ForthWind Offshore Wind Demonstration Project, Methil, Fife

ForthWind Offshore Wind Demonstration Project,

Methil, Fife.

Volume 3: Technical Appendices

July 2015

Forthwind Ltd Environmental Statement

FORTHWIND LTD: ENVIRONMENT STATEMENT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The following Environment Statement and Technical Appendices constitutes Volume 3 of the Forthwind

Environment Statement.

It is supported by Volume 1: Environment Statement and Volume 2: Figures and Visualisations which are

provided in a separate folder

Section Number Appendix Title

Volume 3 Technical Appendices

A6.1 Aspect Geophysical Report

A7.1 Ornithology Technical Appendix

A7.2 Habitats Regulation Assessment Appendix

A10.1 Methil Benthic Survey Report

A12.1 Cultural Heritage DBA

A14.1 Survey Record Sheets and Calculations Certificates

A14.2 Noise Survey Wind Speed and Directions

A15.1 Navigational Risk Assessment

A19.1 Phase 1 FEPOWDT Phase 1 Survey Results

Aspect Land & Hydrographic Surveys Ltd

Thornhouse Business Centre Ballot Road, Irvine, Ayrshire KA12 0HW Tel: 01294 313 399 Fax: 01294 313 389

E-mail: [email protected]

Web: www.aspectsurveys.com

MULTIBEAM AND GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY

WIND TURBINE DEMONSTRATION PROJECT

METHIL

FIRTH OF FORTH

FINAL SURVEY REPORT

A5353

12th December 2014

COMPILED: E J Stacey

APPROVED: C D Thomson

Client:

2-B Energy Ltd Quayside House Dock Road Methil Dock Business Park Methil Fife KY8 3SR

2 A5353_Report of Survey_Rev 1

Table of Contents 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 2

2. Scope of Works .......................................................................................................................................... 4

3. Geodesy & Datum ...................................................................................................................................... 5

4. Multibeam Bathymetric Survey ................................................................................................................... 6

4.1 Multibeam Bathymetric Survey Equipment and Methods .................................................................... 6

4.2 Multibeam Bathymetric Survey Results .............................................................................................. 7

4.3 Multibeam Backscatter Survey Results............................................................................................... 9

5. Sub-Bottom Profiler Survey ...................................................................................................................... 10

5.1 Sub-Bottom Profiler Survey Equipment and Methods ....................................................................... 10

5.2 Sub-Bottom Profiler Survey Results ................................................................................................. 11

6. Sidescan Sonar Survey ............................................................................................................................ 18

6.1 Sidescan Sonar Survey Equipment and Methods ............................................................................. 25

6.2 Sidescan Sonar Survey Results ....................................................................................................... 25

7. Magnetometer Survey .............................................................................................................................. 35

7.1 Magnetometer Survey Equipment and Methods ............................................................................... 35

7.2 Magnetometer Survey Results ......................................................................................................... 35

8. Survey Vessels ........................................................................................................................................ 35

9. Survey Standards ..................................................................................................................................... 36

10. Personnel............................................................................................................................................. 37

Annex A ............................................................................................................................................................ 38

Annex B ............................................................................................................................................................ 39

Annex C............................................................................................................................................................ 40

Annex D............................................................................................................................................................ 42

Annex E ............................................................................................................................................................ 43

FIGURE 1 – MULTIBEAM BATHYMETRIC DATA AND PHASE 1 (BLACK) ........................................................ 5

FIGURE 2 - R2SONIC 2024 SYSTEM USED FOR THE BATHYMETRIC SURVEY ............................................. 6

FIGURE 3 – OVERVIEW OF BATHYMETRIC DATA IN SURVEY AREA, DEPTHS TO CD ................................. 7

FIGURE 4 – SECTION OF THE CABLE ROUTE LOOKING NORTH-EAST RUNNING FROM THE SHORE OUT

TO APPROX. 500M ............................................................................................................................................ 8

FIGURE 5 – EXAMPLE OF MBES BACKSCATTER IMAGERY SHOWING CHANGING GEOMORPHOLOGY

OUT TO 200M FROM THE SHORE .................................................................................................................... 9

FIGURE 6 – APPLIED ACOUSTICS CSP-P POWER SUPPLY ......................................................................... 10

FIGURE 7 – AA201 BOOMER PLATE AND 20-ELEMENT HYDROPHONE TOWED BEHIND VESSEL ........... 10

FIGURE 8 – DIPPING STRATA EXPOSED AT SURFACE (CABLE ROUTE SHORE – T2) ............................. 12

FIGURE 9 – RECOMMENDED SAMPLING LOCATION (CABLE ROUTE SHORE – T3)................................... 13

FIGURE 10 – EXISTING BOREHOLE LOCATIONS .......................................................................................... 13


FIGURE 11 – SEGMENT OF LINE 20141107_142743 SHOWING ROCK OUTCROP ON CABLE ROUTE

336731, 697480 ................................................................................................................................................ 15

FIGURE 12 – LINE 20141110_120426 SHOWING POSITION OF T2 ............................................................... 16

FIGURE 13 – LINE 20141118-095955 SHOWING POSITION OF T3 ................................................................ 17








FIGURE 21 – EDGETECH SIDESCAN SONAR ................................................................................................ 25

FIGURE 22 – EDGE OF OUTCROPPING ROCK IN NORTH OF AREA ............................................................ 26

FIGURE 23 – LINEAR BANDS OF ROCK ......................................................................................................... 27

FIGURE 24 – SAND PATCHES WITH SAND WAVES BETWEEN ROCK OUTCROPS .................................... 28

FIGURE 25 – TYRES ON SEABED .................................................................................................................. 29

FIGURE 26 – IMAGERY OF CONTACT A5353_0004 SHOWING LINEAR DEBRIS ON SEABED .................... 32

FIGURE 27 – IMAGERY OF CONTACT A5353_0005 SHOWING LARGE ANCHOR ON SEABED ................... 33

FIGURE 28 – OVERVIEW OF GEOMORPHOLOGICAL BOUNDARIES IDENTIFIED IN THE SIDESCAN

SONAR SURVEY ............................................................................................................................................. 34

FIGURE 29 – GEOMETRICS G882 CAESIUM VAPOUR MAGNETOMETER ................................................... 35

FIGURE 30 – SURVEY VESSEL MARINE SENSOR ........................................................................................ 36

FIGURE 31 – SURVEY VESSEL REMOTE SENSOR ....................................................................................... 36

TABLE OF REVISIONS

DATE REVISION AUTHOR CHECKED STATUS

4/12/2014 00 EJS Draft, SBP Phase 1

12/12/14 01 EJS CDT Original


1. Introduction On the instructions of 2-B Energy Ltd, Aspect Land and Hydrographic Surveys Ltd (ALHS) carried out multibeam

bathymetric (MBES), magnetometer, side-scan sonar (SSS) and geophysical surveys at Methil in the Firth of

Forth.

The program of events was as follows:

6th – 8th August 2014 MBES Survey

3rd – 7th November 2014 SSS Survey

4th November 2014 Magnetometer Survey

7th – 21st November 2014 Geophysical Survey

2. Scope of Works The aim of the survey was to allow better understanding of the seabed as part of the licence application process

for a wind turbine demonstration field. The survey methods used aimed to give information on the topography

and distribution of any seabed objects in addition to an indication of seabed geomorphology and the depth of

sediment overburden.

The survey area encompassed the proposed sites of the turbines, the cable routes between them and the cable

route to shore (Figure 1). This was further divided into two areas with differing survey requirements. Phase 1 is

shown in Figure 1 enclosed by a black boundary. This includes turbines 2 and 3 and the cable route to shore.

Outwith this boundary is the Phase 2 area.


FIGURE 1 – MULTIBEAM BATHYMETRIC DATA AND PHASE 1 (BLACK)

3. Geodesy & Datum The horizontal datum used throughout the data gathering phase of the survey was OSGB36 (OSTN02™). Data

has been rendered in OSGB36 Datum, British National Grid. The vertical datum for all rendered data is Chart

Datum.

OSTN02™ defines OSGB36 National Grid in conjunction with the National GPS Network. In this respect

OSTN02™ can be considered error free (not including any GPS positional errors). The agreement between

OSTN02™ and the old triangulation network stations (down to 3rd order) is 0.1m rms.


4. Multibeam Bathymetric Survey

4.1 Multibeam Bathymetric Survey Equipment and Methods ALHS’ R2Sonic 2024 multibeam sonar system (Figure 2) was controlled using R2Sonic Sonic Control 2000

software during the course of data gathering.

Very detailed data with full seafloor coverage was gathered over the area of the survey using the R2Sonic 2024.

It’s narrow beam width (0.5°), high ping rate and the selection of 400 kHz as the main operating frequency

ensured that the highest possible detail was achieved.

The system was operated at the maximum ping rate achievable throughout the survey, such that the ping rate

was controlled by the depth of water.

Sound Velocity (SV) dips were carried out prior to commencing survey operations and thereafter whenever the

surface sound velocity varied by more than 2ms-1.

FIGURE 2 - R2SONIC 2024 SYSTEM USED FOR THE BATHYMETRIC SURVEY

During the survey there was little freshwater input and the waters were well mixed, resulting in little variation over

the survey area. SV dips were carried out using an AML SVP dipping probe and SeaCast software, and the data

incorporated into the Hysweep Survey software for real-time corrections.

Positioning was achieved using a CODA F185 R+ INS RTK GPS system, providing horizontal and vertical

positioning as well as precise heading. Full motion compensation for use in the multibeam sonar data gathering

system was also provided by this CODA unit. The motion reference unit was co-located with the sonar head,

providing high quality and frequent motion compensation as required by the multibeam sonar system. The

situation of the motion system in this way also minimises lever arm errors.

The sonar and ancillary sensor data was gathered in the Sonar Interface Module (SIM) on the boat, which

combined sonar data from the head with motion (TSS1) and array face SV to accurately steer the sonar system

in real time. The data was transmitted to the survey laptop running Hypack Hysweep over an Ethernet


connection where the data was then amalgamated with position, motion and sound velocity through the water

column to provide precise depth and position data on the seabed.

Data was gathered with a planned insonification of 200% in order to allow online and post-survey quality

assurance checks to be carried out reliably.

Calibration values for the system were calculated from a patch test conducted on the 6th August 2014 in the

survey area. Details of the patch test can be seen in Annex D.

Latency -0.1

Pitch -5.00

Roll 0.35

Yaw 2.00

Data gathering was done in Hypack Hysweep Survey. Hypack was then used to post-process in the MBMax

software. The stages of Hypack processing are detailed in Annex C.

4.2 Multibeam Bathymetric Survey Results Depths in the survey area ranged from 2m above to 28m below Chart Datum. The depth increases steadily

moving offshore. Much of the seabed is featureless with the exception of frequent scattered boulders. An

overview of the multibeam bathymetric data can be seen in Figure 3.

FIGURE 3 – OVERVIEW OF BATHYMETRIC DATA IN SURVEY AREA, DEPTHS TO CD


The most rugged seabed topography can be seen on the cable route between the shore and T2 where there

appears to be outcropping rock (see also 6.2 Sidescan Survey Results). This rock strikes 010/190 and has a

direction of dip of 100. A point-cloud image showing a section of the cable route from the shore outwards can be

seen in Figure 4.

FIGURE 4 – SECTION OF THE CABLE ROUTE LOOKING NORTH-EAST RUNNING FROM THE SHORE OUT TO APPROX. 500M


4.3 Multibeam Backscatter Survey Results Backscatter data showing the intensity of the seabed return was collected by the R2Sonic 2024 MBES system.

The backscatter data effectively shows variations in seabed geomorphology. An extract of the backscatter

mosaic can be seen in Figure 5.

FIGURE 5 – EXAMPLE OF MBES BACKSCATTER IMAGERY SHOWING CHANGING GEOMORPHOLOGY OUT TO 200M FROM THE SHORE

Armour Stone

Fine Sediment

Coarse Sediment

Outcropping

Rock

~200m


5. Sub-Bottom Profiler Survey

5.1 Sub-Bottom Profiler Survey Equipment and Methods An Applied Acoustics boomer system was utilised for the geophysical work. The boomer system was chosen as

the sensor for this task in order to allow penetration of the sediments and rock to identify sub-bottom horizons.

This system comprises:

High Voltage Power Supply CSP-P 50-350 Joule (Figure 6)

AA201 Boomer Plate (sound source) towed behind the survey vessel (Figure 7)

Twenty element Hydrophone (receiver) towed behind the survey vessel (Figure 7)

Chesapeake Analogue to Digital converter

Chesapeake SonarWiz5 on-line data acquisition software

FIGURE 6 – APPLIED ACOUSTICS CSP-P POWER SUPPLY

FIGURE 7 – AA201 BOOMER PLATE AND 20-ELEMENT HYDROPHONE TOWED BEHIND VESSEL


The sub-bottom profiler lines were run at 25m intervals.

Before the start of the sub-bottom profiler survey each day a pre-shooting search was carried out by a qualified

Marine Mammal Observer (MMO) in line with Marine Scotland guidelines. The search was followed by a soft-

start procedure whereby the power of the sub-bottom profiler was increased from the minimum level (50J) up to

the operational level for the area (generally 200J) over a period of 20 to 30 minutes. This was done in order to

reduce the impact of the works on marine wildlife in the area. There were no marine mammals sighted prior

to commencing operations throughout the period of the survey or during data gathering.

The geophysical data was interpreted in Chesapeake SonarWiz geophysical survey processing software. This

allowed full resolution data to be viewed and interpreted with individual horizons digitised as required. Further

details of the data processing procedures can be seen in Annex C.

Thicknesses were calculated for all horizons to the seafloor in SonarWiz. These were then landformed (reduced)

to the seabed levels obtained from the multibeam survey such that all horizons could be reported as a level to

Chart Datum.

5.2 Sub-Bottom Profiler Survey Results Six sub-bottom horizons were identified in the geophysical data. These are coloured on both the images and

rendered DWG files according to the following classification:

Horizon 1 Representing the limit of acoustic detection, the base of layered sediments which is likely to represent the first hard return

Horizon 2 Not shown on DWG. This horizon is visible on the rendered SBP Images showing what appear as dipping strata below Horizon 1. This is particularly found around the area of the cable route from the shore to T2. From the MBES the orientation of these beds appears to be Strike (010/190) Dip direction 100. From the SBP the Dip angle appears to be around 5º. This is depicted in Figure 8.

Horizon 3 Represents an interface between differing layered sediment types





FIGURE 8 – DIPPING STRATA EXPOSED AT SURFACE (CABLE ROUTE SHORE – T2)

It is recommended that the morphology of these features be intrusively investigated.

2 locations that are thought well suited to investigation of these features have been provided as detailed below

and imaged in Figure 9.

A 336731 697480 5m CD ridge in surrounding depths of 7m B 336637 697962 5.1mCD ridge in surrounding depths of 6.5m


FIGURE 9 – RECOMMENDED SAMPLING LOCATION (CABLE ROUTE SHORE – T3)

There are 2 boreholes existing within 2km of the survey area. These gleaned the following information:

FIGURE 10 – EXISTING BOREHOLE LOCATIONS


BH04A showed the following succession with the seabed at a depth of 3.7m below CD close offshore of the Fife

Energy Park.

3.5m SAND 3.1m CLAY 3.73m MUDSTONE 3.97m SANDSTONE 2.0m SILTSTONE 12.24m MUDSTONE

A COAL BOARD borehole from 1961 lies approximately 1.4km to the north and 300m to the east of T3. This

shows GREY SHALE on the surface with COAL, SHALE, SANDSTONE, SILTSTONE and MUDSTONE below.

Figures 11-19 and images provided with this report are not tidally corrected so the range lines on the

image do not represent depths to Chart Datum, but can be used to assess relative thickness between

horizons approximately.

The provided DWG files give the horizon level to CD as they are landformed to the bathymetric survey and the

drawing A5353_METHIL SBP.dwg should be referred to for horizon levels.

Figure 11 below shows an example of what is thought to be outcropping rock seen on shore-T2 cable route,

digitised in green.

Figure 12 below shows a line across T2 turbine location. The location of the turbine itself is marked by a white

vertical line. A surface layer of sediment is seen, the base of which is digitised as Horizon 3 (Orange). Below

Horizon 3 there are layers of what is thought to be denser sediments, digitised as Horizons 4 and 5. Horizon 1,

thought to be a hard return which may be rock, is seen rising up towards the shore end of the line (NW) with

dipping strata below (Horizon 2).

Figure 13 below shows a line across T3 turbine location. The location of the turbine itself is marked by a white

vertical line. A surface layer of sediment is seen, the base of which is digitised as Horizon 3 (Orange).Below

Horizon 3 there is a layer of what is thought to be a denser material which is overlain on Horizon 1. Horizon 4

and 5 are absent from this turbine. Horizon 1 is seen 3-4m below the surface with dipping strata (Horizon 2).

Figures 14 to 20 show images of the sub bottom information at each of the turbine locations in Phase 2 area.

These show a varying overburden which generally increases as you move further offshore.

North South

FIGURE 11 – SEGMENT OF LINE 20141107_142743 SHOWING ROCK OUTCROP ON CABLE ROUTE 336731, 697480


North West South East

FIGURE 12 – LINE 20141110_120426 SHOWING POSITION OF T2



FIGURE 13 – LINE 20141118-095955 SHOWING POSITION OF T3














South East North West








6. Sidescan Sonar Survey

6.1 Sidescan Sonar Survey Equipment and Methods An Edgetech 4125 dual frequency sonar (Figure 21) was used for the side-scan sonar survey. Both high (900

kHz) and low (400 kHz) frequency data was collected allowing the morphology of the seabed to be fully

understood and small objects to be detected.

FIGURE 21 – EDGETECH SIDESCAN SONAR

The side-scan sonar files were processed and mosaicked in Chesapeake SonarWiz software. The generated

mosaics were then inserted into an AutoCAD drawing. The line spacing was 20m, with a range scale of 50m in

order to guarantee full insonification of the seabed. Details of the side-scan sonar processing procedures are

detailed in Annex C.

6.2 Sidescan Sonar Survey Results Along the route from the shore to T2 outcropping rock could be seen. Linear bands of rock, also seen in the

multibeam data, run from NNE to SSW. Between the outcrops areas of sand can be seen, which in some cases

has sand waves superimposed on it suggesting a dynamic environment with a strong flow. Numerous boulders

are present throughout the survey area, although some areas of smooth sand do exist.


FIGURE 22 – EDGE OF OUTCROPPING ROCK IN NORTH OF AREA


FIGURE 23 – LINEAR BANDS OF ROCK


FIGURE 24 – SAND PATCHES WITH SAND WAVES BETWEEN ROCK OUTCROPS

Along the route from the shore to T2 numerous buoys thought to mark lobster pots were observed. Individual

lobster pots have not been targeted as they cannot be reliably distinguished among the boulders. Throughout the

area surveyed several tyres could also be seen.


FIGURE 25 – TYRES ON SEABED

Non-natural objects within the survey area have been targeted and are detailed below.

Target Image Target Info User Entered Info

A5353_0001

● Sonar Time at Target: 11/5/2014 10:29:18 AM

● Click Position

56.1579793863 -3.0197428382 (WGS84)

0.0000000000 0.0000000000 (NAD27LL)

56.1579793863 -3.0197428382 (LocalLL)

(X) 336758.68 (Y) 696613.63 (Projected

Coordinates)

● Map Projection: OSGB-GPS-2002

● Acoustic Source File: C:\SonarWiz-

Projects\A5353_SSS\SBP\20141105102143.jsf

● Ping Number: 39714

● Range to target: 19.38 Meters

● Fish Height: 3.96 Meters

● Heading: 216.500 Degrees

● Water Depth: 13.58 Meters

Dimensions and attributes

● Target Width: 0.23 Meters

● Target Height: 0.34 Meters

● Target Length: 9.19 Meters

● Target Shadow: 1.87 Meters

● Description: Linear object

A5353_0002

● Sonar Time at Target: 11/5/2014 1:44:07 PM

● Click Position

56.1575709524 -3.0116423290 (WGS84)

0.0000000000 0.0000000000 (NAD27LL)

56.1575709524 -3.0116423290 (LocalLL)

(X) 337261.15 (Y) 696560.76 (Projected

Coordinates)














● Description: Rope/Chain/Wire


A5353_0003


● Click Position

56.1636888750 -3.0062548501 (WGS84)

0.0000000000 0.0000000000 (NAD27LL)

56.1636888750 -3.0062548501 (LocalLL)

(X) 337605.72 (Y) 697236.78 (Projected

Coordinates)














● Description: Object

A5353_0004


● Click Position

56.1637824475 -3.0061181367 (WGS84)

0.0000000000 0.0000000000 (NAD27LL)

56.1637824475 -3.0061181367 (LocalLL)

(X) 337614.36 (Y) 697247.08 (Projected

Coordinates)














● Description: Rope/Chain/Wire

A5353_0005


● Click Position

56.1643070393 -3.0078935641 (WGS84)

0.0000000000 0.0000000000 (NAD27LL)

56.1643070393 -3.0078935641 (LocalLL)

(X) 337504.95 (Y) 697307.07 (Projected

Coordinates)














● Description: Anchor

A5353_0006


● Click Position

56.1668235347 -3.0033811851 (WGS84)

0.0000000000 0.0000000000 (NAD27LL)

56.1668235347 -3.0033811851 (LocalLL)

(X) 337789.26 (Y) 697583.07 (Projected

Coordinates)














● Description: Object among boulders


A5353_0007


● Click Position

56.1647681532 -3.0046463757 (WGS84)

0.0000000000 0.0000000000 (NAD27LL)

56.1647681532 -3.0046463757 (LocalLL)

(X) 337707.36 (Y) 697355.45 (Projected

Coordinates)














● Description: Linear object

A5353_0008


● Click Position

56.1671460721 -3.0213025770 (WGS84)

0.0000000000 0.0000000000 (NAD27LL)

56.1671460721 -3.0213025770 (LocalLL)

(X) 336676.91 (Y) 697635.31 (Projected

Coordinates)














● Description: Possible static fishing gear


FIGURE 26 – IMAGERY OF CONTACT A5353_0004 SHOWING LINEAR DEBRIS ON SEABED


FIGURE 27 – IMAGERY OF CONTACT A5353_0005 SHOWING LARGE ANCHOR ON SEABED

Some distinct geomorphological boundaries could be identified in the sidescan sonar data. An overview of these

is shown in Figure 28. Light green indicates the edge of the rock armour slope, dark green the edge of exposed

rock and yellow the boundary between differing sediment types. These boundaries are given as indicative only,

and their nature should be confirmed by way of grab sampling or intrusive investigation.


FIGURE 28 – OVERVIEW OF GEOMORPHOLOGICAL BOUNDARIES IDENTIFIED IN THE SIDESCAN SONAR SURVEY


7. Magnetometer Survey

7.1 Magnetometer Survey Equipment and Methods The magnetometer survey was carried out with a Geometrics G882 Caesium Vapour magnetometer (Figure 29)

which can measure total field strength to a precision of 0.02nT. The magnetometer was towed along 5m spaced

lines in two directions, resulting in a 70x70m grid of data centred on turbine locations 2 and 3. The

magnetometer was towed as close to the seabed as safe and practicable in order to detect objects with small

magnetic signatures.

FIGURE 29 – GEOMETRICS G882 CAESIUM VAPOUR MAGNETOMETER

Details of the data processing procedures used with the magnetometer data are detailed in Annex C.

7.2 Magnetometer Survey Results No significant magnetic contacts were found in the areas surveyed. The background magnetic field varied slightly

between the areas, but no specific magnetic anomalies typical of ferrous metal objects were seen in the data.

8. Survey Vessels Survey vessels Marine Sensor (Figure 30) and Remote Sensor (Figure 31) were used to carry out the survey

work. Both are fibreglass catamarans certified Cat III by the Maritime and Coastguard Agency with ample deck

and cabin space to house crew and equipment.

Marine Sensor was used to carry out the multibeam bathymetric, magnetometer and part of the sidescan sonar

survey. The vessel has a dedicated central moon pool in order to allow the multibeam sonar head to be easily

deployed and recovered. The sub-bottom profiler and the remainder of the sidescan sonar survey were carried

out from Remote Sensor.


FIGURE 30 – SURVEY VESSEL MARINE SENSOR

FIGURE 31 – SURVEY VESSEL REMOTE SENSOR

9. Survey Standards The Hydrographic survey is considered complete to International Hydrographic Organisation Special Order

standard, with a Full Sea Floor Search being achieved as per IHO publication S44, Table 1. A representation of

the section of interest within that document is shown in Table 6:


Order Examples of Typical Areas

Horizontal Accuracy (95% Confidence Level)

Depth Accuracy for Reduced Depths (95% Confidence Level)

100% Bottom Search

System Detection Capability

Maximum Line Spacing

Special Harbours, berthing area and associated critical channels with minimum under keel clearances

2m a = 0.25m b = 0.0075

Compulsory Cubic features > 1m

Not applicable as 100% search compulsory

Table 2 - Taken From IHO Publication S44, Table 1, Showing Requirements Of A Special Order Survey

The error limits for depth accuracy are calculated by introducing the values listed in Table 2 for a and b into the

formula ±√[a2+(b*d)2], where:

a constant depth error, i.e. the sum of all constant errors

b*d depth dependent error, i.e. the sum of all depth dependent errors

b factor of depth dependent error

d depth1

The line spacing used for side-scan sonar, magnetometer and sub-bottom profiler surveys are considered well

suited to achieve a full understanding of the environment. The multibeam system and associated backscatter

was shown on numerous instances to be capable of detecting objects far smaller than the 1m cubic features

specified for a Special Order survey.

