Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of the Scottish Climate Change Bill: Consultation Proposals: Environmental Report

Covering Letter

Please note, this response is in regard only to the adequacy and accuracy of the Environmental Report and comments SEPA has on the SCCB consultation itself have been provided separately.

Noted.

SEPA welcomes the undertaking of a Strategic Environmental Assessment on the SCCB consultation and considers that it is a very comprehensive document that covers the issues in considerable detail and, importantly, identifies a comprehensive range of mitigation measures.

Noted.

Given the comprehensive nature of the work, SEPA would recommend that a simplified report is prepared to support the introduction of the SCCB to Parliament which clearly sets out the key findings and mitigation measures.

This will help inform decision making on the Bill as it progresses through Parliament.

The SCCB Team are in favour of providing an effective summary through the SEA Statement.

As the SCCB consultation is finalised, the Scottish Government, as Responsible Authority, will be required to take account of the findings of the Environmental Report and of views expressed upon it during this consultation period.

As soon as reasonably practical after the adoption of the plan, the Responsible Authority should publish a statement setting out how this has occurred.

SEPA normally expects this to be in the form of an " SEA Statement" similar to that advocated in the Scottish Government SEA templates and toolkit.

A copy of the SEA statement should be sent to the Consultation Authorities via the Scottish Government SEA Gateway on publication.

Noted.

Environmental Report

General Comments

SEPA recognises the difficulties and practical constraints in undertaking SEA of a strategic consultation document and consider that in most areas you have been successful in using the assessment to identify issues for consideration as the Bill itself is prepared.

Noted.

At a general level, the one key concern is, in fact, that it may be a little too comprehensive to the point that it becomes very complex and as a result difficult to read through the various stages of assessment.

That said; the findings of the assessment, as set out in chapter 6 and the non technical summary, are actually very clear in terms of the positive, negative and cumulative effects upon each of the SEA topics.

Accepted.

Due to the complexity of the issue, the wide ranging implications of the SCCB, and constraints on developing an acceptable methodology and preparing the report in conjunction with consultation deadlines, the final presentation of analyses could have been improved.

As the SCCB consultation is progressed and the Bill itself prepared and indeed introduced to parliament, it would be helpful for a very simple overview of the assessment findings to be prepared (eg from the non technical summary or via the SEA statement) in order to help inform debate on the Bill and its implications.

Following discussions with the SCCB Team, the SEA Statement will fulfil this requirement.

Re.

Question 31

The SCCB consultation itself asked:

" should provisions within the Environmental Assessment (Scotland) Act 2005 be amended in order to provide clearer links with emissions reductions and if so how should this be done ?".

As noted in our response to the consultation, SEPA considers that using the SEA process to evaluate progress by public bodies in integrating greenhouse gas reduction targets into plan-making is supported.

In addition to this, there is a big opportunity to influence the climate effects other plans and programmes through this Environmental Report.

For example, the adoption and implementation of a mitigation measure that encourages Responsible Authorities to identify the contribution of their plans and programmes to climate change objectives or to the proposed 80% target would enable reporting of the contribution of each plan and programme through its SEA.

As noted in our response to the Bill consultation, SEPA would be very pleased to work with the Scottish Government and the SEA consultation authorities to investigate ways in which SEA could be used proactively to integrate emissions reduction into plans and programmes.

Potential future guidance on climate issues within SEA is likely to play a key part in embedding the SCCB targets and emissions reduction throughout public policy.

Similarly, the SEA monitoring framework is intended to integrate with proposals for SCCB reporting as far as possible.

SCCB proposals for ministers to report on future policies and plans for emissions reduction and climate adaptation should be accompanied by appropriate SEA if expected to have significant environmental effects.

The Scottish Government has considered the views which SEPA and SNH have expressed on the SEA process in their responses to the consultations on both the Scottish Climate Change Bill proposals and the related Environmental Report.

The Environmental Assessment (Scotland) Act 2005 is a relatively new piece of legislation and users are still learning how best to work within the framework it sets out.

The Scottish Government considers that the most appropriate measure in the first instance is to seek to amend the SEA guidance to embed consideration of emissions in the assessment process.

The Scottish Government is now working with SEPA to consider how the SEA guidance might best be improved.

Environmental Report

Detailed Comments

1. Introduction

We note the position that the SEA is of the consultation proposals and not of the Bill itself and also that there may be no assessment of the adopted version of the Bill following the Parliamentary handover and the legislative process.

