotland, and complement other studies such as those undertaken by Sailing and Tourism Scotland, which investigate the overall economic benefits of sailing tourism in Scotland. A planned study proposed by Visit Scotland, RYAS and Sea Anglers Conservation Network ( SACN) to determine the spatial extent and economic activity on tourist activities such as including sea angling and water sports, has the potential to inform future renewables development. The potential displacement of recreational activities will likely be a consideration in project-level assessment of prospective developments.	Continued monitoring of recreational boating activities in Scottish waters. Targeted consideration of displacement at the project level, including socio-economic aspects if appropriate.
	Disruption to commercial shipping.	Maritime transport statistics such as tonnages, vessel numbers utilising Scottish ports and travelling through Scottish waters, and Automatic Identification System ( AIS) traffic data is routinely collated by organisations such as the MCA and Lloyds List Intelligence. There may be the opportunity to use this collated data to monitor shipping impacts, and identify potential disruption to shipping routes associated with offshore renewable developments. A planned survey project involving TCE and the MCA amongst others may add to this data and also identify the need for setting priority areas for shipping and renewables.	Continued monitoring of maritime transport figures and traffic routes in Scottish waters. Targeted consideration of shipping displacement at the project level, including socio-economic aspects if appropriate.
	Increase in collision risk associated with development siting.	Marine incident monitoring programmes, such as those run by the Marine Accident Investigation Branch ( MAIB), provide detailed data on vessel collisions and groundings within UK waters. While these figures also include fatality information when applicable, other sources such as the National Water Safety Forum, also collate and report on water-related fatality data. While neither provide detail on collision risk, both are likely to be important sources of data to identify and monitor potential changes in incident occurrence that may be associated with collisions with offshore renewables infrastructure and service vessels. The reporting of collision incidents associated with the construction and operation of offshore renewables developments in accordance with standard health and safety practices, would likely be beneficial in identifying the likelihood of incidents at the project level.	Continued monitoring of collision incidents, including project-level reporting of collisions and near-miss events to identify the potential for increased collision occurrence, and potentially identify 'hotspots' for such incidents.
Water and the Marine Environment	Water quality impacts from construction and operation of offshore renewables.	Current programmes such as the monitoring and classification of coastal and transitional waters by SEPA, developed to meet Scotland's the requirements of the WFD, are likely to be the primary source of data in relation to water quality. Other more localised programmes, such as monitoring of Bathing Water status and Shellfish Water classification, may also provide some spatial perspective into water quality monitoring. However, they are unlikely to be sufficient to monitor localised impacts from offshore renewables development works. Undertaking ongoing monitoring at the local level will likely add to the existing overarching programmes, with the potential to provide evidence of the likelihood of effects of offshore renewables and construction impacts on local water quality. This may also aid future decision-making and inform future developments in nearby areas.	Monitoring of water pollution incidents during the construction and operation of renewable developments may be beneficial.
Climatic Factors	Contribution of renewable developments to meeting renewable energy targets.	The Scottish Government currently oversees the monitoring of Scotland's renewable energy generation, and assesses performance against current energy generation targets. The contribution of renewable energy technologies to emissions target reductions are monitored and reported.	Monitoring and reporting of electricity generation achieved by renewables developments.
	Contribution to reduction of GHG emissions.	The Scottish Government currently oversees monitoring of Scotland's renewable energy generation, and assesses performance against GHG emissions reduction targets.	Monitoring and reporting of GHG emissions reductions achieved by renewables developments.
Marine Geology and Coastal Processes	Seabed disturbance in areas of development ( e.g. scouring, shading, smothering).	At present, seabed monitoring is largely limited to protected habitats. SNH currently undertakes Site Condition Monitoring of protected sites to identify trends in the condition of threatened habitats. Site specific monitoring is also undertaken as part of consent conditions in select areas, for example, seabed monitoring for controlled activities such as aquaculture. Targeted studies, such as those completed for Marine Scotland in the Pentland Firth and Orkney Waters ( PFOW), have focused on habitat issues within specific areas considered likely for marine renewables. These studies may be suitable for inclusion as baseline data at the project level for future developments in these areas. The characterisation of seabed habitats is also a component of several other monitoring programmes, including MarClim and SAMS research, although these are largely biodiversity-focused rather than geological. Project level EIA work, and subsequent monitoring, will likely add to these overarching programmes. These may have the potential to inform future developments in the nearby area, and also provide evidence on the likelihood of effects on designated sites from construction and operations of offshore renewables developments.	Improved seabed habitat characterisation and data on the status of seabed habitats would be beneficial. Project-level seabed assessment and monitoring during construction and operation would be beneficial.