10. Personnel The following personnel were involved during the survey:

NAME POSITION

C D Thomson Hydrographic Survey Manager/ MMO/QA

C K Stephenson Hydrographic Surveyor/MMO/Data Processing

E J Stacey Hydrographic Surveyor/MMO/Data Processing

G D Bennett Hydrographic Surveyor/MMO/Data Processing

A McCormick Vessel Skipper/MMO

P McCormick Survey Assistant/MMO

R Gigli Survey Assistant

1 IHO 2005. Publication M-13 ‘Manual on Hydrography’. Chapter 1, Pages 9-10.


Annex A Drawing Record

A5353

File Description

AutoCAD DWG Files: A5353_MBES.dwg A5353_MBES_1 to 5000.dwg A5353_MBES Backscatter.dwg A5353_Mag.dwg A5353_SSS.dwg A5353_SBP_Phase 1.dwg A5353_METHIL SBP.dwg

Drawing showing bathymetry to CD Large-scale drawing showing bathymetry to CD Drawing showing MBES backscatter data Drawing showing magnetometer data Drawing showing sidescan sonar data Drawing showing SBP horizons to CD (Phases 1) Drawing showing SBP horizons to CD (Full Area)

PDF Files: A5353_MBES-(SHORE,T1,T2,T3,T4,T5,T6,T7,T8,T9).pdf A5353_MBES_1 to 5000-(OVERVIEW 1,OVERVIEW 2).pdf A5353_MBES Backscatter-( SHORE,T1,T2,T3,T4,T5,T6,T7,T8,T9).pdf A5353_Mag-(T2,T3).pdf A5353_SSS-(SHORE,T2,T3).pdf

Drawings showing bathymetry to CD Large-scale drawings showing bathymetry to CD Drawings showing MBES backscatter data Drawings showing magnetometer data Drawings showing sidescan sonar data Drawings showing SBP horizons to CD

GeoTIF Files: A5353_MBES_1m.tif/tfw 1_0-2m.tif/tfw – 9_0-2m.tif/tfw A5353_SSS.tif/tfw

Georeferenced imagery of bathymetric data Georeferenced imagery of MBES backscatter data Georeferenced imagery of sidescan sonar mosaic

XYZ Files: A5353_CD_1M_20140806.xyz A5353_Gratio_T2 A5353_Gratio_T3

Bathymetric data gridded at 1m post spacing to CD Magnetometer data at T2 Magnetometer data at T3 Sub Bottom Profiled Information for Horizons 1 to 6 referred to Chart Datum in ASCII xyz format


Annex B Horizontal and Vertical Positioning System Precision

A5353

Marine Sensor CODA F185 +R INS Geodetic grade GPS Receiver and Heading system, utilising RTK corrections.

HORIZONTAL ACCURACY VERTICAL ACCURACY

REAL TIME KINEMATIC ±10mm + 1ppm RMS ±20mm + 1ppm RMS

Remote Sensor

Trimble SPS 461 Geodetic grade GPS Receiver and Heading system, using RTK corrections.

HORIZONTAL ACCURACY VERTICAL ACCURACY

REAL TIME KINEMATIC ±10mm + 1ppm RMS ±20mm + 1ppm RMS

All horizontal positions in the survey are referred to OSGB and have used the OSTN 02 model to transform

WGS84 positions obtained from GPS observations.


Annex C Data Processing Procedures

A5353

Multibeam Processing Stages

Sonar Control 2000 software was used to control the MBES system during the data gathering phase.

Data was logged in HYPACK HYSWEEP software.

After data gathering the data was post processed in HYPACK MBMax where the following stages of processing

were undertaken:

Navigation data was processed.

Motion Sensor data was examined and edited as required.

Tidal data was examined and edited as required

Automatic filtering of the data was carried out.

Individual lines of MBES sounding data were manually edited.

Processed files were loaded into Fledermaus visualisation and editing software and fully quality assured

before being unloaded back to Hypack.

The data was gridded at an appropriate post spacing for the scale of plot requested by the client. This

was exported to AutoCAD for presentation.

The data was contoured at 0.5m intervals in Hypack and exported to AutoCAD.

Side-Scan Sonar Processing Stages

The side-scan data was processed in Chesapeake SonarWiz5 software where the following procedures

were undertaken:

Import of all side-scan jsf files into Chesapeake SonarWiz Software

Lines were replayed to assess the bottom tracking, gain and time variable gain settings and these were

adjusted as necessary to ensure optimal representation of the sonar record.

All lines were examined for any significant sonar contacts.

Any detected sonar contacts were sized, heighted and checked to see that they had been adequately

depicted in the bathymetric survey.

A sonar mosaic was prepared to show the seabed type over the entire survey area.

A Sidescan Sonar Mosaic of the entire area was prepared in Chesapeake SonarWiz and AutoCAD and

rendered in AutoCAD dwg format.


Magnetometer Processing Stages

The magnetometer data was recorded in Hypack. The Hypack Single Beam Editor was used for processing, with

the following procedures undertaken:

Import of all HSX files into Single Beam Editor software

Lines replayed and data spikes examined and edited as necessary to ensure optimal representation of

the magnetometer record

Lines examined for any significant magnetic anomalies

Data exported in xyz format

3D rendering and magnetic field strength contours generated and plotted in AutoCAD dwg format

Sub-bottom Profiler Processing Stages

The sub-bottom profiler data was collected and processed using Chesapeake SonarWiz Software.

SEG-Y data was imported into the software

Frequency filtering, gain and time-variable gain settings were adjusted to ensure that the best possible

picture of the sub-bottom data was available to the user

Each individual horizon was digitised

An xyz of the thickeness between the seabed and each horizon was prepared and exported to

McCarthy Taylor System LSS 3D modelling software

LSS was used to prepare isopach xyz and to export isopach dxf of the sediment thickness

A drawing file was prepared in AutoCAD to show the sediment thickness detected during the survey


Annex D Multibeam Echosounder Calibration

A5353

Patch tests are tests which are performed after initial equipment installation, and periodically thereafter as well as

if sensors are modified, to quantify any residual biases from the initial system alignment.

During this calibration series, four separate tests must be performed to determine residual alignment biases for:

Roll offset Position Time Delay (Latency) Pitch Offset Yaw (Heading) Offset

ROLL

PITCH

Sonar and Motion Reference Unit (MRU) alignment relative to vertical.

Can cause large depth and position errors at outer beams.

Sonar and MRU alignment relative to vertical.

Can cause depth and position errors across the swath.

LATENCY

YAW (HEADING)

The delay between position and fix

transmission.

Will cause positional errors.

Error is independent of multibeam system.

Sonar and MRU alignment relative to vertical Can cause depth and position errors across

the swath.


Annex E Standard Disclaimer

A5353

1. All client-supplied data is taken on trust as being accurate and correct, and the sub-contractor cannot be held responsible for the quality and accuracy of that data set.

2. Geophysical interpretation of bathymetry and sonar is based on an informed opinion of the supplied data, and is subject to inherent errors out with the control of the interpretational hydrographer or geophysicist, which include but are not limited to GPS positioning errors, navigation busts, data quality, assumed speed velocity sediment profiles in the absence of Geotechnical data, sub bottom profile pulse width, and induced scaling errors therein associated with seismic signature. Seabed geomorphology and sub-seabed geology should be further investigated by visual or intrusive methods.

3. The limits of this survey are defined by the data set; out with the survey limits are not covered at any level by the sub-contractor.

4. The data is accurate at the time of data acquisition, the sub-contractor cannot be held responsible for environmental changes, and the client by accepting this report accepts that the environment of the seabed is subject to continuous change, that items of debris, hard contacts etc. may move, appear, be relocated or removed, thickness of surficial sediment change out with the knowledge of the sub-contractor and they will not be held responsible for such actions at any level.

FORTHWIND DEMONSTRATION PROJECT

TECHNICAL APPENDIX A7.1 ORNITHOLOGY

JULY 2015

Prepared By:

Arcus Consultancy Services

Suite 1C Swinegate Court East

3 Swinegate

York North Yorkshire

YO1 8AJ

T +44 (0)1904 715 470 l E [email protected] w www.arcusconsulting.co.uk

Registered in England & Wales No. 5644976

Technical Appendix A7.1

Forthwind Ltd

Page i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 2

1.1 Introduction to the Development .................................................................. 2

1.1.1 Site Consenting Background (Stage 1) ..................................................................... 2

1.1.2 Proposed Development Summary (Stages 2 and 3) .................................................. 2

1.1.3 Terminology and Survey Areas ................................................................................ 3

2 CONSULTATIONS ....................................................................................................... 4

3 DESIGNATED SITES ................................................................................................... 4

4 BASELINE SURVEY METHODS ................................................................................... 8

4.1 Flight Activity Surveys .................................................................................... 8

4.2 Sea Use Survey ............................................................................................. 10

5 BASELINE SURVEY RESULTS ................................................................................... 10

5.1 Flight Activity ............................................................................................... 10

5.1.1 Target Species Summary ...................................................................................... 10

5.1.2 Secondary Species................................................................................................ 12

5.1.3 Collision Risk Modelling ......................................................................................... 13

5.2 Sea Use Surveys ........................................................................................... 20


Forthwind Demonstration Project

Page 2

1 INTRODUCTION

This Ornithology Technical Appendix 7.1 presents the following information in support of Chapter 7: Ornithology of the proposed Forthwind Demonstration Project Environmental

Statement (“the ES”):

Introduction to the Development: describes the evolution of the Forthwind Demonstration

Project (“the Development”), project description and terminology used within this report;

Consultations: a summary record of meetings/correspondence with Marine Scotland

Licensing Operations Team (MS-LOT), Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) and Royal Society

for the Protection of Birds (RSPB); Designated Sites: information on designated sites with potential connectivity to the

Development;

Baseline Survey Methods: the survey methods used to provide baseline data on the

breeding and non-breeding bird interest for the assessment; and Baseline Survey Results: the results of the baseline surveys carried out for the

assessment, providing Collision Risk Modelling and sea-use density calculations.

1.1 Introduction to the Development

Full details of the Development can be found in Chapter 1: Introduction and Chapter 3:

Project Description of the ES. A summary of information relevant to this Technical Appendix

7.1 and Chapter 7: Ornithology is provided herein.

1.1.1 Site Consenting Background (Stage 1)

An application was submitted by 2-B Energy in April 2010 and subsequently granted consent by Marine Scotland in November 2011 for the construction and 5-year operation of a single

185 m tip-height, 2-bladed wind turbine with an installed capacity of 6 MW, located in a

nearshore area adjacent to the Fife Energy Park (FEP) near Methil. This consent was subject to an agreement for the lease of the seabed being reached with the Crown Estate. Due to

various commercial reasons, the applicant decided not to construct this development.

In July 2012, an application for consent for the construction and 5-year operation of a single

196 m tip-height, 3-bladed turbine at the same nearshore location was submitted by Scottish Enterprise. The project, known as the Fife Energy Park Offshore Demonstration Wind Turbine

(FEPODWT), was consented by the Scottish Government in May 2013 (hereafter referred as

“the Consented Development”). Samsung, in association with Scottish Enterprise, constructed the 3-bladed turbine which is currently operational at the nearshore site. The Consented

Development is located approximately 35 m from the mean high water springs (MHWS) mark and 48.3 m from the FEP boundary.

1.1.2 Proposed Development Summary (Stages 2 and 3)

The proposal is for the implementation of development Stages 2 and 3 as described in the Scoping Report issued in December 2009 for the Methil Wind Turbine Demonstration

Project. Stage 1 of the proposal has not been implemented by 2-B Energy, although Scottish Enterprise and Samsung Heavy Industry have developed a turbine at approximately the same

location (as described above).

The proposal is for the construction and operation of up to two offshore wind turbines with associated infrastructure including foundations, scour protection, transformers, inter-array

cables between the turbines, an onshore control building and substation, and an export cable connecting the turbines to the onshore substation. Due to the uncertainties associated with

offshore construction, it is not possible to define a fully detailed project design at this point in the development process.

Aspects of the Development that cannot be determined at this stage include:

Model, dimensions and precise location of turbines;

Turbine foundation and substructure types; and



Page 3

Lengths and layouts of the inter array and export cables.

In order to ensure that the ES is sufficiently robust and has taken account of the worst case

likely significant effects arising from the Development, a set of parameters has been developed, within which the final parameters will fall. These parameters are collectively

referred to as a ‘Rochdale Envelope’, which can be defined as a range of parameters within which the final Development must fall. The Rochdale cases1 established that it is acceptable

for an ES to assess the worst case likely significant effects of a project through implementing

the Rochdale Envelope approach.

The two main ornithological impacts of the Development will be displacement of birds from

the area around the operational turbines and collision mortality. Of those aspects of the Development listed above, it is the variation in turbine dimensions (principally number of

rotors, rotor size, speed and height above the water) that will have the greatest influence on the magnitude of impact on birds, due to the difference in collision risk associated with

difference in hub height of the turbines2. Most seabirds fly low above the sea surface and

exhibit positively skewed flight height distributions; i.e. most flights are low, with decreasing flight activity with increasing height above the surface. The worst-case scenario for the

Rochdale Envelope in terms of collision risk is therefore the turbine model with three rotor blades of largest size and with the lowest sweep. For the purposes of the collision risk

assessment, the model presented uses the parameters for operation of two, 3-bladed turbines

with a rotor diameter of 172 m and hub height of 110 m.

The 2-B turbine model under consideration is a 2-bladed model with a rotor diameter of up to

155 m. As there are only two rotor blades, the collision risk would inherently be two-thirds that of a similarly proportioned 3-bladed turbine model. Although the 2-bladed model has a

lattice structure tower, it is not automatically considered to provide increased risk over and above the tubular tower 3-bladed turbine, because the lattice is deigned in such a way to

avoid horizontal perching opportunities that might attract birds.

In terms of displacement, there is unlikely to be any material difference in the effects on birds between the different turbine models under consideration.

The consent period being applied for will be for 20 years of operation to reflect the purpose of the project, which is to test, certify and demonstrate the new technology to the UK market.

The location of landfall is to be within the Fife Energy Park where a compound of up to 720

m2 will be established to house the site offices and transformer unit.

1.1.3 Terminology and Survey Areas

Surveys were centred on a ‘Core Survey Area’ (CSA). The CSA was a 33.62 ha (c. 0.34 km2) polygon, located between approximately 1.0 and 1.8 km off the Fife coastline at the site of

the Fife Energy Park (Figure 7.1).

At the time the baseline surveys were being carried out (and consultation regarding this project was being carried out), it was understood that the two turbines would be located

within, or on the periphery of the CSA. For a number of reasons, outlined above and within Chapter 1: Introduction and Chapter 3: Project Description of the ES, the two proposed

turbine locations are now situated just outwith, but close to the periphery of the CSA.

Due to the close proximity of the proposed turbine locations to the CSA and the similar

distance from the shoreline, it is considered that the survey data collected from the Core

Survey Area are representative; for example, the surveyor commented that the majority of birds were recorded moving on an axis parallel to the shoreline, at various distances from the

shore. There is not likely to be a significant difference between the flight activity and density of birds within the CSA and the flight activity and density of birds within a zone of influence

1 R v Rochdale MBC ex. parte Tew and R v Rochdale MBC ex parte Milne 1999 2 Johnston, A., Cook, A.S.C.P., Wright, L.J., Humphreys, E.M. & Burton, N.H.K. (2014) Modelling flight heights of marine birds

to more accurately assess collision risk with offshore wind turbines. Journal of Applied Ecology. (DOI: 10.1111/1365-2664.12191).



Page 4

(of up to 1 km) around the proposed turbine locations. The data should therefore provide a

suitable baseline for the EIA/HRA.

2 CONSULTATIONS

A consultee meeting was held on 21st July 2010 between Fiona Thompson (MS-LOT), Catriona Gall and Ross McGregor (SNH), Scott Harper (2-B Energy), Fiona MacGregor and Mike

Armitage (Arcus), to discuss the assessment for the nearshore turbine and to discuss and

agree on the survey method for the two offshore turbines. It was agreed that:

The offshore Development would not require boat-based survey work;

A coastal Vantage Point (VP) was suitable so long as it was no more than 2 km from the

proposed turbine locations;

Survey area should comprise a 500 m zone around the proposed turbines3;

SNH preference for a ‘2 minus 1’ approach to number of years survey required; i.e. two

years of baseline survey should be committed to, reducing to one year, if the data demonstrated that there would clearly be no likely significant effects;

5-minute summary counts is a suitable recording method for the frequent gannet and

herring gull flights; Sea state should be recorded in accordance with relevant COWRIE guidance; and

The Band collision risk model is suitable for a two-bladed, down-wind rotor.

Discussions with MS-LOT regarding the Development were restarted by 2-B Energy and Arcus

in April 2014 and a Consultation Document was provided in July 2014. The Consultation

Document provided:

an introduction to the Development;

details of baseline survey methods and results; and

a discussion on the proposed assessment methods, use of collision risk analysis and

modelling.

A meeting was held between MS-LOT, SNH, 2-B Energy and Arcus on 17th September 2014 where the above document and responses were discussed. This Technical Appendix 7.1 and

Chapter 7: Ornithology of the ES takes account of written responses to the Consultation Document from the above parties (and RSPB), and discussions held at the meeting.

3 DESIGNATED SITES

A search was conducted for internationally designated sites of ornithological interest (Special Protection Areas (SPAs) and Ramsar sites) within 20 km that are likely to have connectivity

with the Development site, and a search radius of 5 km for other statutory designated sites of ornithological value (Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs), National Nature Reserves

(NNRs), Local Nature Reserves (LNRs)) and 2 km for non-statutory designated sites.

SNH provided details of a draft Special Protection Area (dSPA), at present referred to as the Outer Firth of Forth and Tay Bay Complex dSPA. SNH recommends that the HRA considers

this dSPA in relation to the Development), although at this stage the site does not hold any legal standing. If the dSPA was adopted as a proposed SPA (pSPA) the site would have the

full legislative protection afforded to SPAs and would therefore legally be subject to HRA.

Data on statutory and non-statutory designated sites were obtained from the Multi-Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside (MAGIC)4. Designated sites with potential

connectivity to the Development site are presented in Table 1 and Figure 7.2.

3 At the time of consultation, the CSA had already been defined. The CSA encompassed the original locations of the two

proposed turbines, but did not comprise a complete 500 m buffer around them. The CSA was defined by features in the sea-scape and land on the opposite shore of the Firth of Forth that were easily identifiable and allowed accurate repetition of the surveys. As described above, it was considered that the CSA provided a representative sample of bird movement and use of the sea at and around the locations of the turbines. 4 MAGIC (2014) ‘Various Mapping’ [online]. Available from: http://magic.defra.gov.uk/ (Accessed May 2014).



Page 5

Table 1: Designated Sites Site Designation,

Distance and Direction

Details (Based on SPA Citation)

Cameron Reservoir “A water supply reservoir created by impounding freshwater from upland streams. The open water is used as a roost by an internationally important wintering population of Pink-footed Goose”

SPA, 16 km to north-east

This site qualifies under Article 4.2 of the Directive (2009/147/EC) by supporting populations of European importance of the following migratory species: Over winter: Pink-footed goose: 16,233 birds, 7.2 % of wintering Eastern Greenland/Iceland/UK population (5-year peak mean 1991/92-1995/96)

Firth of Forth “The Firth of Forth SPA is a complex of estuarine and coastal habitats in south east Scotland stretching east from Alloa to the coasts of Fife and East Lothian. The site includes extensive invertebrate-rich intertidal flats and rocky shores, areas of saltmarsh, lagoons and sand dune”

SPA, RAMSAR, SSSI, adjacent to terrestrial parts of Development, 1.2 km from turbine locations

This site qualifies under Article 4.1 of the Directive (2009/147/EC) by supporting populations of European importance of the following species listed on Annex I of the Directive: Over winter: Red-throated diver: 90 birds, 2 % of GB population (5-year peak mean 1993/94-1997/98) Oystercatcher: 7,846 birds, 2 % of GB population (5-year peak mean 1993/94-1997/98) Slavonian grebe: 84 birds, 21 % of GB population (5-year peak mean 1993/94-1997/98)

Bar-tailed godwit: 1,974 birds, 4 % of GB population

(5-year peak mean 1993/94-1997/98) Golden plover: 2,949 birds, 2 % of GB population (5-year peak mean 1993/94-1997/98) On Passage: Sandwich tern: 1,617 birds, 6 % of GB population (5-year peak mean 1993/94-1997/98) This site also qualifies under Article 4.2 of the

Directive (2009/147/EC) by supporting populations of European importance of the following migratory species: Over winter: Pink-footed goose: 10,852 birds, 6 % of Eastern Greenland/Iceland/UK population (5-year peak mean 1993/94-1997/98) Shelduck: 4,509 birds, 2 % of North-western Europe population (5-year peak mean 1993/94-1997/98) Knot: 9,258 birds, 3 % of North-eastern Canada/Greenland/Iceland/North-western Europe

population (5-year peak mean 1991/92-1995/96) Redshank: 4,341 birds, 3 % of Eastern Atlantic – wintering population (5-year peak mean 1993/94-



Page 6

Site Designation, Distance and Direction


1997/98) Turnstone: 860 individuals, 1 % of Western Palearctic wintering population (5-year peak mean 1993/94-1997/98) Assemblage qualification: An internationally important assemblage of birds. The area qualifies under Article 4.2 of the Directive (2009/147/EC) by regularly supporting at least 20,000 waterfowl: Over winter, the area regularly supports 95,000 individual waterfowl (5-year peak mean 01/08/2000) including: red-throated diver, great crested grebe, Slavonian grebe, cormorant, pink-footed goose, shelduck, wigeon, mallard, scaup, eider, long-tailed duck, common scoter, velvet scoter, goldeneye, red-breasted merganser, oystercatcher, ringed plover, golden plover, grey plover, lapwing, knot, dunlin, bar-tailed godwit, curlew, redshank and turnstone.

Forth Islands “Forth Islands SPA consists of a series of islands supporting the main seabird colonies in the Firth of Forth. The islands of Inchmickery, Isle of May, Fidra, The Lamb, Craigleith and Bass Rock were classified on 25 April 1990. The extension to the site, classified on the 13th February 2004 consists of the island of Long Craig, which supports the largest colony of roseate tern in Scotland. It is the most northerly of only six regular British colonies”

SPA, 17 km to south-east

This site qualifies under Article 4.1 of the Directive (2009/147/EC) by supporting populations of European importance of the following species listed on Annex I of the Directive: Breeding Season: Arctic tern: 540 pairs, 1.2 % of GB population (5-year mean 1992-1996) Roseate tern: 8 pairs, 13 % of GB population (5-year mean 1997-2001) Common tern: 334 pairs, 3 % of GB population (5-year mean 1997-2001) Sandwich tern: 440 pairs, 3 % of GB population (SCRC 1985-1988) This site also qualifies under Article 4.2 of the Directive (2009/147/EC) by supporting populations of European importance of the following migratory species: Breeding Season: Gannet: 21,600 pairs, 8.2 % of world population (SCRC 1985-1988) Shag: 2,400 pairs, 1.9 % of northern Europe population (SCRC 1985-1988) Lesser black-backed gull: 1,500 pairs, 1.2 % of graellsii subspecies world breeding population (SCRC 1985-1988)

Puffin: 14,000 pairs, 1.5 % of grabae subspecies world population (SCRC 1985-1988) Assemblage qualification: An internationally important



Page 7



assemblage of birds. The area qualifies under Article 4.2 of the Directive (2009/147/EC) by regularly supporting at least 20,000 waterfowl: During the breeding season, the area regularly supports 90,000 seabirds (SCRC 1985-1988) including: razorbill, puffin, fulmar, herring gull, lesser black-backed gull, gannet, shag, cormorant, kittiwake, roseate tern, common tern, Arctic tern, sandwich tern and guillemot.

Loch Leven “Loch Leven in central Scotland is the largest natural eutrophic lake in Britain. It is a relatively shallow loch, surrounded by farmland, with a diverse aquatic flora and shoreline vegetation. The boundary of the Loch Leven SPA follows that of the Loch Leven SSSI except for the exclusion of 4 ha of SSSI towards the northern end of the loch.”

SPA, 19 km to west-south-west

This site qualifies under Article 4.1 of the Directive (2009/147/EC) by supporting populations of European importance of the following species listed on Annex I of the Directive: Over winter: Whooper swan: 97 birds, 2 % of the population in Great Britain (5-year peak mean 1993/94-1997/98) This site also qualifies under Article 4.2 of the Directive (2009/147/EC) by supporting populations of European importance of the following migratory species: Over winter: Pink-footed goose: 17,163 birds, 8 % of Eastern Greenland/Iceland/UK population (5-year peak mean 1993/94-1997/98) Shoveler: 509 birds, 1 % of North-western/Central European population (5-year peak mean 1993/94-1997-1998) Assemblage qualification: An internationally important assemblage of birds. The area qualifies under Article 4.2 of the Directive (2009/147/EC) by regularly supporting at least 20,000 waterfowl: Over winter, the area regularly supports 34,280 individual waterfowl (5-year peak mean 01/03/2000) including: whooper swan, pink-footed goose and shoveler.

Outer Firth of Forth and Tay Bay

Complex5

“A large marine area covering 312,982.11 ha”

Draft SPA (dSPA), Development site is within the dSPA

Currently a draft SPA included at request of SNH. The species listed for dSPAs do not always occur in important numbers throughout the dSPA and throughout the year. Rather, some species have distinct areas of elevated densities or foraging effort within the overall boundary and most exhibit strong seasonal variations in abundance (though this information is not provided within the Release Pack). Qualifying bird species in the dSPA include: Annex 1 species (presumably meeting Article 4.1

criteria): red-throated diver, Slavonian grebe, little gull, common tern and Arctic tern.

5 Release pack for Marine SPAs http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/A1350044.pdf

http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/A1350044.pdf



Page 8



Migratory species (presumably meeting Article 4.2 criteria): eider, long-tailed duck, common scoter, velvet scoter, goldeneye, red-breasted merganser, gannet, Manx shearwater, shag, kittiwake, guillemot, razorbill, puffin, black-headed gull, common gull, herring gull.

4 BASELINE SURVEY METHODS

The surveys reported herein were carried out between December 2009 and July 2010, and

between June 2011 and June 2012 following the principles of prevailing best practice for

onshore wind energy developments, specifically SNH guidance: Survey methods for use in assessing the impacts of onshore wind farms on bird communities (SNH 2005 updated 20106).

During the consultation process SNH/MS-LOT requested further information/clarification on the (previously agreed) survey methodology regarding how distance and flight heights were

estimated from the land-based observer and how the issue of poor visibility was considered. This is addressed in the sections below.

All surveys were carried out by local ornithologist Alan Leitch. Alan previously worked for SNH

and at the time the survey methodology was agreed, Alan was known to SNH and they were prepared to trust Alan’s judgement on the survey methodology. Alan has been watching birds

for nearly 50 years, carrying out a wide range of surveys and research. He has been carrying out vantage point watches for the last eight years and before that carried out a study of 100

Environmental Statements on windfarms for SNH, and helped in drawing up the 2005 SNH

Guidance6. Alan was secretary of The Seabird Group, and worked extensively for a number of years on seabirds on the Isle of May, and on St Kilda. He has been ringing and counting

seabirds for nearly 50 years and has carried out numerous WeBS Counts and similar wildfowl and wader counts over the years. Alan is therefore extremely familiar with seabird survey and

identification.

4.1 Flight Activity Surveys

The main purpose of flight activity surveys is to collect flight activity data on target and

secondary species that will enable an assessment of the collision risk presented by the Development and to identify patterns of movement across the survey area.

VP watches were undertaken using an adapted methodology (as presented in SNH 2005 updated 20106) to provide the data required for the collision risk assessment. Target species

included all species listed on the Firth of Forth SPA, SSSI and RAMSAR citations, and Forth

Islands SPA citations, as well as all raptors and skuas7. In agreement with SNH, gannets and gulls were recorded using the secondary species method (5-minute sampling to record

minimum numbers of birds attributable to flight activity) to simplify the field recording of these species; they were very frequent in the survey area and it was necessary to make

recording their numbers easier to ensure that flight activity of all species was captured during

the observations.