SEPA cannot comment on whether this is compliant with the SEA legislation.

We are of the view, however, that given the comprehensive nature of the assessment that has been undertaken on the SCCB consultation and, on the assumption that the findings of the Environmental Report are fully taken into account as the Bill is drafted, that we are broadly content with this approach.

The SEA presented an assessment of the environmental implications of a wide range of possible emissions reduction activities, and of the various options for the drafted Bill contained within the consultation document.

It is anticipated that as the Bill is drafted, the findings of the SEA will be taken into account and, should any significant additions/ changes be made, these will be assessed in their own right.

The primary purpose of the Scottish Climate Change Bill is to set a target to reduce emissions by 80% by 2050; establish a framework to set a trajectory to achieve that target, to ensure decisions are taken on the basis of appropriate expert advice and to put reporting and scrutiny measures in place to ensure transparency.

Targets in isolation do not have an environmental effect but the activities undertaken to meet them may. The SEA on the consultation proposals for a Scottish Climate Change Bill sought to reflect this.

Separate policies will have to be brought forward following the parliamentary passage of the Bill in order to deliver the 80% emissions reduction by 2050.

Each of these will be considered on their own merits and SEA will be undertaken where appropriate.

As noted above, it would be helpful to flag up as part of the parliamentary handover the SEA work that has been completed, its key findings and the way in which it has been taken into account in progress towards the Bill.

This will help inform debate on the Bill.

This can be done via the SEA Statement that will be published as the Bill is introduced and we assume that this will be made available to the Parliament alongside other supporting documents.

Discussions on the most appropriate means to provide a summary of key findings and the way in which they have been taken into account, in order to inform parliamentary debate, and to meet the Post Adoption requirements of the SEA legislation will be held.

The full range of SEA documents will be available to Parliament.

We note that any further assessment as the Bill progresses will be at the discretion of Scottish Ministers.

We acknowledge that this is a practical arrangement that reflects the uncertainties regarding progress of the Bill and the possibility that its provisions may be amended.

It is SEPA's view that there would be merit, if at all possible within the constraints of parliamentary procedure, in considering any significant environmental effects that may arise from proposed changes to the Bill.

After parliamentary handover, this particular SEA project will close; however, the SCCB Team may have to discuss the implications of such changes with the SEA Gateway and potentially legal advisors.

Scottish Ministers do not plan to make any amendments to the Bill which will be outwith the scope of the existing Environmental Report.

If non-governmental amendments are made which are considered to have an environmental effect outwith the areas considered in the Environmental Report it may be most appropriate to consider separate strategic environmental assessment of the proposed actions to implement such provisions.

2. SEA Methodology

This chapter is helpful in setting out the context for the assessment.

SEPA welcomes the inclusion (as Annex A) of a summary of the scoping consultation and a summary of the way in which views expressed have been taken into account.

We are content that our views made at scoping have been taken into account.

Noted.

3. Policy Drivers and Context for the SCCB

This summary provides a clear context for the SCCB and is very helpful.

SEPA requested in its scoping report a brief summary of the context for climate change science, policy and action in order to aid consultation on the Environmental Report and this section does this comprehensively.

Noted.

4. Key Environmental Issues

In association with the policy context in Chapter 3, this summary provides a clear environmental context for the SCCB and is very helpful.

Noted.

5. Assessment of SCCB Proposals

The assessments in this section are extremely comprehensive for such a strategic level document and we welcome and support the effort that has gone into evaluating the potential effects of the provisions of the SCCB consultation.

The assessments gradually focus from a strategic overview by sector (in phase 1) to a comprehensive evaluation of the key proposals and consultation questions in the SCCB.

Such an approach is comprehensive, but does in places become rather complex and difficult to understand.

It is also unclear how the different phases relate to each other.

However, the summary provided in chapter 6 which brings all the findings together is much clearer and focuses on the key findings of the assessment.

Some detailed points on the assessments are provided below.

The SEA did not develop 'new' approaches/ guidance to emissions reduction, but did provide a comprehensive review of potential environmental implications of such actions, with each phase of assessment informing the next.

A summary of the intended relationships between phases of assessment will be provided in the SEA Statement.

Energy Sector
(p 30)

Under "water", reference should also be made to impacts on waterbody status from water based renewables - eg hydro, offshore wind, marine renewables such as wave and tidal devices.