	Disturbance of contaminants present in seabed sediments.	Marine Scotland undertakes a regular monitoring programme of sea disposal sites and records are maintained of the material deposited. However, outwith these locations most seabed contamination is likely to be unknown prior to disturbance. Project level EIA work and subsequent project monitoring will likely be the primary source of data on contaminant disturbance and monitoring adverse effects.	Consideration of contamination disturbance and project level assessment and monitoring of the seabed during construction and operation would be beneficial.
	Changes to sediment dynamics and coastal processes from presence of devices.	Monitoring at the local level and the development of plans by many local authorities around Scotland, such as Shoreline Management Plans and Local Development Plans, provide the means for local identification of coastal impacts. Project level EIA and ongoing monitoring, may be useful in identifying potential changes and resulting coastal impacts.	Continued monitoring of coastal erosion in the vicinity of offshore renewables development may be beneficial in identifying visible impacts. Project-level assessment and monitoring of coastal processes during construction and operation would also be beneficial.
	Increase in coastal erosion/accretion due to presence of devices.	Existing climate change monitoring and projection programmes, such as the UK Climate Projections, consider coastal erosion and accretion issues. Monitoring at the local level via programmes, such as the adoption of Shoreline Management Plans by many local authorities around Scotland, provide a means of identification and action against coastal erosion at the local level. Monitoring of individual offshore renewables projects may also identify potential coastal effects.	Continued monitoring of coastal areas, particularly in the vicinity of offshore renewables development, may be beneficial in identifying erosion and accretion effects. Project-level assessment and monitoring of effects such as coastal changes near offshore renewables development, would likely be beneficial.
Historic Environment	Physical damage to marine archaeology and historic assets in coastal areas.	The listing and scheduling of historic assets is carried out by Historic Scotland who also oversee the monitoring of scheduled monuments including those in coastal and marine areas. The Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland ( RCAHMS) also carry out threatened buildings studies to enhance their national database of Scotland's Places (Canmore). Coastal monitoring programmes such as the Shorewatch programme co-ordinated by the SCAPE Trust also monitor the condition of a wide range of archaeological sites around Scotland's coastline. In addition, local communities often report damage to sites or monuments and can help to identify local pressures. However, there are significant data gaps in relation to coastal and marine asset monitoring data.	Continued monitoring on coastal assets may be beneficial. Project-level assessment and monitoring of nearby coastal and marine archaeological sites during construction and operation is likely to be beneficial.
	Effects on setting of historic assets in coastal areas.	Changes to the setting of historic sites in the coastal environment are likely to be location-specific. However, previous investigations including those for other renewables developments in close proximity to a proposed development, may aid in the consideration of setting issues. It is likely that project level EIA will consider the setting of historic assets located in proximity to a prospective development, if any.	Project-level assessment of potential impacts to the setting of historic sites is likely to be required for offshore renewables developments, particularly for wave and wind technologies.
Landscape and Seascape	Effects on landscape and seascape from offshore renewables developments.	Impacts on landscape and seascape value on an area as a result of offshore development are likely to be location-specific. Broad seascape studies, such as the planned seascape assessment of the PFOW associated with planned renewable activities managed by Marine Scotland and TCE, amongst others, may form a key resource for the consideration of these issues within these areas. Similarly, previous EIA investigations in the vicinity of a development, may aid consideration of such issues. It is likely that project level EIA investigations will consider the potential for landscape/seascape impacts for all prospective developments.	Project level assessment and modelling of potential landscape/seascape impacts may be required for many offshore renewables developments, particularly if located near to recognised scenic areas, and involving wave and wind technologies.