Observations were carried out from a single vantage point, located at OS National Grid

Reference NT 36599 98364, shown in Figure 7.1. The CSA, which encompassed the original two proposed turbine locations, was defined as a polygon with the four points at 1,014 m,

1,261 m, 1,621 m, and 1,785 m from the VP respectively (also shown in Figure 7.1). This area was chosen based on identifiable features visible from the VP in the sea-scape and shoreline

on the opposite side of the Firth of Forth.

6 SNH (2005 updated 2010) Survey methods for use in assessing the impacts of onshore wind farms on bird communities. SNH, Battleby. 7 Species listed for the Outer Firth of Forth and Tay Bay Complex dSPA would have been recorded as either target or

secondary species, although information regarding the dSPA became available after the baseline data collection period.



Page 9

In order to record the location of the flight activity (and Sea Use in Section 4.2), the surveyor

calculated an arc of view on a map to encompass the CSA. In order to accurately record distance from the VP the observer spent some time at North Berwick in East Lothian looking

at the island of Craigleith, just over 1 km off the coast, to get used to the viewing distance. The surveyor also marked focal points on his telescope to aid in the above. It was

hoped to have deployed buoys on the boundary of the survey area to further aid viewing from

the VP location. Unfortunately this proved to be impossible, due to issues with navigation of vessels in the Firth of Forth and permission was not obtained. There were buoys in the sea

that the surveyor could use to judge positions, but these were not located within the viewing area. A combination of the above helped the surveyor to identify the extent of the CSA and

improve repeatable accuracy of flight line recording.

All target species flights that passed through the CSA were recorded. Secondary species were

recorded from 18th February 2010 onwards. Gannets were treated as a target species from

December 2009 up until 14th April 2010, when the number of gannet flights became unsuitable for data collection using the focal recording method, and were thereafter treated

as secondary species (following agreement from SNH) to make recording their numbers easier to ensure that flight activity of all species was captured during the observations.

A total of 235.5 hours of survey was carried out. Tables 2 and 3 provide the survey

breakdown per month for the 2009-2010 and 2011-2012 survey periods.

Table 2: Monthly VP Survey Breakdown (hours surveyed per VP) 2009-2010 Month and Year of Survey

2009 2010

De

ce

mb

er

Ja

nu

ary

Fe

bru

ary

Ma

rch

Ap

ril

Ma

y

Ju

ne

Ju

ly

Hours of survey

9 12 6 16.5 9 15 12 12

Table 3: Monthly VP Survey Breakdown (hours surveyed per VP) 2011-2012

Month and Year of Survey

2011 2012

Ju

ne

Ju

ly

Au

gu

st

Se

pte

mb

er

Octo

be

r

No

ve

mb

er

De

ce

mb

er

Ja

nu

ary

Fe

bru

ary

Ma

rch

Ap

ril

Ma

y

Ju

ne

Hours of survey

12 6 18 6 18 9 12 9 18 6 12 6 12

Surveys were carried out at various times of day, and in a variety of weather conditions and

sea states. The weather conditions during each watch were recorded (data within Appendix 1.1).

Surveys were limited by various weather conditions. If visibility was poor because of rain or fog, or if the sea was very rough, surveys were not carried out. When the sea was rough, the

wind was too strong to watch properly which meant the observer was unable to use his telescope at full 60x magnification, making the detection and identification of flights difficult.

As the VP was facing due south, it was initially thought that the sun would be a continuous

hindrance to surveys as light reflected off the water. However, the band of dazzle was much smaller than the surveyors viewing arc. As birds were virtually all flying from one side of the

survey area to the other in an east-west or west-east direction the observer found that he could still detect the flights either side of the area of sun dazzle. The surveyor is of the

opinion that nothing of any significance was missed at these times. There was some

discussion in the early stages about not doing observations on sunny days in order to reduce the effect of glare; however, it was considered that the effect was minimal based on the

reasons stated above. The surveyor does not consider that weather conditions affected the



Page 10

observations, apart from not carrying out surveys during times of poor visibility and strong

winds.

Watches usually comprised one or two sessions of three hours, with occasional shorter

sessions of one and a half hours. Surveys were usually separated by a break of 5-35 minutes in order to avoid observer fatigue.

For each target species flight the following details were recorded:

Species;

Number of birds;

Time; Duration of flight within the CSA; and

Flying height in three height bands corresponding to height band 1: 0–40 m, height

band 2: 40-175 m, and height band 3: >175 m based on the early iterations of the

proposed scheme8.

Most seabirds fly close to the water, they have no need to go very high and it was easy to see that most birds were well below potential collision risk height (PCRH) (i.e. within height

band 1). Gannets and gulls would occasionally fly at PCRH. The surveyor used the lighting towers over the old rig yard to help judge height in these circumstances. Although it is

possibly easier in an onshore situation to estimate flight heights, with more features to use as

markers, it is still not easy, in the end it comes down to the experience of the observer and we are confident that the observations made are representative of what was happening in the

survey area.

The flight path of each target species recorded was drawn as accurately as possible on to a

large scale map in the field. Each recorded flight path was numbered and cross-referenced to

the flight data.

Secondary species were recorded in 5-minute summaries. During each 5-minute period of the

watch, the minimum number of each species passing through the CSA in each different height band was recorded.

4.2 Sea Use Survey

Birds sitting on the sea (e.g. foraging, roosting, loafing) within the CSA (an area of 33.619 ha;

c. 0.34 km2) were recorded on arrival and at each 30-minute interval during the VP surveys.

The species and number of sitting birds within the CSA were recorded. The weather data were also updated at 30-minute intervals throughout the surveys.

The aim of this survey was to allow an estimation of the density of seabirds using the CSA to be calculated.

5 BASELINE SURVEY RESULTS

5.1 Flight Activity

5.1.1 Target Species Summary

A total of 1,936 observed flights were recorded during the VP surveys. Table 4 presents a summary of the number of target species flights within each height band across the entire

survey period (Year 1: December 2009-July 2010 and Year 2: June 2011-June 2012). Details of each flight recorded are provided in Appendix 1.2.

Of the 1,936 flights recorded, 81 flights (4.18 %) occurred between 40-175 m; 1,846 flights

(95.35 %) occurred below 40 m and nine flights (0.47 %) occurred above 175 m.

8 A precautionary approach was taken so that any flight occurring at more than one height band within the CSA was considered to be at PCRH for the purpose of collision risk modelling.



Page 11

Table 4: Target Species Records and Flight Heights Species

Year 1 No of flights (peak flock)

Year 2 No of flights (peak flock)

Total No of flights

Ht Band 1 No. of Flights <40 m

Ht Band 2 No. of Flights 40-175 m

Ht Band 3 No. of Flights >175 m

Pink-footed goose

3 (27) 3 (110) 6 0 2 4

Greylag goose 2 (27) 1 (20) 3 2 1 0

Goose species 0 1 (40) 1 0 1 0

Shelduck 0 1 (2) 1 1 0 0

Teal 0 1 (1) 1 0 1 0

Mallard 0 1 (6) 1 0 1 0

Scaup 0 1 (16) 1 1 0 0

Eider 51 (10) 68 (4) 119 119 0 0

Long-tailed duck

74 (9) 43 (7) 117 117 0 0

Common scoter

33 (35) 50 (25) 83 81 2 0

Velvet scoter 22 (12) 43 (10) 65 64 1 0

Scoter species 7 (6) 0 7 7 0 0

Goldeneye 4 (4) 0 4 3 1 0

Red-breasted merganser

8 (2) 6 (3) 14 10 4 0

Duck species 6 (12) 1 (1) 7 6 1 0

Red-throated diver

26 (2) 56 (3) 82 77 4 1

Fulmar 28 (20) 27 (2) 55 47 6 2

Shearwater

species9

1 (28) 0 1 1 0 0

Manx shearwater

3 (5) 5 (30) 8 8 0 0

Gannet10 68 (10) - 68 54 14 0

Cormorant 122 (2) 156 (7) 278 271 7 0

Shag 71 (2) 194 (5) 265 265 0 0

Grey heron 1 (1) 0 1 0 1 0

Peregrine falcon

0 1 (1) 1 0 1 0

Oystercatcher 2 (6) 2 (1) 4 3 1 0

Knot 0 1 (3) 1 1 0 0

Curlew 5 (6) 7 (2) 12 8 2 2

Wader species 0 2 (6) 2 0 2 0

Arctic skua 0 3 (2) 3 2 1 0

Great skua 0 3 (1) 3 2 1 0

Kittiwake 45 (3) 226 (40) 271 250 21 0

Sandwich tern 13 (7) 62 (5) 75 72 3 0

Tern species11 92 (5) 81 (10) 173 171 2 0

Guillemot 0 19 (5) 19 19 0 0

Razorbill 1 (1) 11 (2) 12 12 0 0

Puffin 3 (1) 15 (20) 18 18 0 0

Auk species 31 (7) 123 (8) 154 154 0 0

Total 722 1,214 1,936 1,846 81 9

The majority of target species flights occurred in height band 1 (1,846 flights; 95.35 %) and

typically flew on an axis parallel to the shore, either in a roughly east to west direction, or vice versa, with the exception of cormorants and terns which took less predictable flightlines

across the CSA.

9 This record refers to Manx or sooty shearwater. 10 Gannet was only treated as a target species between December 2009 and April 2010. 11 Flights comprised of 18 ‘comic terns’ (common and/or arctic tern) flights and 155 unidentified tern species flights.



Page 12

The observer noted a particular problem with the recording of tern flights. A combination of

distance and glare from the sea often made observation of these small, white birds extremely difficult, and most flights were recorded as ‘tern species’ rather than attempting identification

to species level. Furthermore it was noted that when sun glare was in the centre of the CSA it was often possible to spot terns, but not to follow their flight across the entire CSA,

particularly when low to the water, in which instances the duration of the flight was

estimated. The observer did however note that although tern flights were often more meandering and less direct than the other species recorded, they only extremely rarely flew at

PCRH (e.g. five out of 246 tern flights (2.03 %) were recorded in height band 2).

CRM has not been undertaken for most of the target species12 recorded but has been carried

out for fulmar and kittiwake as requested by SNH (see Section 5.1.3). Flight activity of the remaining target species at PCRH was very infrequent and as a result, predicted collision risk

would be zero or negligible, based upon data collected during the flight activity surveys.

5.1.2 Secondary Species

Secondary species recorded included gannet, black-headed gull, common gull, lesser black-

backed gull, herring gull and great black-backed gull.

Of the 7,008 birds recorded, 1,284 birds (18.32 %) occurred in height band 2 between 40-

175 m; 5,450 birds (77.77 %) occurred in height band 1 below 40 m and 274 birds (3.91 %)

occurred in height band 3 above 175 m.

Monthly totals of flights are provided in Table 5 (Year 1) and Table 6 (Year 2) below. The

table shows the total number of birds recorded each month and the number recorded in height bands 2 and 3 in square brackets.

Table 5: Secondary Species Monthly Totals at PCRH (Year 1) Month

Gannet13 Black-headed gull

Common gull

Herring gull

Lesser black-backed gull

Great black-backed gull

December 2009 No secondary species recording during these months

January 2010

February 2010 7 [0]

0 [0]

0 [0]

95 [2]

0 [0]

2 [0]

March 2010 105 [18]

7 [0]

34 [8]

519 [80]

2 [2]

59 [4]

April 2010 220 [30]

0 [0]

1 [0]

72 [16]

6 [2]

7 [3]

May 2010 199 [98]

1 [1]

2 [0]

621 [38]

20 [2]

26 [2]

June 2010 298 [118]

1 [1]

0 [0]

119 [64]

32 [16]

48 [24]

July 2010 46 [27]

2 [1]

0 [0]

7 [2]

1 [0]

15 [4]

Total 875 [291]

11 [3]

37 [8]

1433 [202]

61 [22]

157 [37]

12 An exception to this is gannet which was initially treated as a target species but became a secondary species, in agreement

with SNH, and was included within the collision risk modelling process. 13 Gannet was recorded as a target species between December 2009 and April 2010, totals from target species recording have

been incorporated into this table.



Page 13

Table 6: Secondary Species Monthly Totals at PCRH (Year 2) Month

Gannet13 Black-headed gull

Common gull

Herring gull

Lesser black-backed gull


June 2011 270 [78]

0 [0]

2 [0]

94 [42]

47 [11]

17 [6]

July 2011 153 [36]

1 [0]

0 [0]

24 [11]

8 [0]

5 [4]

August 2011 347 [55]

1 [0]

2 [0]

94 [17]

88 [8]

60 [19]

September 2011 183 [27]

148 [0]

0 [0]

172 [21]

0 [0]

4 [3]

October 2011 169 [7]

43 [9]

24 [1]

122 [46]

10 [1]

40 [22]

November 2011 19 [0]

1 [0]

1 [0]

48 [10]

0 [0]

40 [5]

December 2011 1 [0]

15 [5]

14 [0]

175 [91]

3 [0]

42 [9]

January 2012 0 [0]

8 [0]

20 [2]

110 [41]

0 [0]

26 [6]

February 2012 5 [0]

9 [3]

6 [0]

147 [58]

2 [2]

29 [7]

March 2012 87 [17]

0 [0]

7 [0]

80 [35]

0 [0]

12 [7]

April 2012 97 [43]

1 [0]

8 [2]

200 [46]

3 [2]

14 [2]

May 2012 70 [0]

2 [0]

6 [0]

60 [24]

3 [2]

4 [3]

June 2012 551

[42]

2

[0]

4

[2]

446

[108]

24

[5]

23

[12]

Total 1952 [305]

231 [17]

94 [7]

1772 [550]

188 [31]

316 [105]

Based on the frequency of occurrence of flights in height bands 2 and 3, and based on

discussions held with SNH, collision risk modelling has been conducted on the following secondary species: gannet, herring gull, lesser black-backed gull and great black-backed gull.

5.1.3 Collision Risk Modelling

Collision risk assessment for large offshore wind energy developments relies upon a different methodology from onshore wind energy developments, both in terms of the survey data

collection (boat-based transect sampling) and in the mathematical model. For this small Development, it was considered most appropriate to use the same flight activity data

collection methodology as for onshore wind energy projects, because the CSA was entirely visible within 2 km from the shoreline. This allowed recording of flight lines and heights and

absolute numbers of birds passing through the CSA during each survey; hence bird density

estimates has not been necessary for this project as it might be for typical large offshore projects. We therefore considered that the most appropriate method for assessing the

collision risk to birds is to employ the Band model typically used for onshore wind energy projects, as described below. This approach was agreed through consultation with SNH.

The onshore model developed by W. Band (Band et al. 200714) estimates the number of bird

collisions with the turbine rotors during a specified time period. The risk is calculated in two stages:

14 Band, W., Madders, M. and Whitfield, D.P. (2007) Developing field and analytical methods to assess avian collision risk at

wind farms. In de Lucas, M., Janss, G. and Ferrer, M. (eds.) Birds and Wind Power. Quercus, Madrid.



Page 14

1. Estimating the number of birds passing through the area swept by the rotors; and,

2. Estimating the probability that a bird will be struck by a rotor blade when passing through the area swept by the rotors.

The first stage of calculation varies depending on whether flight activity follows a regular predictable pattern, or is random. The second stage is identical for both methods. In this

case, the predictable flight activity model is used, as surveys demonstrated that the majority

of flights were of single transit movements across the CSA in an approximate east-west axis parallel to the Fife shoreline.

Since the consultations with SNH took place, the decision has been taken to allow for more variation in the turbine model proposed for the Development. As described above, the worst-

case scenario for the Rochdale Envelope in terms of collision risk is a turbine model with three rotor blades of largest size and with the lowest sweep above sea level. For the purposes of

the collision risk assessment, this would be a Development comprising two, 3-bladed turbines

with a rotor diameter of 172 m and hub height of 110 m. This presents two challenges regarding the compatibility of the height bands used to collect flight activity data in relation to

the height of the span of the rotors.

At the top end of the rotor sweep, the Development’s overall Rochdale Envelope allows for

maximum rotor tip height of 199 m. The model presenting the worst-case collision risk

(110 m hub, 172 m rotor diameter) would have a tip height of approximately 196 m. However, the risk height band during surveys (height band 2) was considered to be up to

175 m. There is therefore some discrepancy between the height recording bands to define PCRH and the maximum dimensions of the turbines as defined under the Rochdale Envelope.

We consider that the margin of difference is small in light of the estimation technique used in flight height recording – the proportion of flights occurring between 175-199 m will be a small

fraction of all flights recorded in height band 3 (all flights >175 m). Notwithstanding the

above, and in order to maintain a precautionary approach, all flights occurring at height band 3 have been included in the modelling process as occurring at PCRH. In reality, this makes

little contribution to the collision risk, as there were so few flights recorded at heights above 175 m.

At the lower end of the rotor sweep, the worst-case collision risk would likely be caused by a

turbine model with the lowest rotor sweep above MHWS (because most bird flight activity is at lower elevation). We consider this to be the two 3-bladed turbines of hub height 110 m and

rotor diameter 172 m, which would give a lowest rotor sweep of 24 m above MHWS. Survey height band 1 was 0-40 m and height band 2 was 40-175 m. All birds flying in height band 2

would therefore be considered at PCRH. A proportion of the birds recorded in height band 1

that are flying at 24-40 m above MWHS would also be at PCRH and these need to be accounted for in the model.

They cannot be accounted for by inclusion in the model of all flights in height band 1; that would severely over-estimate the risk, as it is extremely likely that most of the birds recorded

in height band 1 were actually close to the sea surface, well below 24 m.

The current best practice offshore collision model utilises an apportioning method for

predicting the distribution of bird flight heights in offshore scenarios, which is based on the

recording of flight data from a number of offshore surveys (Johnston et al. 2014)2. In the collision model presented below, we apply this apportioning method to the total number of

each species recorded flying across the CSA to estimate the number of birds of each species flying across the CSA at heights coinciding with the sweep of the rotors (PCRH). The

apportioning method is compared with the actual data we have collected within the height

bands of 0-40 m, 40-175 m and >175 m to test the suitability of the apportioning method in this particular situation.

The estimated numbers of birds of each species flying through the CSA are then applied to the original onshore Band Model for predictable flight movements to estimate the collision

risk. For comparison, we have also modelled and presented the collision risk using the flight activity data under the assumption that all birds recorded in height band 1 are not at PCRH,

whilst all birds in height bands 2 and 3 are at PCRH.



Page 15

The length of the breeding season of each species of seabird on the Forth Islands SPA varies

and as collision risk will be assessed separately for the breeding season and non-breeding season, it is necessary to define the seasons for each species. During the consultation

process, SNH provided definitions for the breeding seasons of those species associated with the Forth Islands SPA (Table 7). The modelling has been carried out to provide a working

comparison for various seasons within both periods of survey (Year 1: December 2009-July

2010 and Year 2: June 2011-June 2012).

Table 7: Breeding Seasons used in CRM (and other assessments)15 Species Breeding Season

Arctic tern May-August

Common tern May-August

Roseate tern (May-August)

Sandwich tern (April-August)

Gannet April-September

Great black-backed gull April-August

Lesser black-backed gull April-August

Puffin April-August

Shag (April-August)

Razorbill April-July

Guillemot April-July

Kittiwake April-August

Herring gull April-August

Cormorant (April-August)

Fulmar May-September

5.1.3.1 Predictable Flight Activity Model

CRM using the predictable model has been carried for fulmar, gannet, kittiwake, herring gull, lesser black-backed gull and great black-backed gull because these species showed a frequent

and predictable pattern of movement across the survey area. All other species were recorded so infrequently at PCRH that the risk is predicted to be negligible without the need to examine

it thoroughly through a collision risk model.

A ‘risk window’ was defined through which these species approaching the turbines were

predicted to pass. The window measured 172 m tall (the span of the largest rotors) and

1,076 m wide (the distance across the CSA) on a perpendicular axis to the primary flight direction. The cross-sectional area (W) of the risk window was calculated (width × height).

The mean number of flights per hour of observation that flew through the risk window each season was determined for each species – this is the sum of the number of birds observed

passing through the risk window at risk height during the season divided by the observation

duration at the VP for that season.

As described above, an apportioning method for flight heights used in offshore collision risk

modelling has been applied here to account for the discrepancy between the height recording bands used in the surveys and the height span of the turbine rotors. Table 8 provides the

percentage of birds (i) recorded by the surveys above 40 m; (ii) estimated above 24 m by the

apportioning tool available on the Strategic Ornithological Support Services (SOSS) website16; and (iii) estimated above 40 m by the apportioning tool, for comparative purposes.

15 Based on SNH Update 22.04.2013. The breeding seasons in brackets have been estimated from similar species and

literature, e.g. Snow, D.W. and Perrins, C.M. (1998) The Birds of the Western Palearctic. Concise edition. Oxford University Press. 16 http://www.bto.org/sites/default/files/u28/downloads/Projects/Final_Report_SOSS02_FlightHeights2014.xls



Page 16

Table 8: Percentage of birds flying at risk height

Species >40 m (survey) >24 m (from Johnston et al. 2014)

>40 m (from Johnston et al. 2014)

Fulmar 12.07 % 0.41 % 0.01 %

Gannet 21.08 % 8.30 % 1.55 %

Kittiwake 6.30 % 10.22 % 2.20 %

Herring gull 23.46 % 25.44 % 10.08 %

Lesser black-backed gull 21.29 % 21.89 % 7.85 %

Great black-backed gull 30.02 % 26.04 % 10.66 %

The data show that for all the species the proportion of birds observed flying above 40 m (height bands 2 and 3) was much higher than that predicted by the height apportioning tool.

The collision risk using the Band model (for onshore wind farms) is presented using the two different methods to estimate the number of passes through the risk area at PCRH (n): (i)

using the observed survey data under the assumption that birds >40 m are at PCRH and

those < 40 m are not at PCRH and (ii) using the number of birds >24 m estimated by the apportioning tool.

The number of birds (n) assumed to fly through the risk window during each season was calculated by multiplying the mean number of birds estimated flying through the risk window

at risk height per hour within the season by the number of hours that they are potentially

active in the season based on data within Table 7 and based on information supplied by SNH regarding potential nocturnal activity (Table 9).

Table 9: Hours used in CRM Species Hours in CRM Breeding Season Non-breeding Season

Fulmar Daylight +4 hours 2,938 hours 2,936 hours

Gannet Daylight +1 hour 2,869 hours 1,910 hours

Kittiwake Daylight +3 hours 2,755 hours 2,754 hours

Herring gull Daylight +2 hours 2,602 hours 2,542 hours

Lesser black-backed gull Daylight +2 hours 2,602 hours 2,542 hours

Great black-backed gull Daylight +2 hours 2,602 hours 2,542 hours

The area (A) presented by the wind turbine rotors within the risk window was calculated by

multiplying the number of turbines (2) by the area swept by one rotor. This model is based on a 3-bladed turbine.

The proportion of the risk window occupied by the rotors is A/W. Therefore the number of

birds assumed to pass through the rotors each year (NTRANSIT) is the number of birds estimated to cross the risk window each year multiplied by the proportion of the risk window

occupied by the rotors (n × A/W).

The probability of a bird that flies through the area swept by the rotors being hit by a rotor

blade (p) depends on a number of parameters: the dimensions of the bird and type of flight

(speed, and flapping or gliding), and the size and rotation speed of the rotors. For this assessment, birds were assumed to use flapping flight for kittiwake, herring gull, lesser black-

backed gull and great black-backed gull and gliding flight for fulmar and gannet.

Flight speeds used in the modelling were: fulmar 13.0 m/s17, gannet 14.9 m/s17,

kittiwake 13.1 m/s18, herring gull 12.8 m/s18, lesser black-backed gull 13.1 m/s19 and great

black-backed gull 13.1 m/s20. Bird lengths and wingspans were taken from Snow and Perrins (199821).

17 Pennycuick, C.J. (1997) Actual and ‘optimum’ flight speeds: field data reassessed. Journal of Experimental Biology. 200:

2,355-2,361. 18 Alerstam, T., Rosén, M., Bäackman, J., Ericson, P.G.P. and Hellgren, O. (2007) Flight speeds among bird species: allometric

and phylogenetic effects. PLoS Biol. 5(8): e197. 19 Information supplied by SNH as value used in the Forth and Tay assessments. 20 Considered to be similar to flight speed provided by SNH for lesser black-backed gull. 21 Snow, D.W. and Perrins, C.M. (1998). The Birds of the Western Palearctic. Concise Edition. Oxford University Press.



Page 17

These parameters were input into a bespoke Excel spreadsheet that calculates the average

collision risk for a single transit of a bird flying through the rotors, expressed as a percentage.

From the above results, the number of birds colliding with the rotors during each season was

calculated, assuming that birds take no avoiding action, by multiplying the number of transits (NTRANSIT) by the probability of being struck by the rotor during a single transit (p). Note that

the assumption has been made that turbines are operational for a maximum of 85 % of the

time; therefore the collision risk has been reduced by 15 %, as birds are unlikely to be at risk of collision with the stationary turbine structure.

The above calculations make an estimate of collision risk, assuming that birds take no action to avoid being struck by the operating rotor blades. In reality, as described above, a very high

proportion of birds are likely to take avoiding action. In agreement with SNH an avoidance rate of 98 % has been used, however recent work has shown that an avoidance rate of 99 %

may be more suitable for some species in relation to offshore windfarms (Cook et al. 201222);

therefore collision risk assuming an avoidance rate of 99 % has also been presented.

5.1.3.2 CRM Results

Table 10 provides the results for all CRM (collisions per year and years per collision) for fulmar, gannet, kittiwake, herring gull, lesser black-backed gull and great black-backed gull

using observed data on bird flight heights, under the assumption that birds in flight height

bands 2 and 3 are equivalent to PCRH. Results are presented for the 2010, 2011 and 2012 breeding season, and the 2011-12 non-breeding season.

Table 10: Collision Risk Modelling Outputs Species Season Collision

Risk Collisions/

Year (98 %)

Collision Risk Years/

Collision (98 %)

Collision Risk

Collisions/ Year (99 %)


Collision (99 %)

Fulmar (Predictable model - gliding)

2010 breeding season

0.13 7.86 0.06 15.72


0.02 42.33 0.01 84.67


Negligible, none recorded in height bands 2 and 3

2011-12 non-breeding season

Negligible, too few flights to model

Gannet (Predictable model - gliding)


6.25 0.16 3.12 0.32


5.12 0.20 2.56 0.39


3.11 0.32 1.56 0.64


0.24 4.10 0.12 8.21

Kittiwake (Predictable model - flapping)


0.07 13.41 0.04 26.82


0.27 3.66 0.14 7.31


0.39 2.58 0.19 5.16


0.07 14.53 0.03 29.06

Herring gull

(Predictable

2010 breeding

season 2.44 0.41 1.22 0.82

22 Cook, A.S.C.P., Johnston, A., Wright, L.J. and Burton, N.H.K. (2012). A review of flight heights and avoidance rates of birds

in relation to offshore wind farms. BTO Research Report Number 618. British Trust for Ornithology.