Some of these impacts on water will also affect water dependent biodiversity.

Accepted.

This reviewed version of the ER incorporates these impacts.

Transport Sector
(p 31)

Under "land", one would expect an increase in use of biomass for fuel to have impacts on Scotland's land that should be recorded.

This may also lead to effects on population (eg through diverting land away from food crops) which should also be recorded.

The potential for increased use of biofuel in both energy and transport sectors driven by the 80% target is an issue that deserves some focus in this assessment as the implications of this are quite significant for many issues.

Accepted.

This reviewed version of the ER incorporates these impacts.

Waste Management
(p 37)

The most effective means of reducing greenhouse gas emissions from waste is to adopt a waste management regime that deals with waste as far up the waste hierarchy (prevent, reuse, recycle (including composting), recover and dispose) as possible.

You will be aware that the Government has, since publication of the SCCB, made an announcement regarding its vision for waste management in Scotland which calls for 70% recycling by 2025 and proposes a cap of 25% of all municipal waste being used to generate energy.

The assessment notes that energy from waste facilities will have impacts on local communities.

While SEPA does not contend this statement, it should be noted:

(a) that all waste management facilities will have impacts on those living close to them (eg. from vehicle movements or from emissions from that waste management process) and

(b) that these emissions will be strictly controlled through both the land use planning and environmental consenting processes to ensure that adverse effects are prevented or minimised.

Accepted.

This reviewed version of the ER incorporates these impacts.

6. Anticipated Significant Effects

As noted above, this section is extremely important in bringing together all of the more complex assessments into a single summary of the key environmental effects.

It is our view that this has been done comprehensively.

We also welcome the summary of potential cumulative effects which are cited here.

As a result, SEPA has no significant comments on this section, although under the water section you should note potential negative effects on waterbodies may also occur as a result of marine and water based renewables.

Noted.

This reviewed version of the ER incorporates these impacts.

7. Mitigation and Enhancement

SEPA considers that mitigation is a very important part of SEA in ensuring that the adverse effects of a plan are addressed.

Accordingly SEPA supports the inclusion of this section which, like the assessments, is very comprehensive.

In particular, we welcome the inclusion of suggestions regarding ways to maximise environmental gain in the SCCB.

SEPA would recommend that as you move towards introducing the Bill and preparing the SEA Statement you consider including a section which identifies those mitigation measures that will be put into place along with an indication of when those actions will be implemented and by whom.

This will help to ensure that the measures are actually put into place as the Bill is taken forward.

The Environmental Report made suggestions on a range of data sources and indicators for SEA monitoring that could help inform wider SCCB reporting.

Discussions on the developing SEA statement will consider the most appropriate means to integrate SEA monitoring with SCCB reporting mechanisms.

These will include identifying the most appropriate means to incorporate mitigation proposals and responsibilities.

As noted in the response to no. 8 above, the Scottish Climate Change Bill is primarily intended to create the targets and framework to drive subsequent climate change policies.

The Scottish Government published a SEA Scoping Report investigating the range of emissions reduction measures potentially open to Scottish Ministers (available from: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Environment/Climate-Change/16327/Climate-Change-Bill/Scopingreport/Q/forceupdate/on).

Work is ongoing to build on this study, and the work of the UK Committee on Climate Change, to develop a strategic overview of policies to deliver the 80% emissions reduction, and a recent report by AEA Technology is available online at http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/244863/0068651.pdf

The Scottish Government intends to make further announcements on these policies in due course.

One matter that you may wish to consider is the extent to which the SCCB has the potential to deliver some of the mitigation measures put forward.

While SEPA supports the measures put forward and recognise that these are extremely comprehensive, it is difficult to see how the Bill will implement some of them as they rely on other drivers which may well be outwith the Bill's remit.

That said, the measures are a useful reminder to the Scottish Government and public bodies of the measures that they can put in place to contribute to the proposed 80% target through their own activities.

An implementation framework such as that suggested above would assist with this.

See response to no. 17 above.

The Scottish Climate Change Bill is primarily about setting a statutory framework and the SEA assessed the potential environmental impact of this by considering measures which may be brought forward in the future to deliver the 80% reduction in emissions.

Therefore, the SEA makes reference to mitigation of potential impacts that are not directly associated with the Bill itself.

Subsequent delivery policies will be considered individually and further SEAs carried out, if required.

The Environmental Report stated that further discussions will be required between the Climate Bill Team and environmental consulting authorities to determine the most effective monitoring and mitigation framework.

It is likely that this will develop further over the lifetime of the SCCB.

8. Monitoring Framework

The identified set of potential environmental indicators that may be used to monitor the significant environmental effects are extremely comprehensive and SEPA supports their identification.

For the most part, the indicators are directly linked to activities the SCCB will closely influence and, accordingly, when monitored should provide an accurate reflection of the SCCB's effects.

Given that the Bill will set a 40+ year trajectory, the list of environmental indicators is likely to develop over time as the policies for achieving emissions reductions are implemented.

As the Bill is based upon achieving reductions in emissions, the statutory reporting framework will be based around data which shows the progress being made in this respect.

Ministers will be required by the Bill to report emissions figures on an annual basis.

Longer-term reporting will also cover proposed and ongoing emissions reduction and climate change adaptation policies.

The Bill will also require independent expert advice to inform future target setting.

Covering Letter

General Comments

Overall, the Environmental Report provides a well-balanced assessment of the potential environmental effects arising from the proposed Bill.

The following comments on the Environmental Report are further to our comments on the consultation itself.

Noted.

Covering Letter

General Comments

We have argued in our consultation response that the Scottish Climate Change Bill should more clearly relate the intended target to the goal of avoiding dangerous climate change.

Only in this way can the target be justifiably and robustly adjusted should emissions projections or the understandings of climate change science, change.

Comment refers to Tyndall Centre Analyses.

At the time of producing the ER, cumulative targets were not favoured by the SCCB team and only receive minimal attention in the preliminary assessments in the ER Appendices.

Action on climate change requires a global response.

Scottish greenhouse gas emissions account for just 0.15% of the global total.

It would not therefore be credible for a Scottish target to use such global measures, so the target is specified in terms of Scottish emissions.

The Bill will require Scottish Ministers to take account of independent expert advice before setting any of the emissions budgets which will set the trajectory towards achieving the 80% target.

The Bill will allow the 80% target to be adjusted in secondary legislation should it be judged necessary to do so in light of developing understanding of climate change science.

This is relevant to this SEA as there are frequent references, especially in the Detailed Assessment Matrices (Section 5.7) and Anticipated Significant Effects (Section 6) to the relative unimportance of Scottish emissions in the global context.

This is an argument which nearly all countries could adopt and could potentially lead to inaction, which would run contrary to the case for action by Scotland set out in the consultation paper.

It is therefore of importance that the proposed emissions from Scotland can be related to a 'Scottish fair share' of the global emissions total.

The ER simply recognises that Scottish reductions alone will not be sufficient to significantly impact global climate change.

If Scottish emissions represent 0.15% of current global GHG emissions, and if the SCCB is successful in delivering an 80% reduction, then Scottish emissions could be as little as 0.03% (at current rates of global emissions).

This is much more equitable in light of Scotland's population of around 0.1% of global population.

If global emissions decrease through similar action in other countries, the Scottish share will once again increase, and IPCC accounting mechanisms should allow confirmation of the relative percentage.

In bringing forward this Bill, Scotland is taking the first step in the action called for in the consultation paper.

As noted in the response to point no. 17 above, work is underway to develop the right policies for Scotland to deliver the necessary emissions reductions over the long term.

It is considered that in seeking to achieve an 80% reduction in emissions is a sufficiently ambitious target.

Section 3

Policy Drivers and Context for the SCCB

We agree with the suggestion in paragraph 3.5.2 that SEA guidance and requirements on the consideration of greenhouse gas emissions and climatic factors within environmental assessment procedures should be strengthened.

This will help maintain a focus on emissions reduction not only within government policies but also in private and public sector development proposals.

We envisage a clear role for SEPA within environmental assessment processes - both SEA and EIA - to act as the consultation authority in respect of greenhouse gas emissions, by commenting on the assessments made on potential emissions.

We also welcome development by the Scottish Government of a carbon assessment tool for evaluation of the next Spending Review.

See response to comment #8 above.

Paragraphs

3.5.20 - 3.5.24

Discuss the National Planning Framework, which we agree is a key determinant of whether Scotland develops a low- or high-carbon infrastructure.

Note that the National Planning Framework now has statutory status following the passage of the Planning (Scotland) Act 2006.

We have responded separately to the consultation on the National Planning Framework 2 Discussion Document and its associated SEA.