Page 18

Species Season Collision Risk



Collision (98 %)

Collision Risk



Collision (99 %)

model - flapping)


1.90 0.53 0.95 1.05


5.79 0.17 2.90 0.35


3.69 0.27 1.85 0.54

Lesser black-backed gull (Predictable model -

flapping)


0.40 2.53 0.20 5.05


0.50 2.00 0.25 3.99


0.28 3.51 0.14 7.02


0.04 28.02 0.02 56.04

Great black-backed gull (Predictable model)


0.69 1.44 0.35 2.88


0.81 1.23 0.41 2.46


0.57 1.75 0.29 3.50


0.75 1.34 0.37 2.68

Table 11 provides the CRM results using the offshore apportioning tool to estimate the number of birds at PCRH. Data is presented for the 2010, 2011 and 2012 breeding season,

and the 2011-12 non-breeding season.

Table 11: Collision Risk Modelling Outputs Species Season Collision

Risk Collisions/

Year (98 %)


Collision (98 %)

Collision Risk



Collision (99 %)

Fulmar (Predictable model - gliding)


0.002 504.61 0.001 1009.21


0.0009 1147.23 0.0004 2294.45


0.004 232.90 0.002 465.79


Negligible, too few flights to model

Gannet (Predictable model - gliding)


1.45 0.69 0.72 1.38


2.07 0.48 1.03 0.97


2.18 0.46 1.09 0.92


0.24 4.22 0.12 8.44

Kittiwake (Predictable model - flapping)


0.10 10.09 0.05 20.19


0.50 2.00 0.25 4.00



Page 19

Species Season Collision Risk



Collision (98 %)

Collision Risk



Collision (99 %)


0.43 2.34 0.21 4.69


0.06 17.41 0.03 34.82

Herring gull (Predictable model - flapping)


4.24 0.24 2.12 0.47


1.46 0.68 0.73 1.37


5.84 0.17 2.92 0.34


2.66 0.38 1.33 0.75

Lesser black-backed gull (Predictable model - flapping)


0.26 3.91 0.13 7.83


0.83 1.21 0.41 2.42


0.21 4.81 0.10 9.62


0.04 25.60 0.02 51.20


(Predictable model)


0.53 1.90 0.26 3.80


0.60 1.67 0.30 3.34


0.36 2.78 0.18 5.57


0.64 1.57 0.32 3.15



Page 20

5.2 Sea Use Surveys

A total of 20 species were recorded on the sea inside the CSA during the survey period. The survey results for each month have been combined to give monthly maximum and average

counts which are provided in Appendix 2.

The summary tables below show average and maximum sea use for each

qualifying/assemblage species listed for the SPAs in Table 1. Seasons are based on

information provided by SNH and shown in Table 7. Qualifying/Assemblage species listed on the Cameron Reservoir SPA and Loch Leven SPA were not recorded during the surveys and

are not considered further.

Sea use by Firth of Forth SPA Qualifying/Assemblage species is shown in Table 12. The

following species were not recorded and are therefore not included in Table 12: oystercatcher, Slavonian grebe, bar-tailed godwit, golden plover, sandwich tern, pink-footed

goose, shelduck, knot, redshank, turnstone, great crested grebe, Slavonian grebe, wigeon,

mallard, scaup, goldeneye, ringed plover, lapwing, dunlin and curlew.

Table 12: Mean and maximum monthly sea use for the Firth of Forth SPA Qualifying/Assemblage species

Species Mean monthly count over

season23

Maximum monthly count over season23

Wintering Species (Article 4.1)

Red-throated diver 1.55 birds 4 (December 2009)

Wintering Species (Article 4.2) Assemblage

Red-throated diver 1.55 birds 4 (December 2009)

Cormorant 2.64 birds 7 (March 2010)

Eider 11.00 birds 30 (January 2010)

Long-tailed duck 6.45 birds 32 (January 2010)

Common scoter 8.45 birds 37 (March 2010)

Velvet scoter 3.91 birds 15 (March 2010)

Red-breasted merganser 0.27 birds 2 (January 2010)

Sea use by Forth Islands SPA Qualifying/Assemblage species is shown in Table 13. The

following species were not recorded and are therefore not included in Table 11: Arctic tern, roseate tern, common tern, sandwich tern and fulmar.

Table 13: Mean and maximum monthly sea use for the Forth Islands SPA Qualifying/Assemblage species


season24


Breeding Species (Article 4.2)

Gannet 5.36 birds 23 (June 2011)

Shag 2.40 birds 6 (April 2012)

Lesser black-backed gull 4.60 birds 22 (August 2011)

Puffin 1.50 birds 8 (June 2011)

Breeding Species (Article 4.2) Assemblage

Razorbill 1.00 birds 4 (June 2012)

Puffin 1.50 birds 8 (June 2011)

Herring gull 17.60 birds 52 (May 2010)

Lesser black-backed gull 4.60 birds 22 (August 2011)

Gannet 5.36 birds 23 (June 2011)

Shag 2.40 birds 6 (April 2012)

23 Wintering species data based on two non-breeding seasons (2009-2010 and 2011-2012). 24 Breeding species data based on three breeding seasons (2010, 2011 and 2012).



Page 21


season24


Cormorant 1.00 birds 2 (July 2010, August 2011 and April

2012)

Kittiwake 5.00 birds 40 (June 2011)

Guillemot 9.44 birds 25 (June 2011)

Sea use by the Upper Firth of Forth and Tay Bay Complex dSPA (presumed Qualifying/Assemblage species) are not included here as it is not known whether species are

included due to their breeding, passage or wintering value in the area. Most species, with the exception of black-headed gull and common gull are shown in the likely season of interest in

Tables 12 and 13 above. Both black-headed gull and common gull were recorded infrequently

during the survey period in low numbers.

The following two species not listed as SPA qualifying/assemblage species were also recorded

during the sea use surveys: goosander and great skua.

In order to allow potential disturbance/displacement to be investigated it is necessary to

understand the density of birds using the Core Survey Area during the breeding and non-

breeding season (Table 14). Densities are calculated based on the maximum monthly count in the Core Survey Area (covers an area of 0.34 km2) calculated as follows:

Density = (1 km2 / 0.34 km2) x Peak Count

Table 14: Peak Densities for key species

Species Season Peak Count

(Month/Year) Density

(Number/km2)

Red-throated diver Non-breeding 4 11.76

Cormorant Non-breeding 7 20.59

Eider Non-breeding 30 88.24

Long-tailed duck Non-breeding 32 94.12

Common scoter Non-breeding 37 108.82

Velvet scoter Non-breeding 15 44.12

Red-breasted merganser Non-breeding 2 5.88

Razorbill Breeding 4 11.76

Puffin Breeding 8 23.53

Herring gull Breeding 52 152.94

Lesser black-backed gull Breeding 22 64.71

Gannet Breeding 23 67.65

Shag Breeding 6 17.65

Cormorant Breeding 2 5.88

Kittiwake Breeding 40 117.65

Guillemot Breeding 25 73.53

FORTHWIND DEMONSTRATION PROJECT

Appendices to Technical Appendix A7.1

JULY 2015

Prepared By:

Arcus Consultancy Services

Suite 1C Swinegate Court East

3 Swinegate York

North Yorkshire YO1 8AJ

T +44 (0)1904 715 470 l E [email protected]

w www.arcusconsulting.co.uk

Registered in England & Wales No. 5644976



Page i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 APPENDIX 1 ............................................................................................................... 2

1.1 Weather .......................................................................................................... 2

1.2 Vantage Point Surveys ................................................................................. 13

1.2.1 Target Species ..................................................................................................... 13

1.2.2 Secondary Species................................................................................................ 59

2 APPENDIX 2 ............................................................................................................. 62

2.1 Sea Use Surveys ........................................................................................... 62


Forthwind Ltd

Page 2

1 APPENDIX 1

1.1 Weather

Table A1.1: Weather for All Surveys Survey Date Start Finish Period Weather

1 14/12/2009 12:15 15:15 0 Dry, overcast, wind 2/3 west

1 14/12/2009 12:15 15:15 30 2/3 W

1 14/12/2009 12:15 15:15 60 2/3 W

1 14/12/2009 12:15 15:15 90 2/3 W

1 14/12/2009 12:15 15:15 120 2/3 W

1 14/12/2009 12:15 15:15 150 Wind 0 no rain, light poor

1 14/12/2009 12:15 15:15 180 1 W

2 15/12/2009 11:10 14:20 0 Dry, overcast, wind 1/2 northeast

2 15/12/2009 11:10 14:20 30 1/2 NE

2 15/12/2009 11:10 14:20 60 1/2 NE

2 15/12/2009 11:10 14:20 90 1/2 NE

2 15/12/2009 11:10 14:20 120 3 NE

2 15/12/2009 11:10 14:20 150 3+ NE

2 15/12/2009 11:10 14:20 180 3 NE

3 16/12/2009 10:50 13:50 0 Dry, Overcast Wind 1 Northeast

3 16/12/2009 10:50 13:50 30 1 NE, Light Rain

3 16/12/2009 10:50 13:50 60 1 NE, Light Rain

3 16/12/2009 10:50 13:50 90 1 NE, Dry

3 16/12/2009 10:50 13:50 120 1/2 NE

3 16/12/2009 10:50 13:50 150 2 NE, Light Rain

3 16/12/2009 10:50 13:50 180 2 NE

4 08/01/2010 11:00 14:00 0 Dry Wind 1 NE Poor Vis sun obscuring 15% view

-5oC

4 08/01/2010 11:00 14:00 30 1 NW

4 08/01/2010 11:00 14:00 60 1 NW

4 08/01/2010 11:00 14:00 90 1 NW

4 08/01/2010 11:00 14:00 120 1 NW, vis poor, but sun no longer in FOV



5 22/01/2010 09:00 12:00 0 Dry, overcast, <1 N

5 22/01/2010 09:00 12:00 30 0

5 22/01/2010 09:00 12:00 60 0

5 22/01/2010 09:00 12:00 90 1 N

5 22/01/2010 09:00 12:00 120 1 N

5 22/01/2010 09:00 12:00 150 1 N

5 22/01/2010 09:00 12:00 180 1 N

6 22/01/2010 12:30 15:30 0 Dry, overcast, slight mist, wind 1 N

6 22/01/2010 12:30 15:30 30 1 N

6 22/01/2010 12:30 15:30 60 1 N

6 22/01/2010 12:30 15:30 90 1 N

6 22/01/2010 12:30 15:30 120 1 N

6 22/01/2010 12:30 15:30 150 1 N

6 22/01/2010 12:30 15:30 180 1 N

7 26/01/2010 11:30 14:30 0 Rain, Wind 2/3 NW, Vis poor but adequate

7 26/01/2010 11:30 14:30 30 3 NW

7 26/01/2010 11:30 14:30 60 3 NW

7 26/01/2010 11:30 14:30 90 2 NW Rain stopped

7 26/01/2010 11:30 14:30 120 2 NW

7 26/01/2010 11:30 14:30 150 2 NW

7 26/01/2010 11:30 14:30 180 2 NW

8 02/02/2010 11:10 14:10 0 Dry, overcast initially, clearing later, Wind 1 S

8 02/02/2010 11:10 14:10 30 1 W

8 02/02/2010 11:10 14:10 60 1 NW Sun glare

8 02/02/2010 11:10 14:10 90 1 NW Sun glare



Page 3

Survey Date Start Finish Period Weather

8 02/02/2010 11:10 14:10 120 2 NW Sun off to West

8 02/02/2010 11:10 14:10 150 1 NW

8 02/02/2010 11:10 14:10 180 1 NW

9 18/02/2010 11:15 14:15 0 Dry, Wind E 1, 1/3 cloud, sunny, sun obscuring part of site

9 18/02/2010 11:15 14:15 30 1 E

9 18/02/2010 11:15 14:15 60 0

9 18/02/2010 11:15 14:15 90 0

9 18/02/2010 11:15 14:15 120 1 SW

9 18/02/2010 11:15 14:15 150 1 SW

9 18/02/2010 11:15 14:15 180 1 SW

10 01/03/2010 09:30 12:30 0 Dry, Wind 2 N, clear, sunney 20% obscured by sun

10 01/03/2010 09:30 12:30 30 2 N

10 01/03/2010 09:30 12:30 60 3 N sun in face 50% obscured




10 01/03/2010 09:30 12:30 180 2 N no direct sun in face

11 01/03/2010 13:00 16:00 0 Dry, sunny, clear, No direct sun, some glare, Wind 2 N

11 01/03/2010 13:00 16:00 30 2 N

11 01/03/2010 13:00 16:00 60 2 N

11 01/03/2010 13:00 16:00 90 2 N Glare reducing

11 01/03/2010 13:00 16:00 120 2 N no glare

11 01/03/2010 13:00 16:00 150 2 N

11 01/03/2010 13:00 16:00 180 2 N

12 02/03/2010 13:00 16:00 0 Dry, sunny, clear, Wind 1 N, heat haze

12 02/03/2010 13:00 16:00 30 0

12 02/03/2010 13:00 16:00 60 0

12 02/03/2010 13:00 16:00 90 1 SW

12 02/03/2010 13:00 16:00 120 1 SW

12 02/03/2010 13:00 16:00 150 2 SW

12 02/03/2010 13:00 16:00 180 1 SW

13 16/03/2010 09:40 12:40 0 Dry, cloudy, some sun/glare, wind NW 2/3

13 16/03/2010 09:40 12:40 30 2 NW

13 16/03/2010 09:40 12:40 60 2 NW glare

13 16/03/2010 09:40 12:40 90 2 NW strong glare

13 16/03/2010 09:40 12:40 120 2 NW strong glare

13 16/03/2010 09:40 12:40 150 2 NW no glare

13 16/03/2010 09:40 12:40 180 1 NW

14 16/03/2010 13:10 16:10 0 Dry, cloudy, wind 1 NW

14 16/03/2010 13:10 16:10 30 1 SW

14 16/03/2010 13:10 16:10 60 1 W

14 16/03/2010 13:10 16:10 90 1 WSW

14 16/03/2010 13:10 16:10 120 1 SW

14 16/03/2010 13:10 16:10 150 0

14 16/03/2010 13:10 16:10 180 0

15 29/03/2010 09:40 11:10 0 Slight drizzle, cloudy, wind 1 NE

15 29/03/2010 09:40 11:10 30 1/2 N

15 29/03/2010 09:40 11:10 60 2/3 NNE

15 29/03/2010 09:40 11:10 90 4 N

15 29/03/2010 09:40 11:10 120 Null

15 29/03/2010 09:40 11:10 150 Null

15 29/03/2010 09:40 11:10 180 Null

16 14/04/2010 11:00 12:30 0 Full cloud, overcast, dry Wind 2 ENE

16 14/04/2010 11:00 12:30 30 2 E

16 14/04/2010 11:00 12:30 60 3 E

16 14/04/2010 11:00 12:30 90 3 E

16 14/04/2010 11:00 12:30 120 Null


Forthwind Ltd

Page 4


16 14/04/2010 11:00 12:30 150 Null

16 14/04/2010 11:00 12:30 180 Null

17 14/04/2010 13:00 16:00 0 Dry, overcast, Wind 3 ESE

17 14/04/2010 13:00 16:00 30 3 SE

17 14/04/2010 13:00 16:00 60 2 SE

17 14/04/2010 13:00 16:00 90 2 SE

17 14/04/2010 13:00 16:00 120 2 SE

17 14/04/2010 13:00 16:00 150 2 E

17 14/04/2010 13:00 16:00 180 2 SE

18 23/04/2010 10:15 13:15 0 Cold 8/8 Wind 2+ SE

18 23/04/2010 10:15 13:15 30 2 SE

18 23/04/2010 10:15 13:15 60 2/3 SE

18 23/04/2010 10:15 13:15 90 3 SE

18 23/04/2010 10:15 13:15 120 3 SE rain

18 23/04/2010 10:15 13:15 150 3 E rain

18 23/04/2010 10:15 13:15 180 3 E rain heavier, poor vis

19 23/04/2010 13:40 15:10 0 Rain, cloudy 8/8 Wind 2 E

19 23/04/2010 13:40 15:10 30 3 E rain

19 23/04/2010 13:40 15:10 60 3 E heavy rain

19 23/04/2010 13:40 15:10 90 3 E heavy rain, poor vis

19 23/04/2010 13:40 15:10 120 Null

19 23/04/2010 13:40 15:10 150 Null

19 23/04/2010 13:40 15:10 180 Null

20 17/05/2010 13:10 16:10 0 Dry, sunny, cloud land not sea, slight glare, no direct sun, wind 1/2 SE

20 17/05/2010 13:10 16:10 30 2 S

20 17/05/2010 13:10 16:10 60 2 S

20 17/05/2010 13:10 16:10 90 2 S

20 17/05/2010 13:10 16:10 120 3 S

20 17/05/2010 13:10 16:10 150 3 S 50% cloud

20 17/05/2010 13:10 16:10 180 2 S sunny

21 18/05/2010 09:30 12:30 0 Dry, 3/8 cloud Sunny, Wind 1 S

21 18/05/2010 09:30 12:30 30 1 SW

21 18/05/2010 09:30 12:30 60 1 SW

21 18/05/2010 09:30 12:30 90 1 SW

21 18/05/2010 09:30 12:30 120 1 SW

21 18/05/2010 09:30 12:30 150 1 S

21 18/05/2010 09:30 12:30 180 0

22 18/05/2010 13:00 16:00 0 Dry, sunny, Wind 1 S

22 18/05/2010 13:00 16:00 30 3 S Difficult to see Terns against Glare

22 18/05/2010 13:00 16:00 60 3 S

22 18/05/2010 13:00 16:00 90 3 S

22 18/05/2010 13:00 16:00 120 3 S

22 18/05/2010 13:00 16:00 150 2 SE

22 18/05/2010 13:00 16:00 180 2 SE

23 25/05/2010 09:30 12:30 0 Dry, sunny, 3/8 cloud, Wind 1 S

23 25/05/2010 09:30 12:30 30 1 S

23 25/05/2010 09:30 12:30 60 1/2 S

23 25/05/2010 09:30 12:30 90 2 S

23 25/05/2010 09:30 12:30 120 1 S

23 25/05/2010 09:30 12:30 150 2 SSW

23 25/05/2010 09:30 12:30 180 2 SSW

24 25/05/2010 13:00 16:00 0 Dry, sunny, 5/8 cloud, Wind 2/3 S

24 25/05/2010 13:00 16:00 30 2/3 S

24 25/05/2010 13:00 16:00 60 3 S

24 25/05/2010 13:00 16:00 90 3 S

24 25/05/2010 13:00 16:00 120 3 S

24 25/05/2010 13:00 16:00 150 2 S

24 25/05/2010 13:00 16:00 180 1 S

25 16/06/2010 10:10 13:10 0 Dry, 8/8 cloud, Wind <1 S



Page 5


25 16/06/2010 10:10 13:10 30 1 S, 5/8 cloud

25 16/06/2010 10:10 13:10 60 1 S, 3/8 cloud

25 16/06/2010 10:10 13:10 90 1 SW

25 16/06/2010 10:10 13:10 120 1 SW

25 16/06/2010 10:10 13:10 150 2 S 0 cloud

25 16/06/2010 10:10 13:10 180 2 SSW

26 17/06/2010 13:30 16:30 0 Dry, sunny 0 cloud, Wind 2 SE

26 17/06/2010 13:30 16:30 30 2 S

26 17/06/2010 13:30 16:30 60 3 S

26 17/06/2010 13:30 16:30 90 2 SE

26 17/06/2010 13:30 16:30 120 1/2 S

26 17/06/2010 13:30 16:30 150 1 S

26 17/06/2010 13:30 16:30 180 2 S

27 25/06/2010 09:50 12:50 0 6/8 cloud, dry, wind 1 N

27 25/06/2010 09:50 12:50 30 1/2 N

27 25/06/2010 09:50 12:50 60 1 N

27 25/06/2010 09:50 12:50 90 1 SSW

27 25/06/2010 09:50 12:50 120 <1 S

27 25/06/2010 09:50 12:50 150 2 S

27 25/06/2010 09:50 12:50 180 2 S

28 25/06/2010 13:05 16:05 0 Dry 7/8 cloud, Wind 1 S

28 25/06/2010 13:05 16:05 30 1 S

28 25/06/2010 13:05 16:05 60 1 SE

28 25/06/2010 13:05 16:05 90 1 SE

28 25/06/2010 13:05 16:05 120 1 S

28 25/06/2010 13:05 16:05 150 1 S

28 25/06/2010 13:05 16:05 180 1 S

29 20/07/2010 10:15 13:15 0 Dry, Sunny, 3/8 cloud, glare, Wind 1 SW

29 20/07/2010 10:15 13:15 30 1 S

29 20/07/2010 10:15 13:15 60 1 S

29 20/07/2010 10:15 13:15 90 1 S

29 20/07/2010 10:15 13:15 120 1 S

29 20/07/2010 10:15 13:15 150 2 S

29 20/07/2010 10:15 13:15 180 2 SE

30 20/07/2010 13:50 16:50 0 Dry, sunny, 3/8 cloud, Wind 1/2 S

30 20/07/2010 13:50 16:50 30 1 SSE

30 20/07/2010 13:50 16:50 60 1 SE

30 20/07/2010 13:50 16:50 90 2 SSE

30 20/07/2010 13:50 16:50 120 2 SSE

30 20/07/2010 13:50 16:50 150 1 SE

30 20/07/2010 13:50 16:50 180 3 SSE

31 26/07/2010 10:00 13:00 0 Dry, 8/8 cloud, Wind 1 W, sea smooth

31 26/07/2010 10:00 13:00 30 1 W Sea smooth

31 26/07/2010 10:00 13:00 60 1 SW Sea smooth

31 26/07/2010 10:00 13:00 90 <1 SW Sea smooth

31 26/07/2010 10:00 13:00 120 1 NW Sea smooth

31 26/07/2010 10:00 13:00 150 1 SW Sea smooth

31 26/07/2010 10:00 13:00 180 1 SW Sea smooth

32 26/07/2010 13:35 16:35 0 Dry, 8/8 cloud, Wind 1 SW, Sea smooth

32 26/07/2010 13:35 16:35 30 1 WSW, Sea smooth

32 26/07/2010 13:35 16:35 60 1 W, Sea smooth

32 26/07/2010 13:35 16:35 90 1 W, Sea smooth

32 26/07/2010 13:35 16:35 120 1 W, Sea smooth

32 26/07/2010 13:35 16:35 150 1 W, Sea smooth

32 26/07/2010 13:35 16:35 180 1 W, Sea smooth

33 16/06/2011 09:40 12:40 0 Dry, 8/8 cloud, Wind 1 E, slight rippple, small

swell

33 16/06/2011 09:40 12:40 30 2 E, sea same

33 16/06/2011 09:40 12:40 60 1/2 E, sea same

33 16/06/2011 09:40 12:40 90 1 E, sea same


Forthwind Ltd

Page 6


33 16/06/2011 09:40 12:40 120 1 SW Sea smooth, slight swell

33 16/06/2011 09:40 12:40 150 1 SW Sea smooth, slight swell

33 16/06/2011 09:40 12:40 180 1 SW Sea ripple slight swell

34 16/06/2011 13:00 16:00 0 Dry, 8/8 cloud, Wind 1 SW, sea slight ripple

34 16/06/2011 13:00 16:00 30 1 SW sea slight ripple






35 29/06/2011 09:40 12:40 0 Dry, Cloud 6/8, Wind 2 W, Slight glare, Sea ripple, occasional breaking crests

35 29/06/2011 09:40 12:40 30 2 W, Ripple no breaking crests

35 29/06/2011 09:40 12:40 60 1 W, some glare, sea rippled

35 29/06/2011 09:40 12:40 90 1 W, some glare, sea rippled

35 29/06/2011 09:40 12:40 120 2 W, glare increasing, sea rippled

35 29/06/2011 09:40 12:40 150 2 W, Ripples occasional breaking crests, glare

35 29/06/2011 09:40 12:40 180 2 W, Sea rippled

36 29/06/2011 13:00 16:00 0 Slight rain, 6/8 cloud, Wind 2 W, sea slight swell and ripple

36 29/06/2011 13:00 16:00 30 1 W, Rain, sea slight ripple and swell

36 29/06/2011 13:00 16:00 60 1 W, Heavy rain 13.35-13:47, sea slight ripple and swell

36 29/06/2011 13:00 16:00 90 1 W, sea slight ripple and swell

36 29/06/2011 13:00 16:00 120 1 W, Rain, sea slight ripple

36 29/06/2011 13:00 16:00 150 2-3 W, Sea breaking crests

36 29/06/2011 13:00 16:00 180 3-4 W, Sea no breaking crests only swell

37 13/07/2011 09:48 12:48 0 Dry, sunny, 1/8 cloud, wind 1/2 S, sea rippled

37 13/07/2011 09:48 12:48 30 1/2 S, sea rippled

37 13/07/2011 09:48 12:48 60 1 S, sea rippled

37 13/07/2011 09:48 12:48 90 1 S, sea rippled

37 13/07/2011 09:48 12:48 120 1 SSW, sea rippled

37 13/07/2011 09:48 12:48 150 1 SSW, sea rippled

37 13/07/2011 09:48 12:48 180 2 SSW, sea small wavelets

38 13/07/2011 13:00 16:00 0 Dry, sunny, 0 cloud, wind 2 SE, Sea small wavelets

38 13/07/2011 13:00 16:00 30 2/3 SW, small wavelets occ breaking crests

38 13/07/2011 13:00 16:00 60 3 S, breaking crests

38 13/07/2011 13:00 16:00 90 3+ S, breaking crests

38 13/07/2011 13:00 16:00 120 3+ S, breaking crests



39 09/08/2011 09:30 12:30 0 Dry, sunny, 3/8 cloud, Wind 3/4 W, some glare, sea breaking crests

39 09/08/2011 09:30 12:30 30 4/5 W, few breaking crests

39 09/08/2011 09:30 12:30 60 3 W, small wavelets, few breaking crests

39 09/08/2011 09:30 12:30 90 4 W, small wavelets

39 09/08/2011 09:30 12:30 120 4 WSW, small wavelets, glare

39 09/08/2011 09:30 12:30 150 4 WSW, small wavelets, bad glare

39 09/08/2011 09:30 12:30 180 3/4 WSW, Strong ripple, glare

40 09/08/2011 13:00 16:00 0 Dry, sunny, 4/8 cloud, wind 3 W, sea heavy ripple

40 09/08/2011 13:00 16:00 30 4+ W, small wavelets, breaking crests

40 09/08/2011 13:00 16:00 60 4 W, sea same

40 09/08/2011 13:00 16:00 90 3/4 W, sea same

40 09/08/2011 13:00 16:00 120 3/4 W, sea same

40 09/08/2011 13:00 16:00 150 3 W, Few breaking crests

40 09/08/2011 13:00 16:00 180 3 W, Few breaking crests

41 26/08/2011 09:15 12:15 0 Dry, 8/8 cloud, some mist, vis OK, Wind 3 SSE, sea rippled



Page 7






41 26/08/2011 09:15 12:15 150 Dry, 8/8 cloud, some mist, vis OK, Wind 3 SSE, sea rippled, occasional breaks in cloud, glare

41 26/08/2011 09:15 12:15 180 Dry, 8/8 cloud, some mist, vis OK, Wind 3 /4SSE, sea rippled, occasional breaks in cloud, glare, occasional breaking crests

42 26/08/2011 12:30 15:30 0 Dry, 8/8 low cloud, occ sunny, wind 4+SE, sea breaking crests



42 26/08/2011 12:30 15:30 90 Wind 3/4 SE, fewer breaking crests

42 26/08/2011 12:30 15:30 120 Wind 3/4 SE, No breaking crests, 8/8 high cloud

42 26/08/2011 12:30 15:30 150 Wind 3 SE, No breaking crests

42 26/08/2011 12:30 15:30 180 Wind 3 SE, No breaking crests

43 31/08/2011 09:30 12:30 0 Dry, 8/8 cloud, very calm, Wind 1 S

43 31/08/2011 09:30 12:30 30 2 S, sea slight ripple

43 31/08/2011 09:30 12:30 60 2 SW, sea slight ripple

43 31/08/2011 09:30 12:30 90 2 SW, sea slight ripple, some glare

43 31/08/2011 09:30 12:30 120 2 SW, sea slight ripple, less glare



44 31/08/2011 12:50 15:50 0 Dry, 8/8 cloud, wind 1/2 SW, sea slight ripple







45 28/09/2011 10:10 13:10 0 Dry, very sunny, 3/8 high cloud, very hazy, wind 2 SE, sea calm slight ripple


45 28/09/2011 10:10 13:10 60 Dry, very sunny, 3/8 high cloud, very hazy, wind

2 SE, sea calm slight ripple


45 28/09/2011 10:10 13:10 120 Wind 1 SE, sea slight ripple

45 28/09/2011 10:10 13:10 150 Wind 1/2 SE, sea slight ripple

45 28/09/2011 10:10 13:10 180 Wind 1 SE, sea slight ripple

46 28/09/2011 13:20 16:20 0 Dry, sunny, 2/8 high cloud, very hazy, wind 1/2 SW, strong ripple

46 28/09/2011 13:20 16:20 30 2/3 SW, small wavelets

46 28/09/2011 13:20 16:20 60 2/3 SW, small wavelets

46 28/09/2011 13:20 16:20 90 2+ WSW, small wavelets

46 28/09/2011 13:20 16:20 120 2+ WSW, occ breaking crests

46 28/09/2011 13:20 16:20 150 2 WSW, small wavelets no breaking crests

46 28/09/2011 13:20 16:20 180 2 W, small wavelets

47 04/10/2011 09:20 12:20 0 Dry, 8/8 cloud, wind 4+ W, sea rough, freq white horses

47 04/10/2011 09:20 12:20 30 4 W, no white horses, but rough

47 04/10/2011 09:20 12:20 60 4+ W, white horses

47 04/10/2011 09:20 12:20 90 4 W, no breaking crests


Forthwind Ltd

Page 8


47 04/10/2011 09:20 12:20 120 4 W, breaking crests

47 04/10/2011 09:20 12:20 150 3-4 W, few breaking crests, heavy swell and ripple, some glare

47 04/10/2011 09:20 12:20 180 4+, white horses, glare

48 04/10/2011 12:30 15:30 0 Dry Vhigh thin cloud, some glare, Wind 4/5 W, sea rough, some white horses

48 04/10/2011 12:30 15:30 30 4/5 W sea calmer still white horses

48 04/10/2011 12:30 15:30 60 4/5 W sea rough, white horses

48 04/10/2011 12:30 15:30 90 5 W, sea rough, white horses

48 04/10/2011 12:30 15:30 120 4 W, sea more rippled occ white horses

48 04/10/2011 12:30 15:30 150 3 W, sea small wavelets few crests

48 04/10/2011 12:30 15:30 180 2/3 W, more swell than wavea, only few crests

49 26/10/2011 09:45 12:45 0 Dry, sunny, 2/8 cloud, glare, 1/3 obscured, wind 2 W, sea swell, small wavelets

49 26/10/2011 09:45 12:45 30 Dry, sunny, 2/8 cloud, glare, 1/3 obscured, wind 2 W, sea swell, small wavelets

49 26/10/2011 09:45 12:45 60 Dry, sunny, 2/8 cloud, glare mid-point, 1/3 obscured, wind 2 W, sea swell, small wavelets

49 26/10/2011 09:45 12:45 90 glare 50%, 1 W, swell easing

49 26/10/2011 09:45 12:45 120 1 W, small wavelets, very little swell glare 1/3

49 26/10/2011 09:45 12:45 150 1+ WSW, small wavelets, glare almost off to west

49 26/10/2011 09:45 12:45 180 1+ WSE, Ripple slight swell

50 26/10/2011 13:00 16:00 0 Dry, sunny, 3/8 cloud, wind 1+ WSW, sea ripple

50 26/10/2011 13:00 16:00 30 Dry, sunny, 3/8 cloud, wind 1+ WSW, sea ripple

50 26/10/2011 13:00 16:00 60 2 W, strong ripple, slight swell

50 26/10/2011 13:00 16:00 90 3 SW, breaking crests

50 26/10/2011 13:00 16:00 120 2 SW Wavelets, no crests, 7/8 cloud, no longer sunny

50 26/10/2011 13:00 16:00 150 2 SW, small wavelets, overcast

50 26/10/2011 13:00 16:00 180 2 SSW, Small wavelets

51 28/10/2011 09:20 12:30 0 Dry, sunny, 3/8 high cloud, wind 1 W, sea small wavelets, glare 1/3

51 28/10/2011 09:20 12:30 30 Dry, sunny, 3/8 high cloud, wind 1 W, sea small wavelets, glare 1/3

51 28/10/2011 09:20 12:30 60 Wind <1 W

51 28/10/2011 09:20 12:30 90 1/2 W, small waves

51 28/10/2011 09:20 12:30 120 2 W, occ breaking crests

51 28/10/2011 09:20 12:30 150 2-3 W, breaking crests

51 28/10/2011 09:20 12:30 180 3 W, breaking crests

52 28/10/2011 12:50 15:50 0 Dry, sunny, 2/8 high cloud, wind 3 W, sea occ breaking crests

52 28/10/2011 12:50 15:50 30 3/4 W, breaking crests

52 28/10/2011 12:50 15:50 60 3 W, few breaking crests

52 28/10/2011 12:50 15:50 90 4 W, Mumerous breaking crests

52 28/10/2011 12:50 15:50 120 4+ W, sea rough, many white horses

52 28/10/2011 12:50 15:50 150 2 W, sea still rough, fewer white horses

52 28/10/2011 12:50 15:50 180 2 W, Waves but no breaking crests

53 23/11/2011 09:15 12:15 0 Dry, sunny, 7/8 cloud, bad glare, wind 4/5 WSW, sea few white horses

53 23/11/2011 09:15 12:15 30 4+ W, sea rough, white horses


53 23/11/2011 09:15 12:15 90 5 W, sea rough, white horses


53 23/11/2011 09:15 12:15 150 6 W, sea rough, occ white horses and spray

53 23/11/2011 09:15 12:15 180 6+W, sea rough, occ white horses and spray

54 23/11/2011 12:30 15:30 0 Dry, 8/8 cloud, wInd 6 W, sea rough, white horses

54 23/11/2011 12:30 15:30 30 7 W, sea rough white horses and spray

54 23/11/2011 12:30 15:30 60 6/7 W, sea rough white horses and spray



Page 9


54 23/11/2011 12:30 15:30 90 6/7 W, sea now little spray

54 23/11/2011 12:30 15:30 120 6 W, sea calmer, white horses, no spray

54 23/11/2011 12:30 15:30 150 5+ gusting sea rough, fewer white horses

54 23/11/2011 12:30 15:30 180 5+ gusting sea rough, fewer white horses

55 25/11/2011 10:15 13:15 0 Slight rain, 6/8 cloud, some glare, Wind 4+ W, gusting 5/6, sea rough, heavy swell, occ white horses

55 25/11/2011 10:15 13:15 30 No rain, 6/8 cloud, some glare, Wind 4+ W, gusting 5/6, sea rough, heavy swell, occ white horses

55 25/11/2011 10:15 13:15 60 7 W, short squall, heavy rain/sleet numerous white horses

55 25/11/2011 10:15 13:15 90 4-6 WSW, sea rough, numerous white horses

55 25/11/2011 10:15 13:15 120 4-6 WSW, sea rough, fewer white horses

55 25/11/2011 10:15 13:15 150 3 W, sea waves with occ crests

55 25/11/2011 10:15 13:15 180 3 W, sea waves with occ crests

56 02/12/2011 10:15 13:15 0 Dry, 8/8 cloud, wind 2 SW, sea rippled

56 02/12/2011 10:15 13:15 30 2/3 W, sea rippled and occ breaking crests




56 02/12/2011 10:15 13:15 150 3 W, sea rippled and occ breaking crests

56 02/12/2011 10:15 13:15 180 4 W, sea rough, some white horses

57 15/12/2011 11:55 14:55 0 Dry sunny, 1/8 cloud, wind 1 WNW, sea rippled



57 15/12/2011 11:55 14:55 90 2 W, sea wavelets

57 15/12/2011 11:55 14:55 120 1 W, wavelets

57 15/12/2011 11:55 14:55 150 1 WNW, wavelets

57 15/12/2011 11:55 14:55 180 1 WNW, sea rippled

58 20/12/2011 11:35 14:35 0 Dry, 8/8 cloud, cold, wind 2 W, sea rippled

58 20/12/2011 11:35 14:35 30 2+ W, sea wavelets occ crests

58 20/12/2011 11:35 14:35 60 2/3 W, sea wavelets

58 20/12/2011 11:35 14:35 90 2/3 W, sea wavelets

58 20/12/2011 11:35 14:35 120 1/2 W, sea wavelets

58 20/12/2011 11:35 14:35 150 1/2 W, sea wavelets

58 20/12/2011 11:35 14:35 180 1/2 W, sea wavelets

59 22/12/2011 10:50 13:50 0 Dry, 8/8 cloud, wind 3+ W, sea wavelets with some breaking crests

59 22/12/2011 10:50 13:50 30 3/4 W, sea wavelets occ crests

59 22/12/2011 10:50 13:50 60 3/4 W, sea wavelets occ crests

59 22/12/2011 10:50 13:50 90 4 W, sea occ crests

59 22/12/2011 10:50 13:50 120 3+ W, sea wavelets, no crests

59 22/12/2011 10:50 13:50 150 2/3 W, sea wavelets

59 22/12/2011 10:50 13:50 180 2/3 W, sea wavelets

60 05/01/2012 11:30 14:30 0 Dry, 1/8 cloud, wind 4 N, gust 6, sea rippled, sheltered from north, small wavelets further out only

60 05/01/2012 11:30 14:30 30 4/5(6) N, sea as above

60 05/01/2012 11:30 14:30 60 5(6/7) N, sea as above

60 05/01/2012 11:30 14:30 90 4(5) N, sea as above

60 05/01/2012 11:30 14:30 120 4(5) N, sea as above

60 05/01/2012 11:30 14:30 150 5 N, sea as above

60 05/01/2012 11:30 14:30 180 6 N, sea breaking wavelets close inshore

61 27/01/2012 09:45 12:45 0 Dry, sunny, 3/8 cloud, wind 1 NW, sea wavelets, some glare




Forthwind Ltd

Page 10




61 27/01/2012 09:45 12:45 150 2 W, sea ripples

61 27/01/2012 09:45 12:45 180 2 W, sea ripples

62 27/01/2012 12:45 15:45 0 Dry, sunny, 2/8 cloud, wind 1/2 W, sea ripples

62 27/01/2012 12:45 15:45 30 Dry, sunny, 2/8 cloud, wind 1/2 W, sea ripples

62 27/01/2012 12:45 15:45 60 Dry, sunny, 2/8 cloud, wind 1 NW, sea ripples





63 08/02/2012 09:35 12:35 0 Dry, sunny, 5/8 high cloud, hazy, wind 1 SW, glare, sea large ripples/wavelets



63 08/02/2012 09:35 12:35 90 1/2 W, Sea wavelets and swell

63 08/02/2012 09:35 12:35 120 2 W, Sea wavelets and swell, no glare



64 08/02/2012 12:40 15:40 0 Dry, 1/8 high cloud, wind 2 W, sea ripples and swell

64 08/02/2012 12:40 15:40 30 Dry, 1/8 high cloud, wind 2 W, sea ripples and swell

64 08/02/2012 12:40 15:40 60 Dry, 1/8 high cloud, wind 2 W, sea ripples and

swell

64 08/02/2012 12:40 15:40 90 Dry, 1/8 high cloud, wind 2 W, sea ripples, very little swell




65 27/02/2012 09:50 12:50 0 Light rain, 8/8 cloud, wind 3 W, sea wavelets, occ white horses, vix OK but poor

65 27/02/2012 09:50 12:50 30 Light rain, 8/8 cloud, wind 3 W, sea wavelets, occ white horses, vix OK but poor

65 27/02/2012 09:50 12:50 60 Wind 3/4 W, rain heavier, sea occ white horses

65 27/02/2012 09:50 12:50 90 3 W, sea as above

65 27/02/2012 09:50 12:50 120 3 W, sea as above vis improving, sky clearing



66 27/02/2012 12:50 15:50 0 Dry, 8/8 cloud, wind 2/3 W, sea occ white horses




66 27/02/2012 12:50 15:50 120 4+ W, numerous white horses



67 28/02/2012 09:30 12:30 0 Dry, 7/8 cloud, some glare, wind 4+ W, sea wavelets no white horses

67 28/02/2012 09:30 12:30 30 Dry, 7/8 cloud, some glare, wind 4+ W, sea wavelets occ white horses

67 28/02/2012 09:30 12:30 60 3/4 W, wavelets, no white horses

67 28/02/2012 09:30 12:30 90 3/4 W, wavelets, no white horses

67 28/02/2012 09:30 12:30 120 3 W, occ white horses




Page 11



68 28/02/2012 12:35 15:35 0 Dry, 8/8 cloud, wind 3 W, sea wavelets, occ white horses

68 28/02/2012 12:35 15:35 30 2 W, no white horses





69 28/03/2012 10:00 13:00 0 Dry, hot, very sunny 1/8 cloud but slight haze, 30% glare, wind W1-2, sea small wavelets



69 28/03/2012 10:00 13:00 90 Cloud 3/8, Occ WH, glare to 50%

69 28/03/2012 10:00 13:00 120 Glare less, cloud 5/8 high, very sunny

69 28/03/2012 10:00 13:00 150 Wind W2-3, wavelets, no WH

69 28/03/2012 10:00 13:00 180 As above, 10% glare

70 28/03/2012 13:10 16:10 0 Dry, sunny, heat haze, very high temp 22-23 degrees, wind W3, sea wavelets

70 28/03/2012 13:10 16:10 30 Dry, sunny, heat haze, very high temp 22-23 degrees, wind W3, sea wavelets, occ WH

70 28/03/2012 13:10 16:10 60 Dry, sunny, heat haze, very high temp 22-23 degrees, wind W3, sea wavelets, occ WH, vis now very good

70 28/03/2012 13:10 16:10 90 Dry, sunny, heat haze, very high temp 22-23 degrees, wind W3, sea wavelets, occ WH, vis now very good

70 28/03/2012 13:10 16:10 120 W2, wavelets only

70 28/03/2012 13:10 16:10 150 W2, wavelets only

70 28/03/2012 13:10 16:10 180 W2, wavelets only, strong ripple

71 11/04/2012 09:10 12:10 0 Dry, 8/8 cloud, wind WSW1, sea slight ripple

71 11/04/2012 09:10 12:10 30 Wind S1

71 11/04/2012 09:10 12:10 60 Wind S1

71 11/04/2012 09:10 12:10 90 Wind S1

71 11/04/2012 09:10 12:10 120 Wind S1

71 11/04/2012 09:10 12:10 150 Wind S1

71 11/04/2012 09:10 12:10 180 Wind S1

72 11/04/2012 12:30 15:30 0 Dry, 7/8 cloud, wind 1-2, sea rippled

72 11/04/2012 12:30 15:30 30 Cloud 5/8

72 11/04/2012 12:30 15:30 60 Cloud 3/8

72 11/04/2012 12:30 15:30 90 Cloud 3/8

72 11/04/2012 12:30 15:30 120 Cloud 3/8

72 11/04/2012 12:30 15:30 150 Cloud 3/8

72 11/04/2012 12:30 15:30 180 Cloud 3/8

73 24/04/2012 10:00 13:00 0 Occasional showers, 8/8 cloud, wind E3, sea rippled

73 24/04/2012 10:00 13:00 30 Stronger ripple

73 24/04/2012 10:00 13:00 60 Stronger ripple

73 24/04/2012 10:00 13:00 90 Wind W2

73 24/04/2012 10:00 13:00 120 Wind W2

73 24/04/2012 10:00 13:00 150 Wind W2

73 24/04/2012 10:00 13:00 180 Wind W2

74 24/04/2012 13:10 16:10 0 Occasional showers, 7/8 cloud, wind SE2, sea wavelets

74 24/04/2012 13:10 16:10 30 Occasional showers, 7/8 cloud, wind SE2, sea

wavelets

74 24/04/2012 13:10 16:10 60 occasional WH

74 24/04/2012 13:10 16:10 90 Showers

74 24/04/2012 13:10 16:10 120 Dry, numerous WH


Forthwind Ltd

Page 12


74 24/04/2012 13:10 16:10 150 Dry, numerous WH

74 24/04/2012 13:10 16:10 180 Dry, numerous WH

75 01/05/2012 09:15 12:15 0 Dry, 4/8 high cloud, sunny, wind E 4, sea wavelets and WH



75 01/05/2012 09:15 12:15 90 Some glare

75 01/05/2012 09:15 12:15 120 50% dispersed glare, vis poor



76 01/05/2012 12:30 15:30 0 Dry, sunny, 6/8 high cloud, some glare, wind E3, small wavelets no WH

76 01/05/2012 12:30 15:30 30 Glare decreasing

76 01/05/2012 12:30 15:30 60 No glare. Wind 3, sea wavelets

76 01/05/2012 12:30 15:30 90 No glare. Wind 3, sea wavelets

76 01/05/2012 12:30 15:30 120 Wind E4, Wavelets, some WH



77 01/06/2012 13:40 16:40 0 Dry, 2/8 cloud, wind SE 3, sea wavelets occasional WH



77 01/06/2012 13:40 16:40 90 Numerous white horses

77 01/06/2012 13:40 16:40 120 Wind SE4

77 01/06/2012 13:40 16:40 150 Wind SE4

77 01/06/2012 13:40 16:40 180 Wind SE4

78 01/06/2012 10:00 13:00 0 Dry, 7/8, wind E3, sea wavelets







79 05/06/2012 09:45 12:45 0 Dry, sunny, 6/8 high cloud, wind S1, sea ripples



79 05/06/2012 09:45 12:45 90 Wind 2

79 05/06/2012 09:45 12:45 120 Wind 2

79 05/06/2012 09:45 12:45 150 Wind 2

79 05/06/2012 09:45 12:45 180 Wind 2

80 05/06/2012 13:00 16:00 0 Dry, sunny, 4/8 cloud, wind SSW 2/3, sea small wavelets

80 05/06/2012 13:00 16:00 30 Dry, sunny, 4/8 cloud, wind SSW 2/3, sea small wavelets