We might repeat here our concerns that the proposed emphasis on increased connectivity and airport enhancement could lead to the development of infrastructure associated with a high-carbon economy.

Noted - the ER states that the NPF is non-statutory and this is accepted as an error, which is addressed in this revised edition.

As previously noted, the Scottish Climate Change Bill is primarily intended to set high-level emissions reduction targets and the framework for achieving them.

The emissions reductions will be achieved by a variety of measures on the basis of what is most cost effective.

The Bill as introduced will not contain any provisions relating to the National Planning Framework.

Paragraphs

3.5.25 - 3.5.28

Discusses Scotland's Transport Strategy.

They state that biofuels are widely recognised as a more environmentally sound option.

This statement must be substantially qualified.

International discussions are still underway with a view to ensuring that biofuels are based on sustainable production - for example using crops which do not replace valuable habitats and grown and harvested such that significant life cycle carbon savings are achieved.

There are also global issues emerging about competition between land for biofuels and food.

Biofuels are indeed likely to play an important role in carbon reduction for transport, but great care will be needed initially, with the real potential probably realised only when second generation biofuels (based on ligno-cellulose) become economic.

The statement on biofuels was taken directly from the Government's own SEA of the National Transport Strategy.

The issues raised by SNH are accepted and the ER does discuss sustainable sourcing, local impacts and international trading restrictions under Material Assets and Transport Mitigation on p86.

It is accepted that there are significant difficulties and issues associated with the sustainable development and growth of acceptable biofuel solutions, but the ER simply recognises that they are likely to be of increasing importance within the future transport fuel mix.

These statements are qualified in this revised edition of the ER.

Section 5

Assessment of SCCB Proposals

We welcome the emphasis on life cycle analysis in the recommendations and mitigation for the energy and transport sectors.

This should extend to other sectors, for example:

• to agriculture and land use, including assessments of greenhouse gas emissions from different farming systems and food supply from farm to plate;
• to the business sector (where product mapping increasingly uses life-cycle analysis), and
• in the public sector, where there remains a risk that financial constraints could lead to capital investment decisions which are lower cost but more carbon-intensive.

It is anticipated that such assessments will become more widespread across all sectors as the need to meet emissions reductions and the understanding of embedded energy and carbon considerations improves.

Whilst it is agreed that such assessments would lead to environmental benefits, the Scottish Climate Change Bill itself is will not place a specific duty to incorporate LCA.

This could potentially be achieved via one of the enabling powers in the Bill but is more likely to develop organically through improving best practice guidance.

Section 5.4

Stage 2 Assessment of Potential GHG Reductions

We agree with the range of potential environmental effects arising from the emission reduction measures noted here.

In many cases the effects can be mitigated by adopting an appropriate strategic approach to the siting of development, and through detailed planning, design and implementation of specific measures.

See response to point no. 17 above.

In accordance with SEPA's comments addressed under #17/17a above, it is accepted that the wide range of mitigation measures should be reviewed to target more strategic options suitable to the level of the Draft SCCB.

Such a summary will be incorporated within the SEA Statement.

Section 5.7

Detailed Assessment Matrices

In the Table of the Preferred Options Assessments (p.47), the assessment for 'Q1 carbon dioxide based target' is positive for soils.

However, a CO₂-only target could lead to perverse outcomes.

For example, the emissions saved by some windfarm developments on peat-rich soils could be substantially overstated if the assessments fail to take account of potential emissions of greenhouse gases (including methane) resulting from land use change.

The overall assessment for a CO ₂-only target on soils should therefore be '+/-' (potentially positive or negative (mixed) effects).

This reviewed version of the ER incorporates these impacts.

SEA guidance is being evaluated to determine how best to incorporate emissions reduction into these assessments.

EIA would likely be required to assess the environmental impact of each individual project.

Recent guidance has also been produced that updates SNH's own guidance on carbon balancing emissions related to wind farm development on peat soils.

We agree the assessment on p.50 that reducing emissions of methane and nitrous oxide in the agriculture and land use sector and a shift to less intensive agriculture could bring benefits for biodiversity, landscape, field patterns, boundaries and features.

We suggest that the assessment for Q1 Basket of greenhouse gases on p47 should be '+' while for Q1 Carbon dioxide-based target might be '0'.

Accepted.

This reviewed version of the ER incorporates these impacts.

Q12 (interim targets) is discussed on p.59, including a proposal for an interim target of a 40% reduction by 2025.