80 05/06/2012 13:00 16:00 60 Wind 4 occ WH

80 05/06/2012 13:00 16:00 90 Wind 5 numerous WH

80 05/06/2012 13:00 16:00 120 Wind 5-6, SSE numerous WH

80 05/06/2012 13:00 16:00 150 Wind 5, SSE WH

80 05/06/2012 13:00 16:00 180 Wind 4-5 SSE WH



Page 13

1.2 Vantage Point Surveys

1.2.1 Target Species

Table A1.2 Target Species Flights

Species Date Time Duration Number

Percent in height bands 2 and 3

Arctic skua 26-Oct-11 12:37 50 2 0

Arctic skua 26-Oct-11 12:40 40 1 100

Arctic skua 01-Jun-12 10:47 40 1 0

Auk sp. 29-Jun-11 10:52 35 1 0

Auk sp. 29-Jun-11 11:29 35 1 0

Auk sp. 29-Jun-11 15:00 50 1 0

Auk sp. 29-Jun-11 15:13 30 1 0

Auk sp. 31-Aug-11 10:03 40 2 0

Auk sp. 31-Aug-11 10:42 45 1 0

Auk sp. 28-Oct-11 10:08 35 1 0

Auk sp. 28-Sep-11 14:52 45 1 0

Auk sp. 28-Sep-11 15:57 55 1 0

Auk sp. 27-Feb-12 10:27 50 1 0

Auk sp. 27-Feb-12 12:27 45 1 0

Auk sp. 15-Dec-11 12:13 40 1 0

Auk sp. 04-Oct-11 09:43 35 1 0

Auk sp. 04-Oct-11 09:46 50 2 0

Auk sp. 08-Feb-12 11:42 35 1 0

Auk sp. 16-Jun-10 10:20 38 2 0

Auk sp. 16-Jun-10 10:25 40 2 0

Auk sp. 16-Jun-10 10:37 60 1 0

Auk sp. 16-Jun-10 10:41 35 3 0

Auk sp. 16-Jun-10 10:42 40 3 0

Auk sp. 16-Jun-10 10:48 60 1 0

Auk sp. 16-Jun-10 11:06 45 1 0

Auk sp. 16-Jun-10 11:11 33 1 0

Auk sp. 20-Jul-10 11:01 25 1 0

Auk sp. 20-Jul-10 12:59 60 2 0

Auk sp. 20-Jul-10 14:17 65 7 0

Auk sp. 23-Apr-10 11:28 36 4 0

Auk sp. 25-May-10 09:50 45 1 0

Auk sp. 25-May-10 12:14 45 2 0

Auk sp. 26-Jun-10 09:56 50 2 0

Auk sp. 26-Jun-10 10:46 50 1 0

Auk sp. 26-Jun-10 11:26 30 1 0

Auk sp. 26-Jun-10 11:49 55 3 0

Auk sp. 26-Jun-10 11:51 50 2 0

Auk sp. 25-Jun-10 13:40 40 1 0


Forthwind Ltd

Page 14



Auk sp. 25-Jun-10 13:56 52 1 0

Auk sp. 25-Jun-10 14:01 55 1 0

Auk sp. 25-Jun-10 14:40 50 1 0

Auk sp. 25-Jun-10 15:16 25 1 0

Auk sp. 16-Jun-11 10:03 30 1 0

Auk sp. 16-Jun-11 10:04 30 1 0

Auk sp. 16-Jun-11 10:08 45 2 0

Auk sp. 16-Jun-11 10:10 40 6 0

Auk sp. 16-Jun-11 10:13 40 5 0

Auk sp. 16-Jun-11 10:23 35 2 0

Auk sp. 16-Jun-11 11:11 55 1 0

Auk sp. 16-Jun-11 11:17 40 1 0

Auk sp. 16-Jun-11 11:41 40 2 0

Auk sp. 16-Jun-11 12:00 40 4 0

Auk sp. 16-Jun-11 12:01 40 2 0

Auk sp. 16-Jun-11 12:20 40 8 0

Auk sp. 28-Mar-12 12:38 40 2 0

Auk sp. 28-Mar-12 13:25 40 2 0

Auk sp. 28-Mar-12 14:45 45 1 0

Auk sp. 28-Mar-12 15:04 45 1 0

Auk sp. 11-Apr-12 09:21 45 3 0

Auk sp. 11-Apr-12 09:23 40 1 0

Auk sp. 24-Apr-12 10:09 40 1 0

Auk sp. 24-Apr-12 13:23 45 1 0

Auk sp. 01-May-12 10:40 40 3 0

Auk sp. 01-May-12 11:18 45 2 0

Auk sp. 01-May-12 11:58 40 1 0

Auk sp. 01-May-12 12:06 40 1 0

Auk sp. 01-May-12 13:02 40 1 0

Auk sp. 01-May-12 13:04 40 1 0

Auk sp. 01-May-12 13:21 40 1 0

Auk sp. 01-May-12 13:32 45 1 0

Auk sp. 01-May-12 14:01 45 1 0

Auk sp. 01-May-12 14:31 45 1 0

Auk sp. 01-May-12 14:48 45 1 0

Auk sp. 01-May-12 14:54 45 1 0

Auk sp. 01-Jun-12 14:00 45 1 0

Auk sp. 01-Jun-12 16:21 45 2 0

Auk sp. 01-Jun-12 16:27 45 6 0

Auk sp. 01-Jun-12 10:10 35 1 0

Auk sp. 01-Jun-12 10:14 40 1 0

Auk sp. 01-Jun-12 10:15 40 2 0



Page 15



Auk sp. 01-Jun-12 10:20 40 1 0

Auk sp. 01-Jun-12 10:30 40 2 0

Auk sp. 01-Jun-12 10:37 40 1 0

Auk sp. 01-Jun-12 11:10 40 1 0

Auk sp. 01-Jun-12 11:45 40 1 0

Auk sp. 01-Jun-12 11:59 40 1 0

Auk sp. 01-Jun-12 11:59 40 1 0

Auk sp. 05-Jun-12 13:21 45 1 0

Auk sp. 05-Jun-12 13:29 45 1 0

Auk sp. 05-Jun-12 13:32 45 1 0

Auk sp. 05-Jun-12 13:38 45 1 0

Auk sp. 05-Jun-12 13:44 45 1 0

Auk sp. 05-Jun-12 13:47 45 3 0

Auk sp. 05-Jun-12 13:54 45 1 0

Auk sp. 05-Jun-12 14:04 45 2 0

Auk sp. 05-Jun-12 14:08 45 3 0

Auk sp. 05-Jun-12 14:09 45 1 0

Auk sp. 05-Jun-12 14:14 45 2 0

Auk sp. 05-Jun-12 14:32 45 1 0

Auk sp. 05-Jun-12 14:55 45 3 0

Auk sp. 05-Jun-12 15:49 45 1 0

Cormorant 28-Feb-12 11:38 55 1 0

Cormorant 29-Jun-11 10:30 10 1 0

Cormorant 29-Jun-11 10:58 35 1 0

Cormorant 29-Jun-11 12:14 18 1 0

Cormorant 29-Jun-11 13:08 25 1 0

Cormorant 29-Jun-11 13:18 35 1 0

Cormorant 29-Jun-11 14:10 30 1 0

Cormorant 29-Jun-11 14:37 20 1 0

Cormorant 29-Jun-11 15:10 30 1 0

Cormorant 29-Jun-11 15:29 25 1 0

Cormorant 29-Jun-11 15:48 40 1 0

Cormorant 31-Aug-11 10:02 20 2 0

Cormorant 31-Aug-11 10:17 35 1 0

Cormorant 31-Aug-11 10:39 5 3 100

Cormorant 31-Aug-11 12:17 40 2 0

Cormorant 31-Aug-11 13:05 20 1 0

Cormorant 31-Aug-11 13:31 40 2 0

Cormorant 31-Aug-11 14:06 45 1 0

Cormorant 31-Aug-11 14:12 45 1 0

Cormorant 31-Aug-11 14:59 35 1 0

Cormorant 27-Jan-12 13:31 35 1 0


Forthwind Ltd

Page 16



Cormorant 27-Jan-12 14:10 35 1 0

Cormorant 27-Jan-12 14:40 40 1 0

Cormorant 27-Jan-12 15:32 35 1 0

Cormorant 27-Jan-12 15:40 35 1 0

Cormorant 28-Oct-11 11:07 10 1 0

Cormorant 28-Oct-11 13:27 40 1 0

Cormorant 28-Oct-11 13:31 15 1 0

Cormorant 28-Oct-11 15:38 35 1 0

Cormorant 27-Jan-12 10:24 20 1 0

Cormorant 27-Jan-12 11:08 20 1 0

Cormorant 27-Jan-12 12:04 25 1 0

Cormorant 27-Jan-12 12:09 45 1 0

Cormorant 25-Nov-11 10:23 25 1 0

Cormorant 25-Nov-11 10:41 40 1 0

Cormorant 25-Nov-11 10:53 25 1 0

Cormorant 25-Nov-11 10:58 25 1 100

Cormorant 26-Aug-11 12:04 42 1 0

Cormorant 26-Aug-11 13:35 30 1 0

Cormorant 26-Oct-11 10:01 40 1 0

Cormorant 26-Oct-11 10:32 40 1 0

Cormorant 26-Oct-11 10:53 50 1 100

Cormorant 26-Oct-11 12:09 40 2 0

Cormorant 26-Oct-11 12:17 40 1 0

Cormorant 26-Oct-11 12:19 35 1 0

Cormorant 26-Oct-11 12:19 45 1 0

Cormorant 26-Oct-11 12:33 45 1 0

Cormorant 26-Oct-11 12:42 45 7 0

Cormorant 26-Oct-11 13:19 35 1 0

Cormorant 26-Oct-11 13:22 25 1 0

Cormorant 26-Oct-11 14:32 35 1 0

Cormorant 26-Oct-11 14:36 40 1 0

Cormorant 26-Oct-11 14:38 40 1 0

Cormorant 26-Oct-11 15:14 40 1 0

Cormorant 26-Oct-11 15:19 45 1 0

Cormorant 26-Oct-11 15:38 45 1 0

Cormorant 26-Oct-11 15:40 40 1 0

Cormorant 27-Feb-12 10:40 30 1 0

Cormorant 27-Feb-12 11:54 20 1 0

Cormorant 15-Dec-11 12:27 20 1 0

Cormorant 16-Jun-11 14:40 30 1 0

Cormorant 20-Dec-11 12:21 50 1 0

Cormorant 20-Dec-11 12:30 40 1 0



Page 17



Cormorant 20-Dec-11 12:37 40 1 0

Cormorant 20-Dec-11 12:46 40 1 0

Cormorant 20-Dec-11 12:59 40 1 0

Cormorant 20-Dec-11 13:49 40 1 0

Cormorant 20-Dec-11 14:03 45 1 0

Cormorant 20-Dec-11 14:07 20 1 0

Cormorant 22-Dec-11 11:05 50 1 0

Cormorant 22-Dec-11 11:43 15 1 0

Cormorant 22-Dec-11 12:15 35 1 0

Cormorant 23-Nov-11 10:34 20 1 0

Cormorant 23-Nov-11 10:40 40 1 0

Cormorant 23-Nov-11 13:08 20 1 0

Cormorant 23-Nov-11 13:42 12 1 0

Cormorant 23-Nov-11 13:46 55 1 0

Cormorant 23-Nov-11 14:08 60 1 0

Cormorant 23-Nov-11 14:39 45 1 0

Cormorant 13-Jul-11 10:00 40 1 0

Cormorant 13-Jul-11 10:49 20 1 0

Cormorant 09-Aug-11 09:53 15 1 0

Cormorant 09-Aug-11 11:09 30 1 0

Cormorant 09-Aug-11 12:01 18 1 0

Cormorant 09-Aug-11 12:13 10 1 0

Cormorant 09-Aug-11 12:16 20 1 0

Cormorant 09-Aug-11 13:09 50 1 0

Cormorant 09-Aug-11 13:15 25 1 0

Cormorant 09-Aug-11 13:20 40 1 0

Cormorant 09-Aug-11 14:12 35 1 0

Cormorant 09-Aug-11 14:55 33 1 0

Cormorant 09-Aug-11 15:40 45 1 0

Cormorant 04-Oct-11 10:08 45 2 0

Cormorant 04-Oct-11 10:26 20 1 0

Cormorant 04-Oct-11 11:11 30 1 100

Cormorant 04-Oct-11 11:55 10 1 0

Cormorant 04-Oct-11 12:38 35 1 0

Cormorant 04-Oct-11 13:54 30 1 0

Cormorant 04-Oct-11 15:06 37 1 0

Cormorant 02-Dec-11 10:25 35 1 0

Cormorant 02-Dec-11 12:36 12 1 0

Cormorant 05-Jan-12 12:32 20 1 0

Cormorant 05-Jan-12 13:45 6 1 0

Cormorant 05-Jan-12 14:24 30 1 0

Cormorant 08-Feb-12 10:00 40 1 0


Forthwind Ltd

Page 18



Cormorant 08-Feb-12 10:21 35 1 0

Cormorant 08-Feb-12 11:30 40 1 100

Cormorant 08-Feb-12 13:04 35 1 0

Cormorant 01-Mar-10 09:31 45 1 0

Cormorant 01-Mar-10 09:32 42 1 0

Cormorant 01-Mar-10 10:49 10 1 0

Cormorant 01-Mar-10 10:51 50 1 0

Cormorant 01-Mar-10 11:05 21 1 0

Cormorant 01-Mar-10 11:07 20 1 0

Cormorant 01-Mar-10 11:32 32 1 0

Cormorant 01-Mar-10 12:24 12 2 0

Cormorant 01-Mar-10 15:04 20 1 0

Cormorant 01-Mar-10 15:15 12 1 0

Cormorant 02-Feb-10 11:21 10 1 0

Cormorant 02-Feb-10 11:27 15 1 0

Cormorant 02-Feb-10 13:03 25 1 0

Cormorant 02-Mar-10 13:12 2 1 0

Cormorant 02-Mar-10 13:45 10 1 0

Cormorant 02-Mar-10 13:49 17 1 0

Cormorant 02-Mar-10 14:06 28 1 0

Cormorant 02-Mar-10 14:24 24 1 0

Cormorant 02-Mar-10 15:21 35 1 0

Cormorant 02-Mar-10 15:52 10 1 0

Cormorant 14-Apr-10 11:14 26 1 0

Cormorant 14-Apr-10 13:14 10 1 0

Cormorant 14-Apr-10 13:30 33 1 0

Cormorant 14-Apr-10 13:43 22 1 0

Cormorant 14-Apr-10 13:49 20 1 0

Cormorant 14-Apr-10 15:58 71 1 0

Cormorant 16-Jun-10 10:23 45 1 0

Cormorant 16-Jun-10 10:33 50 1 0

Cormorant 16-Jun-10 11:09 30 1 0

Cormorant 16-Jun-10 11:53 30 1 0

Cormorant 16-Jun-10 12:38 20 1 0

Cormorant 16-Mar-10 09:51 50 1 0

Cormorant 16-Mar-10 09:52 30 1 0

Cormorant 16-Mar-10 09:54 23 1 0

Cormorant 16-Mar-10 14:28 15 1 0

Cormorant 16-Mar-10 14:33 20 1 0

Cormorant 16-Mar-10 14:53 10 1 0

Cormorant 16-Mar-10 15:11 30 2 0

Cormorant 16-Mar-10 15:24 36 1 0



Page 19



Cormorant 16-Mar-10 15:28 25 1 0

Cormorant 17-May-10 14:10 35 1 0

Cormorant 17-May-10 14:15 25 1 0

Cormorant 18-Feb-10 12:31 33 1 0

Cormorant 18-Feb-10 12:51 11 1 0

Cormorant 18-Feb-10 13:11 48 1 0

Cormorant 18-Feb-10 14:01 32 1 0

Cormorant 18-Feb-10 14:14 42 1 0

Cormorant 18-May-10 09:39 29 1 0

Cormorant 18-May-10 10:37 35 1 0

Cormorant 18-May-10 11:45 20 1 0

Cormorant 18-May-10 11:46 25 1 0

Cormorant 18-May-10 13:04 19 1 0

Cormorant 20-Jul-10 10:48 60 1 0

Cormorant 20-Jul-10 10:51 65 1 0

Cormorant 20-Jul-10 10:57 40 1 0

Cormorant 20-Jul-10 10:58 40 1 0

Cormorant 20-Jul-10 11:36 10 1 0

Cormorant 20-Jul-10 11:39 30 1 0

Cormorant 20-Jul-10 11:54 34 1 0

Cormorant 20-Jul-10 12:22 35 1 0

Cormorant 20-Jul-10 13:02 25 1 0

Cormorant 20-Jul-10 14:06 15 1 0

Cormorant 20-Jul-10 14:29 20 1 0

Cormorant 20-Jul-10 15:04 40 1 0

Cormorant 20-Jul-10 15:38 40 1 0

Cormorant 20-Jul-10 16:29 40 1 0

Cormorant 22-Jan-10 09:24 20 1 0

Cormorant 22-Jan-10 09:49 15 1 0

Cormorant 22-Jan-10 11:10 40 1 0

Cormorant 22-Jan-10 11:15 13 1 0

Cormorant 22-Jan-10 13:09 32 1 0

Cormorant 23-Apr-10 10:23 10 1 0

Cormorant 23-Apr-10 10:24 35 1 0

Cormorant 23-Apr-10 10:27 60 1 0

Cormorant 23-Apr-10 11:07 62 1 0

Cormorant 23-Apr-10 12:22 55 1 0

Cormorant 23-Apr-10 13:47 40 1 0

Cormorant 25-May-10 10:24 24 1 0

Cormorant 25-May-10 10:30 30 1 0

Cormorant 25-May-10 13:42 15 1 0

Cormorant 26-Jun-10 10:02 40 1 0


Forthwind Ltd

Page 20



Cormorant 26-Jun-10 10:17 18 1 0

Cormorant 26-Jun-10 11:07 30 1 0

Cormorant 26-Jun-10 11:31 56 1 0

Cormorant 26-Jun-10 12:03 16 1 0

Cormorant 25-Jun-10 13:10 10 1 100

Cormorant 25-Jun-10 15:19 16 1 0

Cormorant 25-Jun-10 15:52 55 1 0

Cormorant 26-Jan-10 12:20 25 1 0

Cormorant 26-Jan-10 13:08 22 2 0

Cormorant 26-Jul-10 10:24 60 1 0

Cormorant 26-Jul-10 10:33 35 1 0

Cormorant 26-Jul-10 10:34 30 1 0

Cormorant 26-Jul-10 10:44 25 1 0

Cormorant 26-Jul-10 11:17 35 1 0

Cormorant 26-Jul-10 11:20 35 1 0

Cormorant 26-Jul-10 11:36 30 1 0

Cormorant 26-Jul-10 11:42 30 1 0

Cormorant 26-Jul-10 12:31 45 1 0

Cormorant 26-Jul-10 12:39 20 1 0

Cormorant 26-Jul-10 12:51 20 1 0

Cormorant 26-Jul-10 14:21 30 1 0

Cormorant 26-Jul-10 14:29 25 1 0

Cormorant 26-Jul-10 14:35 55 1 0

Cormorant 26-Jul-10 14:43 55 1 0

Cormorant 26-Jul-10 15:01 45 1 0

Cormorant 26-Jul-10 15:20 25 1 0

Cormorant 26-Jul-10 15:28 42 1 0

Cormorant 26-Jul-10 15:29 25 1 0

Cormorant 26-Jul-10 16:17 24 1 0

Cormorant 26-Jul-10 16:24 30 1 0

Cormorant 26-Jul-10 16:27 40 1 0

Cormorant 29-Mar-10 10:12 20 1 0

Cormorant 29-Mar-10 10:42 20 1 0

Cormorant 29-Mar-10 10:49 55 1 0

Cormorant 08-Jan-10 11:50 50 1 0

Cormorant 08-Jan-10 12:21 17 1 0

Cormorant 16-Dec-09 11:24 11 1 0

Cormorant 16-Dec-09 12:13 23 1 0

Cormorant 16-Dec-09 12:30 12 1 0

Cormorant 14-Dec-09 13:56 22 1 0

Cormorant 14-Dec-09 14:41 22 1 0

Cormorant 16-Jun-11 09:57 10 1 0



Page 21



Cormorant 16-Jun-11 11:30 25 1 0

Cormorant 16-Jun-11 12:16 35 1 0

Cormorant 16-Jun-11 12:33 35 1 0

Cormorant 16-Jun-11 12:35 35 1 0

Cormorant 28-Mar-12 10:27 45 1 0

Cormorant 28-Mar-12 12:49 12 1 0

Cormorant 28-Mar-12 13:32 50 1 0

Cormorant 28-Mar-12 13:59 20 1 0

Cormorant 28-Mar-12 15:14 45 1 0

Cormorant 11-Apr-12 09:30 40 1 0

Cormorant 11-Apr-12 09:54 40 1 0

Cormorant 11-Apr-12 10:49 15 1 0

Cormorant 11-Apr-12 11:02 20 1 0

Cormorant 11-Apr-12 11:23 45 1 0

Cormorant 11-Apr-12 11:44 45 1 0

Cormorant 11-Apr-12 12:39 25 1




Cormorant 24-Apr-12 10:00 45 1 0

Cormorant 24-Apr-12 10:02 45 1 0

Cormorant 24-Apr-12 10:37 60 1 0

Cormorant 24-Apr-12 11:36 55 1 0

Cormorant 24-Apr-12 12:42 35 1 0

Cormorant 24-Apr-12 14:01 55 1 0

Cormorant 24-Apr-12 14:30 30 1 0

Cormorant 24-Apr-12 14:45 55 1 0

Cormorant 01-May-12 09:21 15 1 0

Cormorant 01-May-12 09:30 25 1 0

Cormorant 01-May-12 12:36 21 1 0

Cormorant 01-May-12 13:17 25 1 100

Cormorant 01-May-12 15:28 35 1 0

Cormorant 01-Jun-12 13:52 45 1 0

Cormorant 01-Jun-12 14:02 45 2 0

Cormorant 01-Jun-12 10:43 45 1 0

Cormorant 01-Jun-12 10:47 45 1 0

Cormorant 01-Jun-12 11:37 45 1 0

Cormorant 01-Jun-12 11:40 10 1 0

Cormorant 05-Jun-12 09:49 45 1 0

Cormorant 05-Jun-12 10:21 45 1 0

Cormorant 05-Jun-12 10:46 15 1 0

Cormorant 05-Jun-12 10:52 45 1 0


Forthwind Ltd

Page 22



Cormorant 05-Jun-12 13:11 50 1 0

Cormorant 05-Jun-12 13:45 40 1 0

Cormorant 05-Jun-12 14:02 45 1 0

Cormorant 05-Jun-12 14:39 45 1 0

Cormorant 05-Jun-12 14:50 50 1 0

Curlew 28-Feb-12 12:40 30 1 0

Curlew 13-Jul-11 14:41 35 2 100

Curlew 13-Jul-11 10:56 45 1 0

Curlew 08-Feb-12 10:06 40 1 0

Curlew 01-Mar-10 10:54 15 1 0

Curlew 16-Mar-10 10:48 15 1 0

Curlew 25-Jun-10 15:14 65 2 0

Curlew 26-Jul-10 15:47 30 3 0

Curlew 08-Jan-10 13:35 15 6 100

Curlew 28-Mar-12 10:41 40 1 100

Curlew 11-Apr-12 11:21 40 1 100

Curlew 01-May-12 11:11 50 1 0

Common Scoter 29-Jun-11 14:02 45 7 0

Common Scoter 27-Feb-12 14:02 70 12 0

Common Scoter 28-Oct-11 10:19 35 1 0



Common Scoter 28-Sep-11 11:37 40 1 0

Common Scoter 27-Jan-12 12:09 40 1 0









Common Scoter 13-Jul-11 14:07 40 25 0

Common Scoter 15-Dec-11 14:03 40 17 0





Common Scoter 23-Nov-11 09:31 40 5 0






Page 23








Common Scoter 01-Mar-10 10:30 20 1 0





Common Scoter 14-Apr-10 11:08 35 3 0




















Common Scoter 18-May-10 10:29 30 20 0













Forthwind Ltd

Page 24





Common Scoter 11-Apr-12 14:13 45 18














‘Comic Tern’ 29-Jun-11 11:56 20 2 0

‘Comic Tern’ 29-Jun-11 13:10 30 1 0

‘Comic Tern’ 29-Jun-11 14:48 45 3 25

‘Comic Tern’ 29-Jun-11 15:50 45 1 0

‘Comic Tern’ 31-Aug-11 10:43 55 1 0

‘Comic Tern’ 28-Sep-11 11:39 45 1 0

‘Comic Tern’ 16-Jun-11 15:38 40 4 0

‘Comic Tern’ 13-Jul-11 11:03 35 1 0

‘Comic Tern’ 13-Jul-11 11:30 40 1 0

‘Comic Tern’ 09-Aug-11 12:15 45 1 0

‘Comic Tern’ 16-Jun-10 11:14 45 1 0

‘Comic Tern’ 18-May-10 11:12 35 2 0

‘Comic Tern’ 18-May-10 12:25 61 1 0

‘Comic Tern’ 18-May-10 13:46 70 1 0

‘Comic Tern’ 18-May-10 13:54 70 1 0

‘Comic Tern’ 18-May-10 14:06 70 1 0

‘Comic Tern’ 25-Jun-10 13:25 30 1 0

‘Comic Tern’ 16-Jun-11 10:09 30 6 0

Eider 28-Feb-12 09:37 30 2 0

Eider 28-Feb-12 09:48 40 2 0

Eider 28-Feb-12 09:53 50 2 0

Eider 28-Feb-12 12:51 40 1 0

Eider 29-Jun-11 10:32 17 1 0

Eider 31-Aug-11 14:31 30 2 0

Eider 31-Aug-11 14:36 30 1 0

Eider 31-Aug-11 14:44 28 1 0



Page 25



Eider 27-Feb-12 14:41 35 2 0

Eider 27-Jan-12 13:03 40 1 0

Eider 27-Jan-12 14:25 40 4 0

Eider 27-Jan-12 15:31 35 1 0

Eider 28-Oct-11 10:52 45 2 0

Eider 28-Oct-11 12:04 35 1 0

Eider 27-Jan-12 10:09 45 3 0

Eider 27-Jan-12 10:26 40 1 0

Eider 27-Jan-12 10:51 35 2 0

Eider 27-Jan-12 10:53 30 1 0

Eider 27-Jan-12 11:17 15 1 0

Eider 27-Jan-12 11:51 45 2 0

Eider 27-Jan-12 11:58 50 1 0

Eider 25-Nov-11 11:56 60 1 0

Eider 25-Nov-11 12:05 25 1 0

Eider 26-Oct-11 13:38 50 1 0

Eider 26-Oct-11 14:18 30 1 0

Eider 26-Oct-11 14:27 30 1 0

Eider 26-Oct-11 15:45 50 2 0

Eider 15-Dec-11 14:43 40 1 0

Eider 16-Jun-11 13:24 34 1 0

Eider 20-Dec-11 12:48 35 1 0

Eider 20-Dec-11 12:50 35 2 0

Eider 20-Dec-11 13:13 40 1 0

Eider 20-Dec-11 14:02 40 1 0

Eider 22-Dec-11 11:26 45 2 0

Eider 23-Nov-11 10:35 35 2 0

Eider 23-Nov-11 10:40 50 1 0

Eider 23-Nov-11 10:43 30 1 0

Eider 23-Nov-11 14:41 55 1 0

Eider 04-Oct-11 09:36 40 3 0

Eider 04-Oct-11 12:57 35 1 0

Eider 02-Dec-11 10:30 40 1 0

Eider 02-Dec-11 10:44 35 1 0

Eider 02-Dec-11 10:54 45 1 0

Eider 02-Dec-11 10:55 35 1 0

Eider 02-Dec-11 11:16 40 3 0

Eider 02-Dec-11 11:38 25 2 0

Eider 02-Dec-11 11:53 40 2 0

Eider 02-Dec-11 12:38 35 4 0

Eider 02-Dec-11 12:59 40 1 0

Eider 02-Dec-11 13:02 50 2 0


Forthwind Ltd

Page 26



Eider 05-Jan-12 12:00 10 3 0

Eider 05-Jan-12 13:06 18 1 0

Eider 08-Feb-12 10:03 40 2 0

Eider 08-Feb-12 10:04 45 1 0

Eider 08-Feb-12 11:31 40 2 0

Eider 08-Feb-12 13:29 20 1 0

Eider 01-Mar-10 14:12 5 2 0

Eider 01-Mar-10 14:43 22 3 0

Eider 01-Mar-10 14:47 47 1 0

Eider 01-Mar-10 14:53 30 1 0

Eider 02-Feb-10 11:18 35 1 0

Eider 02-Feb-10 11:22 16 1 0

Eider 02-Feb-10 11:44 26 1 0

Eider 14-Apr-10 11:04 22 1 0

Eider 14-Apr-10 13:15 30 2 0

Eider 14-Apr-10 13:33 38 2 0

Eider 16-Mar-10 09:48 35 2 0

Eider 16-Mar-10 09:52 85 2 0

Eider 16-Mar-10 10:31 40 2 0

Eider 16-Mar-10 11:45 40 1 0

Eider 16-Mar-10 13:10 40 1 0

Eider 16-Mar-10 15:35 30 1 0

Eider 17-May-10 16:04 28 1 0

Eider 18-Feb-10 11:35 35 1 0

Eider 18-Feb-10 11:52 20 1 0

Eider 18-Feb-10 12:00 15 1 0

Eider 18-May-10 09:37 24 1 0

Eider 18-May-10 10:46 46 1 0

Eider 22-Jan-10 11:12 47 2 0

Eider 22-Jan-10 13:47 50 1 0

Eider 23-Apr-10 10:36 12 1 0

Eider 23-Apr-10 10:39 20 1 0

Eider 23-Apr-10 12:41 30 1 0

Eider 23-Apr-10 14:43 32 2 0

Eider 25-May-10 09:36 55 1 0

Eider 26-Jan-10 11:56 20 2 0

Eider 26-Jan-10 12:48 42 1 0

Eider 26-Jan-10 13:15 75 1 0

Eider 26-Jan-10 13:40 50 1 0

Eider 26-Jan-10 13:49 30 1 0

Eider 26-Jan-10 14:18 20 1 0

Eider 29-Mar-10 09:52 45 2 0



Page 27



Eider 29-Mar-10 09:53 48 1 0

Eider 29-Mar-10 10:04 16 1 0

Eider 08-Jan-10 11:56 12 2 0

Eider 08-Jan-10 11:58 25 1 0

Eider 08-Jan-10 12:45 35 2 0

Eider 15-Dec-09 11:32 20 2 0

Eider 15-Dec-09 11:47 23 1 0

Eider 15-Dec-09 12:19 5 1 0

Eider 15-Dec-09 13:42 24 1 0

Eider 15-Dec-09 14:05 27 1 0

Eider 16-Dec-09 11:10 32 1 0

Eider 16-Dec-09 11:55 25 1 0

Eider 16-Dec-09 12:06 44 2 0

Eider 14-Dec-09 13:46 30 2 0

Eider 14-Dec-09 14:51 8 10 0

Eider 28-Mar-12 10:48 10 1 0

Eider 28-Mar-12 13:36 45 2 0

Eider 11-Apr-12 09:32 25 2 0

Eider 11-Apr-12 11:11 40 2 0

Eider 11-Apr-12 11:23 40 2 0

Eider 11-Apr-12 11:39 20 2 0

Eider 11-Apr-12 12:41 35 3

Eider 11-Apr-12 14:34 40 2

Eider 01-May-12 11:53 40 2 0

Eider 01-May-12 13:07 40 1 0

Eider 01-May-12 14:10 40 1 0

Eider 05-Jun-12 10:48 40 1 0

Fulmar 29-Jun-11 14:14 40 1 100

Fulmar 29-Jun-11 15:38 45 1 0

Fulmar 29-Jun-11 15:44 50 1 0

Fulmar 31-Aug-11 12:12 45 1 0

Fulmar 28-Sep-11 11:30 30 1 0

Fulmar 26-Aug-11 14:20 65 1 0

Fulmar 16-Jun-11 15:35 25 1 0

Fulmar 09-Aug-11 09:59 35 1 0

Fulmar 14-Apr-10 11:42 40 1 0

Fulmar 14-Apr-10 12:28 35 1 0

Fulmar 14-Apr-10 14:24 25 1 100

Fulmar 16-Jun-10 12:27 20 1 100

Fulmar 16-Mar-10 10:08 50 1 0

Fulmar 16-Mar-10 13:48 33 1 0

Fulmar 17-Jun-10 15:45 50 1 0


Forthwind Ltd

Page 28



Fulmar 17-May-10 14:52 45 1 0

Fulmar 17-May-10 15:11 35 1 0

Fulmar 17-May-10 15:59 5 1 0

Fulmar 18-Feb-10 11:39 32 1 0

Fulmar 18-May-10 10:59 30 1 100

Fulmar 18-May-10 11:14 35 1 100

Fulmar 18-May-10 11:50 20 1 100

Fulmar 18-May-10 12:09 40 1 100

Fulmar 18-May-10 14:09 40 2 0

Fulmar 18-May-10 14:50 75 1 0

Fulmar 18-May-10 15:40 55 1 0

Fulmar 20-Jul-10 12:31 40 1 0

Fulmar 23-Apr-10 11:17 36 1 0

Fulmar 23-Apr-10 12:40 35 1 0

Fulmar 23-Apr-10 14:37 35 1 0

Fulmar 23-Apr-10 14:40 40 1 0

Fulmar 25-May-10 09:57 40 1 0

Fulmar 25-May-10 10:00 28 1 0

Fulmar 25-May-10 15:25 50 1 0

Fulmar 25-Jun-10 13:53 55 1 0

Fulmar 26-Jul-10 12:08 45 1 0

Fulmar 16-Jun-11 12:09 35 1 0

Fulmar 11-Apr-12 09:29 40 1 0

Fulmar 01-Jun-12 13:50 40 1 0

Fulmar 01-Jun-12 15:45 45 1 0

Fulmar 01-Jun-12 15:45 45 1 0

Fulmar 01-Jun-12 16:22 45 1 0

Fulmar 01-Jun-12 10:40 45 1 0

Fulmar 01-Jun-12 10:42 45 2 0

Fulmar 01-Jun-12 10:43 45 1 0

Fulmar 01-Jun-12 10:50 40 1 0

Fulmar 01-Jun-12 10:58 45 1 0

Fulmar 01-Jun-12 10:58 45 1 0

Fulmar 01-Jun-12 11:30 45 2 0

Fulmar 01-Jun-12 11:33 45 1 0

Fulmar 01-Jun-12 12:33 40 1 0

Fulmar 01-Jun-12 12:40 45 1 0

Fulmar 01-Jun-12 12:48 45 1 0

Fulmar 05-Jun-12 10:35 45 1 0

Fulmar 05-Jun-12 13:12 45 1 0

Greylag goose 23-Apr-10 11:52 30 27 0

Greylag goose 23-Apr-10 13:49 20 27 100



Page 29



Greylag goose 05-Jun-12 10:36 50 20 0

Goldeneye 22-Jan-10 09:54 29 2 0

Goldeneye 22-Jan-10 10:11 25 4 0

Goldeneye 22-Jan-10 13:24 35 1 0

Goldeneye 26-Jul-10 11:52 30 1 100

Guillemot 29-Jun-11 15:27 40 1 0

Guillemot 31-Aug-11 13:17 40 3 0

Guillemot 31-Aug-11 15:35 35 2 0

Guillemot 28-Sep-11 14:02 23 1 0

Guillemot 26-Aug-11 09:54 30 1 0

Guillemot 26-Aug-11 14:58 40 1 0

Guillemot 27-Feb-12 11:51 35 2 0

Guillemot 04-Oct-11 09:31 45 2 0

Guillemot 04-Oct-11 09:38 45 1 0

Guillemot 16-Jun-11 10:55 40 1 0

Guillemot 28-Mar-12 12:51 40 2 0

Guillemot 11-Apr-12 14:50 40 2

Guillemot 01-May-12 09:58 40 2 0

Guillemot 05-Jun-12 12:02 45 1 0

Guillemot 05-Jun-12 12:27 25 1 0

Guillemot 05-Jun-12 13:28 45 1 0

Guillemot 05-Jun-12 13:33 40 2 0

Guillemot 05-Jun-12 13:49 40 5 0

Guillemot 05-Jun-12 15:19 45 3 0

Gannet 01-Mar-10 09:33 35 1 0

Gannet 01-Mar-10 10:08 10 1 0

Gannet 01-Mar-10 10:09 12 1 0

Gannet 01-Mar-10 10:26 44 1 0

Gannet 01-Mar-10 11:20 20 1 0

Gannet 01-Mar-10 11:30 16 1 0

Gannet 01-Mar-10 11:42 25 1 0

Gannet 01-Mar-10 11:49 35 1 0

Gannet 01-Mar-10 11:53 30 1 0

Gannet 01-Mar-10 12:08 21 1 0

Gannet 01-Mar-10 12:14 29 1 0

Gannet 01-Mar-10 12:21 30 2 66.66667

Gannet 01-Mar-10 13:08 31 1 0

Gannet 01-Mar-10 13:11 33 1 0

Gannet 01-Mar-10 13:15 45 2 0

Gannet 01-Mar-10 13:26 15 1 0

Gannet 01-Mar-10 13:34 40 3 0

Gannet 01-Mar-10 13:35 45 10 0


Forthwind Ltd

Page 30



Gannet 01-Mar-10 13:37 17 2 0

Gannet 01-Mar-10 13:37 17 2 0

Gannet 01-Mar-10 13:38 26 1 0

Gannet 01-Mar-10 13:39 20 1 0

Gannet 01-Mar-10 13:41 32 1 0

Gannet 01-Mar-10 13:41 32 1 0

Gannet 01-Mar-10 14:22 28 1 50

Gannet 01-Mar-10 14:26 35 2 0

Gannet 01-Mar-10 14:39 27 2 0

Gannet 01-Mar-10 14:51 32 1 0

Gannet 01-Mar-10 14:55 23 1 0

Gannet 01-Mar-10 15:42 19 1 0

Gannet 02-Mar-10 13:25 30 1 0

Gannet 02-Mar-10 14:45 36 1 0

Gannet 02-Mar-10 14:52 30 1 0

Gannet 02-Mar-10 14:55 37 1 0

Gannet 14-Apr-10 11:01 45 2 0

Gannet 14-Apr-10 11:01 45 2 100

Gannet 14-Apr-10 11:02 40 1 0

Gannet 14-Apr-10 11:08 40 2 0

Gannet 16-Mar-10 09:46 65 1 0

Gannet 16-Mar-10 09:57 40 3 0

Gannet 16-Mar-10 10:01 35 1 100

Gannet 16-Mar-10 10:03 50 4 0

Gannet 16-Mar-10 10:47 26 2 100

Gannet 16-Mar-10 10:48 30 1 0

Gannet 16-Mar-10 11:00 26 1 0

Gannet 16-Mar-10 11:00 36 2 100

Gannet 16-Mar-10 11:06 30 2 0

Gannet 16-Mar-10 12:02 45 2 0

Gannet 16-Mar-10 12:04 50 1 100

Gannet 16-Mar-10 12:12 45 1 100

Gannet 16-Mar-10 12:18 25 1 100

Gannet 16-Mar-10 12:26 31 1 0

Gannet 16-Mar-10 12:26 31 2 100

Gannet 16-Mar-10 12:27 20 2 100

Gannet 16-Mar-10 12:29 35 1 0

Gannet 16-Mar-10 13:37 45 6 0

Gannet 16-Mar-10 13:45 21 1 0

Gannet 16-Mar-10 14:12 45 8 0

Gannet 16-Mar-10 14:28 40 1 100

Gannet 16-Mar-10 14:33 22 1 0



Page 31



Gannet 16-Mar-10 14:58 25 1 100

Gannet 16-Mar-10 15:05 25 1 0

Gannet 16-Mar-10 15:45 42 4 0

Gannet 16-Mar-10 15:56 30 1 0

Gannet 16-Mar-10 15:58 52 1 0

Gannet 18-Feb-10 14:04 30 2 0

Gannet 18-Feb-10 14:04 30 5 0

Gannet 29-Mar-10 10:00 40 1 100

Grey heron 25-Jun-10 15:05 50 1 100

Kittiwake 28-Feb-12 09:43 70 1 0

Kittiwake 29-Jun-11 10:25 10 1 100

Kittiwake 29-Jun-11 11:48 35 1 0

Kittiwake 29-Jun-11 11:50 20 1 0

Kittiwake 29-Jun-11 13:08 50 1 0

Kittiwake 29-Jun-11 13:16 50 1 100

Kittiwake 29-Jun-11 13:55 48 4 0

Kittiwake 29-Jun-11 14:37 50 1 0

Kittiwake 29-Jun-11 15:19 25 1 0

Kittiwake 29-Jun-11 15:34 30 1 100

Kittiwake 31-Aug-11 09:46 25 1 0

Kittiwake 31-Aug-11 10:09 55 1 0

Kittiwake 31-Aug-11 13:08 35 1 0

Kittiwake 31-Aug-11 13:09 35 1 100

Kittiwake 31-Aug-11 14:40 48 1 0

Kittiwake 27-Feb-12 13:39 50 2 0

Kittiwake 27-Feb-12 13:44 50 2 50

Kittiwake 28-Oct-11 11:13 70 1 0

Kittiwake 28-Oct-11 11:24 70 1 0

Kittiwake 28-Oct-11 11:37 70 1 0

Kittiwake 28-Oct-11 11:40 70 2 0

Kittiwake 28-Oct-11 14:04 30 1 100

Kittiwake 28-Oct-11 14:12 30 1 0

Kittiwake 28-Oct-11 14:53 50 1 0

Kittiwake 28-Oct-11 15:09 40 1 100

Kittiwake 28-Sep-11 15:10 1500 15 0

Kittiwake 28-Sep-11 15:52 1200 40 0

Kittiwake 25-Nov-11 10:44 70 1 0

Kittiwake 25-Nov-11 11:06 70 1 0

Kittiwake 25-Nov-11 11:44 70 1 0

Kittiwake 25-Nov-11 12:10 70 1 0


Forthwind Ltd

Page 32



Kittiwake 25-Nov-11 12:50 70 1 0

Kittiwake 25-Nov-11 12:51 80 3 0

Kittiwake 25-Nov-11 12:56 80 2 0

Kittiwake 26-Aug-11 09:56 25 1 0

Kittiwake 26-Aug-11 10:25 45 1 0

Kittiwake 26-Aug-11 11:19 20 1 0

Kittiwake 26-Aug-11 11:44 44 1 0

Kittiwake 26-Aug-11 12:34 56 1 0

Kittiwake 26-Aug-11 12:43 51 1 0

Kittiwake 26-Aug-11 12:47 37 1 0

Kittiwake 26-Aug-11 13:33 45 1 100

Kittiwake 26-Aug-11 14:07 75 3 0

Kittiwake 26-Oct-11 10:07 65 2 0

Kittiwake 26-Oct-11 10:49 50 1 0

Kittiwake 26-Oct-11 12:31 40 1 0

Kittiwake 26-Oct-11 12:37 50 1 0

Kittiwake 26-Oct-11 12:38 50 5 0

Kittiwake 26-Oct-11 12:40 45 2 0

Kittiwake 26-Oct-11 13:15 40 4 0

Kittiwake 26-Oct-11 13:18 40 2 0

Kittiwake 26-Oct-11 13:51 40 1 0

Kittiwake 26-Oct-11 14:03 70 2 0

Kittiwake 26-Oct-11 14:05 45 1 100

Kittiwake 26-Oct-11 14:20 30 1 0

Kittiwake 26-Oct-11 14:32 31 1 100

Kittiwake 27-Feb-12 12:16 40 1 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 14:19 35 1 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 14:27 40 1 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 14:29 35 1 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 15:40 27 2 0

Kittiwake 15-Dec-11 12:08 70 3 0

Kittiwake 15-Dec-11 12:12 70 1 0

Kittiwake 15-Dec-11 12:15 70 2 0

Kittiwake 15-Dec-11 12:33 70 2 0

Kittiwake 15-Dec-11 12:40 70 1 0

Kittiwake 15-Dec-11 12:56 70 1 0

Kittiwake 15-Dec-11 13:00 95 1 0

Kittiwake 15-Dec-11 13:19 50 1 0

Kittiwake 15-Dec-11 13:22 70 2 0

Kittiwake 15-Dec-11 13:50 70 2 0



Page 33



Kittiwake 15-Dec-11 13:55 90 1 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 13:06 45 4 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 13:14 20 3 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 13:15 20 3 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 13:18 40 10 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 13:21 40 3 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 13:25 0 6 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 13:33 40 8 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 13:37 40 2 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 13:39 40 7 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 13:40 50 10 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 14:50 40 1 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 15:06 38 2 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 15:06 40 1 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 15:07 45 1 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 15:10 40 2 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 15:27 40 1 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 15:39 40 4 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 15:40 40 6 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 15:41 40 1 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 15:42 45 1 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 15:48 30 2 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 15:51 40 1 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 15:53 28 2 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 15:57 40 1 0

Kittiwake 20-Dec-11 12:46 130 2 0

Kittiwake 20-Dec-11 14:34 65 2 0

Kittiwake 22-Dec-11 11:38 55 1 0

Kittiwake 22-Dec-11 12:18 40 1 0

Kittiwake 23-Nov-11 10:14 80 5 0

Kittiwake 23-Nov-11 10:43 80 6 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 09:52 35 1 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 10:00 90 1 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 10:05 60 2 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 10:11 50 2 50

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 10:15 60 3 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 10:21 50 2 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 10:23 60 2 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 10:26 100 2 14.28571

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 10:27 40 1 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 10:27 60 1 0


Forthwind Ltd

Page 34



Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 10:30 40 1 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 10:33 30 1 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 10:34 50 2 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 10:35 50 1 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 10:35 55 1 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 10:37 75 1 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 10:38 70 2 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 10:38 60 1 100

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 10:39 60 2 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 10:39 60 1 100

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 10:41 60 2 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 10:42 60 3 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 10:44 70 5 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 10:53 75 5 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 10:58 45 1 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 10:59 55 1 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 11:04 40 1 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 11:07 40 1 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 11:09 50 1 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 11:09 50 1 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 11:18 60 2 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 11:22 40 1 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 11:23 40 1 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 11:32 60 1 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 11:40 45 1 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 11:53 40 1 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 12:03 70 2 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 12:07 50 1 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 12:09 40 1 0

Kittiwake 13-Jul-11 12:43 40 1 0

Kittiwake 09-Aug-11 09:39 70 1 0

Kittiwake 09-Aug-11 10:08 70 1 0

Kittiwake 09-Aug-11 10:51 70 1 0

Kittiwake 09-Aug-11 12:02 55 2 0

Kittiwake 09-Aug-11 13:43 30 1 0

Kittiwake 09-Aug-11 14:00 45 2 0

Kittiwake 09-Aug-11 14:19 40 1 0

Kittiwake 09-Aug-11 15:40 50 1 0

Kittiwake 09-Aug-11 15:46 65 1 0

Kittiwake 09-Aug-11 15:50 65 1 0

Kittiwake 04-Oct-11 09:31 65 1 0

Kittiwake 04-Oct-11 09:34 65 2 0



Page 35



Kittiwake 04-Oct-11 09:42 60 1 0

Kittiwake 04-Oct-11 09:46 65 1 0

Kittiwake 04-Oct-11 11:37 60 1 0

Kittiwake 04-Oct-11 12:14 65 1 0

Kittiwake 04-Oct-11 12:40 20 1 0

Kittiwake 04-Oct-11 12:57 60 1 0

Kittiwake 04-Oct-11 13:48 30 1 0

Kittiwake 02-Dec-11 12:59 60 1 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-10 10:18 40 1 100

Kittiwake 16-Jun-10 10:25 45 1 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-10 10:25 45 1 100

Kittiwake 16-Jun-10 11:07 40 1 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-10 12:19 40 1 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-10 12:32 45 1 0

Kittiwake 17-Jun-10 14:28 45 1 0

Kittiwake 17-Jun-10 15:17 38 1 0

Kittiwake 17-May-10 14:36 45 1 0

Kittiwake 18-May-10 11:40 25 1 0

Kittiwake 18-May-10 14:52 45 1 0

Kittiwake 18-May-10 15:01 66 2 0

Kittiwake 18-May-10 15:10 50 1 0

Kittiwake 18-May-10 15:32 45 2 0

Kittiwake 18-May-10 15:34 46 3 0

Kittiwake 20-Jul-10 10:23 40 1 0

Kittiwake 20-Jul-10 10:42 65 1 100

Kittiwake 20-Jul-10 12:56 45 1 0

Kittiwake 20-Jul-10 13:12 65 1 0

Kittiwake 20-Jul-10 13:57 35 1 0

Kittiwake 20-Jul-10 14:23 20 1 0

Kittiwake 20-Jul-10 14:40 55 2 0

Kittiwake 20-Jul-10 16:16 30 1 0

Kittiwake 20-Jul-10 16:40 55 1 0

Kittiwake 25-May-10 10:34 20 1 0

Kittiwake 25-May-10 10:46 55 1 0

Kittiwake 25-May-10 11:07 77 1 0

Kittiwake 25-May-10 13:23 25 1 0

Kittiwake 25-May-10 13:32 35 1 0

Kittiwake 25-May-10 13:51 45 2 0

Kittiwake 25-May-10 14:14 25 1 100

Kittiwake 25-May-10 14:30 35 2 0

Kittiwake 25-May-10 13:40 45 1 0

Kittiwake 25-May-10 13:41 30 1 0


Forthwind Ltd

Page 36



Kittiwake 25-May-10 13:45 85 1 0

Kittiwake 25-May-10 15:22 20 1 0

Kittiwake 25-Jun-10 14:07 45 1 0

Kittiwake 25-Jun-10 14:58 26 1 0

Kittiwake 25-Jun-10 15:12 58 1 0

Kittiwake 25-Jun-10 15:25 40 1 0

Kittiwake 25-Jun-10 15:52 70 1 0

Kittiwake 25-Jun-10 15:59 55 1 0

Kittiwake 26-Jul-10 10:10 45 1 0

Kittiwake 26-Jul-10 10:33 70 1 0

Kittiwake 26-Jul-10 14:06 40 1 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 09:59 25 2 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 10:00 20 1 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 10:26 40 1 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 10:47 28 1 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 11:03 30 1 0

Kittiwake 16-Jun-11 11:38 20 1 0

Kittiwake 28-Mar-12 10:44 60 2 0

Kittiwake 24-Apr-12 10:14 45 1 0

Kittiwake 24-Apr-12 13:18 40 1 0

Kittiwake 24-Apr-12 13:28 40 1 0

Kittiwake 01-May-12 09:44 50 2 0

Kittiwake 01-May-12 11:51 60 1 0

Kittiwake 01-May-12 13:09 45 1 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 13:53 600 8 100

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 13:56 70 1 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 14:04 45 2 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 14:11 70 10 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 14:15 70 12 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 14:19 70 6 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 14:21 70 4 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 14:34 70 6 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 14:41 50 1 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 14:44 45 11 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 14:58 60 3 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 15:03 50 2 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 15:29 45 2 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 15:32 60 1 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 15:47 45 1 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 15:59 50 1 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 15:29 45 2 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 15:32 60 1 0



Page 37



Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 15:47 45 1 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 15:59 50 1 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 16:22 45 2 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 10:12 40 1 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 10:23 40 1 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 10:28 45 1 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 10:31 45 2 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 10:34 70 2 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 10:40 45 2 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 10:50 45 1 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 10:52 70 4 100

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 11:23 50 1 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 11:40 45 1 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 12:39 70 1 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 12:46 300 6 0

Kittiwake 01-Jun-12 12:48 200 10 0

Kittiwake 05-Jun-12 09:55 70 2 0

Kittiwake 05-Jun-12 10:29 45 1 0

Kittiwake 05-Jun-12 11:10 55 1 0

Kittiwake 05-Jun-12 11:25 70 1 0

Kittiwake 05-Jun-12 12:17 50 1 0

Kittiwake 05-Jun-12 12:20 45 1 0

Kittiwake 05-Jun-12 12:24 50 3 0

Kittiwake 05-Jun-12 12:27 45 1 0

Kittiwake 05-Jun-12 12:29 45 2 0

Kittiwake 05-Jun-12 13:11 45 1 0

Kittiwake 05-Jun-12 13:22 45 1 0

Kittiwake 05-Jun-12 13:32 45 2 0

Kittiwake 05-Jun-12 13:43 40 1 0

Kittiwake 05-Jun-12 13:53 45 1 0

Kittiwake 05-Jun-12 14:13 50 1 100

Kittiwake 05-Jun-12 14:22 70 1 0

Kittiwake 05-Jun-12 15:35 50 1 0

Knot 27-Jan-12 13:08 40 3 0

Long-tailed duck 27-Feb-12 14:19 40 1 0

Long-tailed duck 27-Jan-12 12:52 35 2 0





Long-tailed duck 28-Oct-11 13:15 25 1 0



Forthwind Ltd

Page 38











Long-tailed duck 25-Nov-11 10:35 45 1 0






Long-tailed duck 20-Dec-11 11:39 45 3 0



















Long-tailed duck 01-Mar-10 10:30 38 2 0





Long-tailed duck 14-Apr-10 11:47 46 1 0






Page 39














































Forthwind Ltd

Page 40




























Mallard 26-Oct-11 15:42 15 6 100

Manx Shearwater 20-Jul-10 10:39 60 5 0



Manx Shearwater 16-Jun-11 09:50 10 30 0





Great skua 26-Aug-11 12:59 70 1 0

Great skua 26-Oct-11 14:37 15 1 100

Great skua 04-Oct-11 10:17 25 1 0

Oystercatcher 28-Oct-11 13:32 20 1 100

Oystercatcher 01-Mar-10 12:18 24 1 0

Oystercatcher 18-May-10 09:45 35 6 0

Oystercatcher 11-Apr-12 09:27 40 1 0

Shearwater sp. 25-Jun-10 14:00 35 28 0



Page 41



Peregrine falcon 13-Jul-11 15:43 8 1 100

Pink-footed goose 28-Feb-12 13:44 25 28 100

Pink-footed goose 28-Oct-11 11:52 50 110 100

Pink-footed goose 26-Oct-11 15:32 50 90 100

Pink-footed goose 16-Mar-10 09:58 40 27 100



Puffin 17-Jun-10 15:58 60 1 0

Puffin 26-Jun-10 10:39 40 1 0

Puffin 26-Jul-10 11:10 50 1 0

Puffin 16-Jun-11 10:27 25 1 0

Puffin 16-Jun-11 10:44 40 1 0

Puffin 16-Jun-11 11:32 18 1 0

Puffin 16-Jun-11 12:03 25 1 0

Puffin 16-Jun-11 12:11 40 1 0

Puffin 16-Jun-11 12:22 40 20 0

Puffin 28-Mar-12 10:55 45 1 0

Puffin 28-Mar-12 14:09 45 3 0

Puffin 11-Apr-12 11:16 45 2 0

Puffin 01-May-12 12:12 45 2 0

Puffin 01-Jun-12 11:14 40 1 0

Puffin 01-Jun-12 11:27 45 1 0

Puffin 01-Jun-12 11:50 40 1 0

Puffin 05-Jun-12 10:00 40 1 0

Puffin 05-Jun-12 11:05 45 1 0

Razorbill 28-Feb-12 13:23 20 1 0

Razorbill 27-Jan-12 11:13 20 1 0

Razorbill 26-Oct-11 13:11 25 1 0

Razorbill 22-Dec-11 10:54 20 1 0

Razorbill 09-Aug-11 13:15 45 1 0

Razorbill 04-Oct-11 09:21 45 1 0

Razorbill 04-Oct-11 10:09 46 1 0

Razorbill 04-Oct-11 11:42 50 1 0

Razorbill 08-Feb-12 12:23 40 1 0

Razorbill 26-Jul-10 15:41 45 1 0

Razorbill 28-Mar-12 14:29 40 1 0

Razorbill 11-Apr-12 14:58 40 2

Red-throated diver 28-Feb-12 14:01 30 1 0

Red-throated diver 31-Aug-11 11:30 50 1 0


Red-throated diver 27-Jan-12 13:10 40 1 0

Red-throated diver 28-Oct-11 09:32 35 1 0


Forthwind Ltd

Page 42











Red-throated diver 28-Sep-11 11:44 45 1 0

Red-throated diver 28-Sep-11 15:43 40 1 0


Red-throated diver 25-Nov-11 10:29 55 1 0








Red-throated diver 15-Dec-11 12:08 45 2 100


















Red-throated diver 14-Apr-10 11:08 40 1 0

Red-throated diver 16-Mar-10 12:37 47 1 0

Red-throated diver 16-Mar-10 13:48 36 1 33.33333





Page 43





Red-throated diver 20-Jul-10 12:01 40 2 0








Red-throated diver 25-Jun-10 15:37 48 1 0











Red-throated diver 11-Apr-12 13:05 40 1

Red-throated diver 11-Apr-12 14:52 45 1







Red-throated diver 01-May-12 11:47 35 3 0





Red-throated diver 01-Jun-12 11:18 48 2 0

Red-breasted merganser 29-Jun-11 13:14 40 3 100

Red-breasted merganser 27-Jan-12 14:01 20 2 0

Red-breasted merganser 04-Oct-11 10:24 40 1 0

Red-breasted merganser 14-Apr-10 14:17 43 1 100

Red-breasted merganser 14-Apr-10 14:37 42 1 0


Red-breasted merganser 25-May-10 09:59 25 2 0


Forthwind Ltd

Page 44





Red-breasted merganser 15-Dec-09 13:36 17 1 0

Red-breasted merganser 14-Dec-09 13:20 10 1 0




Shag 28-Feb-12 10:49 45 2 0

Shag 28-Feb-12 14:01 20 1 0

Shag 28-Feb-12 15:00 40 1 0

Shag 29-Jun-11 09:48 20 1 0

Shag 29-Jun-11 10:07 25 1 0

Shag 29-Jun-11 10:47 50 1 0

Shag 29-Jun-11 10:47 48 1 0

Shag 29-Jun-11 11:06 40 1 0

Shag 29-Jun-11 11:45 30 1 0

Shag 29-Jun-11 12:30 50 1 0

Shag 29-Jun-11 14:20 40 1 0

Shag 29-Jun-11 14:48 50 1 0

Shag 29-Jun-11 15:19 50 1 0

Shag 31-Aug-11 10:25 50 5 0

Shag 31-Aug-11 10:44 45 1 0

Shag 31-Aug-11 10:52 70 2 0

Shag 31-Aug-11 10:55 75 1 0

Shag 31-Aug-11 10:55 40 2 0

Shag 31-Aug-11 11:06 70 1 0

Shag 31-Aug-11 11:06 65 1 0

Shag 31-Aug-11 11:35 25 1 0

Shag 31-Aug-11 11:37 55 1 0

Shag 31-Aug-11 11:47 45 1 0

Shag 31-Aug-11 12:04 50 1 0

Shag 31-Aug-11 12:14 35 1 0

Shag 31-Aug-11 13:56 40 1 0

Shag 31-Aug-11 14:12 45 1 0

Shag 31-Aug-11 14:23 10 1 0

Shag 31-Aug-11 14:25 40 1 0

Shag 31-Aug-11 14:48 20 1 0

Shag 31-Aug-11 15:10 40 2 0

Shag 31-Aug-11 15:24 25 1 0

Shag 27-Feb-12 13:15 40 1 0

Shag 27-Feb-12 13:47 45 1 0

Shag 27-Jan-12 13:26 40 1 0



Page 45



Shag 27-Jan-12 13:47 40 1 0

Shag 27-Jan-12 14:19 45 1 0

Shag 27-Jan-12 15:40 40 1 0

Shag 28-Oct-11 09:41 45 3 0

Shag 28-Oct-11 10:24 40 2 0

Shag 28-Sep-11 10:33 41 1 0

Shag 28-Sep-11 11:57 30 1 0

Shag 28-Sep-11 16:09 35 1 0

Shag 27-Jan-12 10:07 45 1 0

Shag 27-Jan-12 10:22 50 2 0

Shag 27-Jan-12 10:27 45 1 0

Shag 27-Jan-12 11:24 40 1 0

Shag 27-Jan-12 11:49 45 1 0

Shag 25-Nov-11 12:48 45 1 0

Shag 26-Aug-11 09:26 40 1 0

Shag 26-Aug-11 10:46 40 2 0

Shag 26-Aug-11 10:56 20 1 0

Shag 26-Aug-11 11:24 28 1 0

Shag 26-Aug-11 11:47 15 1 0

Shag 26-Aug-11 13:12 54 1 0

Shag 26-Aug-11 13:24 28 1 0

Shag 26-Aug-11 13:46 28 1 0

Shag 26-Aug-11 14:20 45 2 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 09:49 15 2 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 09:49 40 2 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 09:53 30 5 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 09:55 45 5 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 09:55 15 2 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 09:57 55 2 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 10:01 50 2 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 10:07 40 2 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 10:01 55 1 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 10:12 45 1 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 10:19 40 2 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 10:20 45 2 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 10:26 50 1 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 10:28 30 1 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 10:33 40 1 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 10:33 40 1 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 10:39 45 1 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 10:56 40 1 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 11:09 45 1 0