This is referenced to 2008 to give a slightly front-loaded emission reduction pathway (40% of the total target in the first 17 years and 25 years to meet the remaining 40%).

This is confusing because the consultation paper proposes baselines consistent with international agreements (1990 for CO _2, N ₂O and CH ₄, and 1995 for F-gases to accord with the Kyoto Protocol and subsequent developments under the UNFCCC) - and we support this.

Referenced to 1990, a 40% reduction by 2025 produces a pathway more consistent with the less desirable upper curve in Fig 6 of the consultation paper ( i.e. delayed emission reductions and greater cumulative emissions).

Interim targets of at least 40% by 2020 against a 1990 baseline are required to front-load emission reductions and move towards the lower, more desirable curve in Fig.6.

It is accepted that the discussion of interim targets within the ER did not correlate with the discussion within the consultation document, and this is accepted as an error.

The ER discussion would have been improved by simply removing the last two bullet points in this section, which would have prevented any discrepancy and confusion.

The Scottish Government accepts the principal of having a statutory interim emissions reduction target.

The Bill will therefore set an interim target of reducing Scottish emissions by 50% by 2030, which is the mid-point between 2010 and 2050.

Section 6

Anticipated Significant Effects

Table 6.1 (last bullet on p71) discusses carbon capture and storage and highlights effects such as ocean acidification and adverse impacts on biodiversity, flora and fauna.

We presume this refers to deep ocean storage of CO ₂ and/or to the potential for leakage from storage within depleted oil and gas reservoirs or saline aquifers, as suggested on p72.

We strongly agree with this assessment.

Hence it is vitally important that carbon capture and storage is directed towards secure geological reservoirs and that the security of these is adequately monitored.

It is accepted that the ER did not fully discuss the implications of CCS using suitably porous geological reservoirs (eg. appropriate sandstones) and that this is potentially a more secure/ viable option than ocean storage.

This is accepted as a limitation of the report, however SNH comments on the use and continued monitoring of the security of such sites are fully supported by the SEA.

This reviewed version of the ER incorporates these comments.

Parts of Table 6.1 stray away from environmental effects.

For example, in the section dealing with population (p74) there are references to business costs, lower standards of living, expensive travel, foreign holidays, out-of-season food, food costs, fuel costs for transport and limits on expenditure on luxury items.

We agree that these are potential outcomes, though they will depend in detail on the mix of policy measures pursued.

However, we suggest that all of these lie outwith the scope of this SEA assessment.

We note that the potential population benefits of mitigating climate change - for example by avoiding floods, famine, storm damage, drought, heat mortality across the planet - are not identified within this SEA.

We accept that these not be identified, but to be consistent, neither should potential social disbenefits.

As climate adaptation is to be considered under a separate study, mitigating climate change impacts were specifically excluded from this assessment.

The ER does state this as being a limitation to analysis; however, as this study was to focus on the environmental implications of emissions reductions, the statutory SEA requirement to discuss effects on population means that the particular range of impacts discussing quality/ standard of living on p74 can be justified in this case.

An Equality Impact Assessment of the proposals for the SCCB will be published prior to the Bill's introduction to the Scottish Parliament.

Scottish Government Consultation on Proposals for a Scottish Climate Change Bill

21,046 consultation responses received and collated by Scottish Government

Analysis of responses completed by Reid Howie Associates.

The report of the analysis is available at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2008/08/15113442/0

Q33.

Is there any existing legislation within the competence of the Scottish Parliament (devolved) which needs to be amended so that appropriate action on climate change can be taken by sectors in society?

RSPB Scotland would like to see changes to the legislation covering muirburn under the Hill Farming Act 1946.

Recent published studies show the growing season starting up to three weeks earlier in much of Scotland since 1961, with predicted changes of a similar magnitude over the next decade, as a result of climate change.

The breeding season for moorland birds is similarly advancing in spring and therefore it is important that the legislation allow for changes to the muirburn dates.

It would be helpful therefore, if the Climate Change Bill could facilitate such changes.

The ability to amend dates for Muirburn activities could be classed as an adaptation measure that allows flexibility in response to climatic and seasonal change in Scotland.

This SEA was restricted to consideration of emissions reduction measures and therefore such issues were not originally addressed.

At the specific request of the SCCB Team, provisions to allow amendment of muirburn dates have been assessed as part of the SEA Post Adoption stage, and the assessment is also included as Appendix I to this reviewed edition of the ER.