Forthwind Ltd

Page 46



Shag 26-Oct-11 11:09 45 2 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 11:11 45 1 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 11:14 45 1 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 11:22 45 1 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 11:30 40 1 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 12:37 45 1 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 13:08 45 1 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 13:13 35 1 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 13:32 35 3 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 13:40 25 1 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 13:43 40 1 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 14:06 35 1 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 14:16 45 1 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 15:19 40 1 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 15:25 45 1 0

Shag 26-Oct-11 15:56 40 2 0

Shag 27-Feb-12 10:35 25 1 0

Shag 13-Jul-11 13:21 30 1 0

Shag 13-Jul-11 14:04 40 1 0

Shag 13-Jul-11 14:47 26 1 0

Shag 13-Jul-11 15:45 46 2 0

Shag 15-Dec-11 12:31 40 1 0

Shag 15-Dec-11 12:43 40 1 0

Shag 15-Dec-11 12:45 45 1 0

Shag 15-Dec-11 14:38 40 1 0

Shag 16-Jun-11 14:29 40 1 0

Shag 16-Jun-11 15:35 45 1 0

Shag 16-Jun-11 15:44 25 1 0

Shag 22-Dec-11 11:23 50 1 0

Shag 13-Jul-11 10:00 38 1 0

Shag 13-Jul-11 10:15 35 1 0

Shag 13-Jul-11 10:59 40 1 0

Shag 13-Jul-11 11:01 35 1 0

Shag 13-Jul-11 11:19 40 1 0

Shag 13-Jul-11 11:24 35 2 0

Shag 13-Jul-11 11:53 40 1 0

Shag 13-Jul-11 12:18 35 1 0

Shag 13-Jul-11 12:23 25 2 0

Shag 13-Jul-11 12:31 30 1 0

Shag 09-Aug-11 09:46 35 1 0

Shag 09-Aug-11 10:57 20 1 0

Shag 09-Aug-11 11:07 40 1 0



Page 47



Shag 09-Aug-11 11:09 15 1 0

Shag 09-Aug-11 12:22 40 1 0

Shag 09-Aug-11 12:26 40 1 0

Shag 09-Aug-11 13:17 30 2 0

Shag 09-Aug-11 13:40 60 1 0

Shag 09-Aug-11 14:07 20 2 0

Shag 09-Aug-11 14:43 50 1 0

Shag 09-Aug-11 14:53 50 1 0

Shag 09-Aug-11 15:37 16 1 0

Shag 02-Dec-11 10:26 45 2 0

Shag 05-Jan-12 12:30 10 1 0

Shag 08-Feb-12 10:44 20 1 0

Shag 08-Feb-12 13:19 64 1 0

Shag 08-Feb-12 13:31 50 1 0

Shag 08-Feb-12 14:33 35 1 0

Shag 01-Mar-10 11:35 20 1 0

Shag 01-Mar-10 13:21 26 1 0

Shag 01-Mar-10 13:42 18 1 0

Shag 02-Feb-10 12:36 30 1 0

Shag 02-Mar-10 15:37 42 1 0

Shag 14-Apr-10 12:16 55 1 0

Shag 14-Apr-10 15:46 45 1 0

Shag 16-Jun-10 10:35 40 1 0

Shag 16-Jun-10 10:46 45 1 0

Shag 16-Jun-10 10:49 60 1 0

Shag 16-Jun-10 11:36 36 1 0

Shag 16-Jun-10 13:03 55 1 0

Shag 16-Mar-10 10:52 15 1 0

Shag 16-Mar-10 10:54 30 1 0

Shag 17-Jun-10 14:01 65 1 0

Shag 17-Jun-10 14:20 65 1 0

Shag 18-May-10 12:12 55 1 0

Shag 18-May-10 13:29 30 1 0

Shag 18-May-10 15:41 49 2 0

Shag 20-Jul-10 10:28 40 1 0

Shag 20-Jul-10 10:35 50 1 0

Shag 20-Jul-10 10:53 75 1 0

Shag 20-Jul-10 11:48 35 1 0

Shag 20-Jul-10 11:55 50 1 0

Shag 20-Jul-10 12:23 65 1 0

Shag 20-Jul-10 12:28 50 2 0

Shag 20-Jul-10 14:02 45 1 0


Forthwind Ltd

Page 48



Shag 20-Jul-10 14:52 30 1 0

Shag 20-Jul-10 16:11 35 1 0

Shag 22-Jan-10 09:17 15 2 0

Shag 22-Jan-10 09:48 10 1 0

Shag 22-Jan-10 09:52 26 1 0

Shag 22-Jan-10 09:58 20 1 0

Shag 22-Jan-10 13:33 38 1 0

Shag 23-Apr-10 12:31 55 1 0

Shag 23-Apr-10 12:36 15 1 0

Shag 25-May-10 11:19 65 1 0

Shag 26-Jun-10 10:30 40 1 0

Shag 25-Jun-10 15:48 45 1 0

Shag 26-Jul-10 10:12 60 1 0

Shag 26-Jul-10 10:24 45 1 0

Shag 26-Jul-10 10:45 55 1 0

Shag 26-Jul-10 11:03 40 1 0

Shag 26-Jul-10 11:51 45 1 0

Shag 26-Jul-10 12:55 45 1 0

Shag 26-Jul-10 15:59 55 1 0

Shag 29-Mar-10 09:51 73 1 0

Shag 29-Mar-10 09:59 15 1 0

Shag 08-Jan-10 12:00 5 1 0

Shag 08-Jan-10 12:09 6 1 0

Shag 08-Jan-10 12:17 25 1 0

Shag 15-Dec-09 11:35 20 1 0

Shag 15-Dec-09 11:41 50 1 0

Shag 15-Dec-09 11:45 16 1 0

Shag 15-Dec-09 11:48 23 1 0

Shag 15-Dec-09 11:56 12 1 0

Shag 15-Dec-09 11:57 22 1 0

Shag 15-Dec-09 12:42 16 1 0

Shag 15-Dec-09 12:45 14 1 0

Shag 15-Dec-09 14:14 9 1 0

Shag 16-Dec-09 11:06 8 1 0

Shag 16-Dec-09 11:08 9 2 0

Shag 16-Dec-09 11:58 14 1 0

Shag 16-Dec-09 12:45 20 1 0

Shag 14-Dec-09 12:41 15 1 0

Shag 14-Dec-09 12:43 15 1 0

Shag 14-Dec-09 12:55 5 1 0

Shag 14-Dec-09 13:03 30 1 0

Shag 14-Dec-09 13:11 10 1 0



Page 49



Shag 14-Dec-09 13:22 25 1 0

Shag 14-Dec-09 14:09 11 1 0

Shag 16-Jun-11 10:40 40 1 0

Shag 16-Jun-11 10:55 50 1 0

Shag 16-Jun-11 11:00 40 1 0

Shag 16-Jun-11 12:24 22 1 0

Shag 16-Jun-11 12:27 40 2 0

Shag 28-Mar-12 12:22 35 1 0

Shag 28-Mar-12 13:54 50 1 0

Shag 28-Mar-12 14:13 50 1 0

Shag 28-Mar-12 14:50 50 1 0

Shag 28-Mar-12 15:31 40 1 0

Shag 28-Mar-12 15:35 40 1 0

Shag 28-Mar-12 15:52 30 1 0

Shag 28-Mar-12 15:52 30 1 0

Shag 11-Apr-12 09:32 40 1 0

Shag 11-Apr-12 11:28 45 1 0

Shag 11-Apr-12 12:46 45 1

Shag 11-Apr-12 12:55 40 1

Shag 11-Apr-12 13:10 40 1

Shag 11-Apr-12 13:52 40 1

Shag 24-Apr-12 10:15 45 1 0

Shag 24-Apr-12 10:23 45 2 0

Shag 24-Apr-12 12:03 45 3 0

Shag 24-Apr-12 12:39 30 1 0

Shag 24-Apr-12 12:59 40 1 0

Shag 24-Apr-12 13:58 10 1 0

Shag 24-Apr-12 14:59 45 1 0

Shag 24-Apr-12 15:00 45 1 0

Shag 24-Apr-12 15:13 45 1 0

Shag 01-May-12 09:25 50 1 0

Shag 01-May-12 09:37 40 1 0

Shag 01-May-12 09:40 45 1 0

Shag 01-May-12 09:59 45 1 0

Shag 01-May-12 10:20 45 1 0

Shag 01-May-12 11:40 30 1 0

Shag 01-May-12 11:54 40 1 0

Shag 01-May-12 12:53 25 1 0

Shag 01-May-12 13:10 45 1 0

Shag 01-May-12 13:26 45 1 0

Shag 01-May-12 13:32 45 1 0

Shag 01-May-12 14:05 25 1 0


Forthwind Ltd

Page 50



Shag 01-May-12 14:11 40 1 0

Shag 01-May-12 14:14 45 1 0

Shag 01-Jun-12 13:50 45 1 0

Shag 01-Jun-12 14:12 45 1 0

Shag 01-Jun-12 16:10 45 1 0

Shag 01-Jun-12 12:00 45 1 0

Shag 01-Jun-12 12:49 45 1 0

Shag 01-Jun-12 12:57 45 1 0

Shag 05-Jun-12 10:21 45 1 0

Shag 05-Jun-12 10:37 45 1 0

Shag 05-Jun-12 11:03 45 1 0

Shag 05-Jun-12 12:14 50 1 0

Shag 05-Jun-12 13:29 45 1 0

Shag 05-Jun-12 13:48 45 1 0

Shag 05-Jun-12 13:52 45 1 0

Shag 05-Jun-12 15:01 45 1 0

Shag 05-Jun-12 15:01 45 1 0

Shag 05-Jun-12 15:30 45 1 0

Shag 05-Jun-12 15:43 45 1 0

Shag 05-Jun-12 15:47 45 1 0

Scaup 24-Apr-12 12:18 60 16 0

Shelduck 28-Feb-12 10:30 40 2 0

Teal 26-Oct-11 15:42 15 1 100

Sandwich tern 31-Aug-11 10:02 40 1 0



Sandwich tern 28-Sep-11 10:27 56 1 0


















Page 51












Sandwich tern 13-Jul-11 14:38 25 2 0


Sandwich tern 16-Jun-11 13:32 35 3 100









Sandwich tern 18-May-10 10:57 20 1 0













Sandwich tern 24-Apr-12 10:46 40 2 0










Forthwind Ltd

Page 52

















Tern sp. 09-Aug-11 15:52 40 1 0

Tern sp. 16-Jun-10 10:59 55 1 0

Tern sp. 17-Jun-10 13:37 50 1 0

Tern sp. 17-Jun-10 14:44 55 1 0

Tern sp. 17-Jun-10 14:57 60 1 0

Tern sp. 17-May-10 13:33 55 2 0

Tern sp. 17-May-10 13:37 65 1 0

Tern sp. 17-May-10 13:37 70 1 0

Tern sp. 17-May-10 13:53 80 1 0

Tern sp. 17-May-10 13:55 95 1 0

Tern sp. 17-May-10 14:00 100 1 0

Tern sp. 17-May-10 14:06 100 1 0

Tern sp. 17-May-10 14:08 65 1 0

Tern sp. 17-May-10 14:11 70 1 0

Tern sp. 17-May-10 14:26 70 2 0

Tern sp. 17-May-10 14:33 65 1 0

Tern sp. 17-May-10 14:39 30 1 0

Tern sp. 17-May-10 14:54 125 1 0

Tern sp. 17-May-10 15:11 70 1 0

Tern sp. 17-May-10 15:15 75 1 0

Tern sp. 17-May-10 15:24 38 2 0

Tern sp. 17-May-10 16:09 50 1 0

Tern sp. 18-May-10 10:36 23 1 0

Tern sp. 18-May-10 11:25 25 2 0

Tern sp. 18-May-10 11:37 40 1 0

Tern sp. 18-May-10 11:47 70 1 0

Tern sp. 18-May-10 12:08 95 1 0

Tern sp. 18-May-10 13:11 58 1 0



Page 53



Tern sp. 18-May-10 13:16 50 1 0

Tern sp. 18-May-10 13:19 75 1 0

Tern sp. 18-May-10 13:22 70 2 0

Tern sp. 18-May-10 13:29 70 4 0

Tern sp. 18-May-10 13:40 70 2 0

Tern sp. 18-May-10 13:41 70 2 0

Tern sp. 18-May-10 13:42 70 1 0

Tern sp. 18-May-10 14:11 40 2 0

Tern sp. 18-May-10 14:17 90 4 0

Tern sp. 18-May-10 14:20 70 1 0

Tern sp. 18-May-10 14:22 70 2 0

Tern sp. 18-May-10 14:26 70 4 0

Tern sp. 18-May-10 14:47 70 1 0

Tern sp. 18-May-10 15:10 70 2 0

Tern sp. 18-May-10 15:23 70 5 0

Tern sp. 18-May-10 15:34 70 2 0

Tern sp. 18-May-10 15:37 40 3 0

Tern sp. 18-May-10 15:54 70 2 0

Tern sp. 20-Jul-10 10:40 70 1 0

Tern sp. 20-Jul-10 11:28 65 2 0

Tern sp. 20-Jul-10 13:07 60 1 0

Tern sp. 20-Jul-10 15:05 70 1 0

Tern sp. 20-Jul-10 15:33 30 1 0

Tern sp. 20-Jul-10 15:46 70 1 0

Tern sp. 20-Jul-10 15:51 70 1 0

Tern sp. 23-Apr-10 11:24 35 2 0

Tern sp. 23-Apr-10 12:31 34 1 0

Tern sp. 25-May-10 09:41 70 1 0

Tern sp. 25-May-10 10:11 70 1 0

Tern sp. 25-May-10 10:55 35 1 0

Tern sp. 25-May-10 11:31 70 1 0

Tern sp. 25-May-10 13:13 70 1 0

Tern sp. 25-May-10 13:20 70 2 0

Tern sp. 25-May-10 13:27 70 1 0

Tern sp. 25-May-10 13:29 70 2 0

Tern sp. 25-May-10 13:32 70 1 0

Tern sp. 25-May-10 13:35 60 1 0

Tern sp. 25-May-10 13:35 60 1 0

Tern sp. 25-May-10 13:44 60 3 0

Tern sp. 25-May-10 13:48 25 2 0

Tern sp. 25-May-10 14:04 30 1 0

Tern sp. 25-May-10 14:09 70 1 0


Forthwind Ltd

Page 54



Tern sp. 25-May-10 14:13 70 1 0

Tern sp. 25-May-10 14:22 70 1 0

Tern sp. 25-May-10 14:52 70 1 0

Tern sp. 25-May-10 14:58 70 1 0

Tern sp. 25-May-10 15:09 70 2 0

Tern sp. 25-May-10 15:17 70 2 0

Tern sp. 25-May-10 15:20 70 1 0

Tern sp. 25-May-10 15:30 70 1 0

Tern sp. 25-May-10 15:36 70 1 0

Tern sp. 25-May-10 15:44 70 2 0

Tern sp. 26-Jun-10 10:30 60 1 100

Tern sp. 26-Jun-10 11:13 60 1 0

Tern sp. 26-Jun-10 11:19 40 1 0

Tern sp. 26-Jun-10 12:45 40 2 0

Tern sp. 25-Jun-10 14:05 70 1 0

Tern sp. 25-Jun-10 14:48 40 1 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 14:27 70 3 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 14:28 50 4 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 15:04 45 3 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 15:09 45 3 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 15:15 50 3 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 15:29 45 1 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 15:34 50 1 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 15:53 60 1 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 15:56 70 1 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 15:34 50 1 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 15:47 60 1 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 15:53 60 2 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 15:56 70 1 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 16:16 960 10 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 16:30 300 6 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 16:32 50 10 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 10:24 40 1 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 10:28 45 4 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 10:30 45 4 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 10:56 70 4 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 10:58 45 2 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 11:07 150 6 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 11:41 45 2 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 11:45 40 1 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 11:59 45 1 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 12:01 50 1 0



Page 55



Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 12:09 45 1 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 12:15 45 1 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 12:25 45 1 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 12:32 45 2 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 12:35 45 2 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 12:37 45 3 0

Tern sp. 01-Jun-12 12:43 45 1 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 09:50 45 1 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 09:56 45 1 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 10:00 50 1 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 10:07 45 1 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 10:08 70 1 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 10:15 45 1 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 10:16 45 1 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 10:24 45 2 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 10:27 45 1 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 10:35 50 1 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 10:46 45 2 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 10:47 45 2 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 10:50 50 2 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 10:53 50 1 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 11:00 40 1 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 11:17 60 2 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 11:41 55 1 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 11:51 60 1 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 12:15 45 1 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 12:33 45 1 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 12:35 45 1

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 13:37 45 1 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 14:11 45 1 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 14:30 60 2 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 14:31 60 2 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 14:38 60 3 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 14:48 65 1 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 14:58 60 2 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 15:01 45 1 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 15:11 45 1 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 15:20 50 1 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 15:25 45 1 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 15:39 45 1 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 15:42 70 2 0

Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 15:43 45 1 0


Forthwind Ltd

Page 56



Tern sp. 05-Jun-12 15:47 45 1 0

Duck sp. 26-Aug-11 10:00 40 1 100

Duck sp. 01-Mar-10 10:04 36 6 0

Duck sp. 01-Mar-10 11:46 50 1 0

Duck sp. 01-Mar-10 11:48 50 2 0

Duck sp. 01-Mar-10 12:07 35 1 0

Duck sp. 26-Jun-10 12:42 45 12 0

Duck sp. 16-Dec-09 13:37 35 1 0

Goose sp. 02-Dec-11 12:24 20 40 100

Scoter sp. 01-Mar-10 10:13 33 1 0

Scoter sp. 18-Feb-10 12:25 15 6 0

Scoter sp. 18-Feb-10 12:38 25 1 0

Scoter sp. 18-Feb-10 12:41 15 1 0

Scoter sp. 18-Feb-10 12:52 42 3 0

Scoter sp. 18-Feb-10 13:41 48 1 0

Scoter sp. 22-Jan-10 12:40 30 1 0

Velvet scoter 28-Feb-12 10:12 45 1 0




Velvet scoter 27-Feb-12 14:09 40 10 33.33333

Velvet scoter 27-Jan-12 13:00 50 6 0





Velvet scoter 25-Nov-11 11:18 40 1 0

Velvet scoter 26-Oct-11 11:07 45 1 0




Velvet scoter 20-Dec-11 13:00 40 1 0













Page 57











Velvet scoter 01-Mar-10 11:34 30 1 0

Velvet scoter 14-Apr-10 11:51 28 1 0
























Velvet scoter 01-May-12 13:26 10 1 0






Wader sp. 26-Oct-11 12:00 50 1 100

Wader sp. 04-Oct-11 10:54 40 6 100

Auk sp. 28-Feb-12 09:42 40 3 0


Forthwind Ltd

Page 58



Auk sp. 28-Feb-12 09:51 45 1 0

Auk sp. 28-Feb-12 10:51 50 4 0

Auk sp. 28-Feb-12 15:04 40 1 0

Auk sp. 27-Feb-12 13:07 40 1 0

Auk sp. 27-Feb-12 13:22 32 1 0

Auk sp. 27-Jan-12 12:54 35 1 0

Auk sp. 27-Jan-12 13:07 45 4 0

Auk sp. 28-Oct-11 10:25 40 1 0

Auk sp. 28-Oct-11 10:52 40 1 0

Auk sp. 28-Oct-11 11:00 30 1 0

Auk sp. 28-Oct-11 12:09 40 1 0

Auk sp. 28-Oct-11 13:51 30 1 0

Auk sp. 28-Oct-11 14:07 30 1 0

Auk sp. 27-Jan-12 10:36 50 1 0

Auk sp. 27-Jan-12 10:55 35 2 0

Auk sp. 27-Jan-12 11:04 35 1 0

Auk sp. 27-Jan-12 12:09 35 1 0

Auk sp. 27-Jan-12 12:12 40 1 0

Auk sp. 27-Jan-12 12:27 22 1 0

Auk sp. 26-Aug-11 14:33 45 1 0

Auk sp. 26-Oct-11 10:14 40 1 0

Auk sp. 26-Oct-11 10:19 35 1 0

Auk sp. 26-Oct-11 10:43 40 1 0

Auk sp. 26-Oct-11 13:21 25 1 0

Auk sp. 26-Oct-11 13:34 30 1 0

Auk sp. 26-Oct-11 13:36 30 4 0

Auk sp. 26-Oct-11 13:41 30 1 0

Auk sp. 26-Oct-11 13:43 40 1 0

Auk sp. 26-Oct-11 13:55 45 1 0

Auk sp. 26-Oct-11 13:58 30 1 0

Auk sp. 26-Oct-11 14:10 30 1 0

Auk sp. 26-Oct-11 14:16 30 1 0

Auk sp. 26-Oct-11 14:23 30 1 0

Auk sp. 26-Oct-11 14:27 30 2 0

Auk sp. 26-Oct-11 15:23 40 1 0

Auk sp. 26-Oct-11 15:52 30 1 0

Auk sp. 13-Jul-11 12:30 45 1 0

Auk sp. 04-Oct-11 11:36 50 1 0

Auk sp. 04-Oct-11 11:39 50 1 0

Auk sp. 04-Oct-11 13:43 50 1 0

Auk sp. 08-Feb-12 12:12 35 1 0

Auk sp. 08-Feb-12 13:21 20 1 0



Page 59



Auk sp. 16-Jun-10 11:40 40 1 0

Auk sp. 17-Jun-10 13:44 50 1 0

Auk sp. 26-Jun-10 11:34 50 1 0

Auk sp. 26-Jun-10 12:15 50 2 0

Auk sp. 25-Jun-10 14:12 40 1 0

Auk sp. 25-Jun-10 14:13 45 1 0

Auk sp. 26-Jul-10 11:06 55 1 0

Auk sp. 16-Jun-11 10:14 35 1 0

Auk sp. 16-Jun-11 10:16 20 3 0

Auk sp. 16-Jun-11 11:14 30 1 0

Auk sp. 16-Jun-11 12:14 40 1 0

Auk sp. 16-Jun-11 12:16 40 1 0

Auk sp. 16-Jun-11 12:26 40 2 0

1.2.2 Secondary Species

The data in Tables A1.3 and A1.4 show the total number of birds recorded in each height band during each survey session.

Table A1.3: Gannet, Black-headed Gull and Common Gull Summary

Date Start Finish

Gannet (height)

Black-headed gull (height)

Common gull (height)

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3

18/02/2010 11:15 14:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

01/03/2010 09:30 12:30 0 0 0 2 0 0 6 0 0

01/03/2010 13:00 16:00 0 0 0 1 0 0 18 0 0

02/03/2010 13:00 16:00 0 0 0 3 0 0 2 8 0

16/03/2010 09:40 12:40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

16/03/2010 13:10 16:10 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

29/03/2010 09:40 12:40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

14/04/2010 11:00 12:30 58 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

23/04/2010 10:15 13:15 92 13 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

23/04/2010 13:40 15:10 35 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

17/05/2010 13:10 16:10 3 9 1 0 0 0 2 0 0

18/05/2010 09:30 12:30 15 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

18/05/2010 13:00 16:00 33 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

25/05/2010 09:30 12:30 2 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0

25/05/2010 13:00 16:00 48 44 6 0 0 0 0 0 0

16/06/2010 10:10 13:10 103 52 4 0 0 0 0 0 0

17/06/2010 13:30 16:30 64 40 16 0 0 0 0 0 0

25/06/2010 09:50 12:50 6 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

25/06/2010 13:05 16:05 7 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 0

26/07/2010 10:00 13:00 19 22 5 1 1 0 0 0 0

16/06/2011 09:40 12:40 52 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

16/06/2011 13:00 16:00 127 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

29/06/2011 09:40 12:40 11 29 26 0 0 0 0 0 0

29/06/2011 13:00 16:00 2 1 4 0 0 0 1 0 0

13/07/2011 09:45 12:45 32 13 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

13/07/2011 13:00 16:00 85 18 4 1 0 0 0 0 0

09/08/2011 09:30 12:30 13 8 3 1 0 0 0 0 0

09/08/2011 13:00 16:00 31 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

26/08/2011 09:15 12:15 145 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

26/08/2011 12:30 15:30 65 13 0 0 0 0 1 0 0


Forthwind Ltd

Page 60

Date Start Finish

Gannet (height)

Black-headed gull (height)

Common gull (height)

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3

31/08/2011 09:30 12:30 25 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

31/08/2011 12:50 15:50 13 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

28/09/2011 10:10 13:10 89 10 1 98 0 0 0 0 0

28/09/2011 13:20 16:20 67 15 1 50 0 0 0 0 0

04/10/2011 09:20 12:20 55 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

04/10/2011 12:30 15:30 104 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 0

26/10/2011 09:45 12:45 0 0 0 22 5 0 3 0 0

26/10/2011 13:00 16:00 1 0 0 4 0 0 6 0 0

28/10/2011 09:20 12:20 1 0 0 6 2 0 10 0 0

28/10/2011 12:50 15:50 1 1 0 0 2 0 4 1 0

23/11/2011 09:15 12:15 19 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

23/11/2011 12:30 15:30 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

25/11/2011 10:15 13:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

02/12/2011 10:15 13:15 0 0 0 1 2 0 1 0 0

15/12/2011 11:55 14:55 0 0 0 2 1 0 3 0 0

20/12/2011 11:35 14:35 0 0 0 4 1 1 1 0 0

22/12/2011 10:50 13:50 1 0 0 3 0 0 9 0 0

05/01/2012 11:30 14:30 0 0 0 1 0 0 9 0 0

27/01/2012 09:45 12:45 0 0 0 2 0 0 5 0 0

27/01/2012 12:45 15:45 0 0 0 5 0 0 4 2 0

08/02/2012 09:35 12:35 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

08/02/2012 12:40 15:40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

27/02/2012 09:50 12:50 1 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 0

27/02/2012 12:50 15:50 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0

28/02/2012 09:30 12:30 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0

28/02/2012 12:35 15:35 3 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0

28/03/2012 10:00 13:00 28 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0

28/03/2012 13:10 16:10 42 17 0 0 0 0 3 0 0

11/04/2012 09:10 12:10 1 1 0 1 0 0 3 0 0

11/04/2012 12:30 15:30 8 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

24/04/2012 10:00 13:00 26 10 0 0 0 0 3 0 0

24/04/2012 13:10 16:10 19 24 6 0 0 0 0 2 0

01/05/2012 09:15 12:15 24 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0

01/05/2012 12:30 15:30 46 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0

01/06/2012 13:40 16:40 64 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

01/06/2012 10:00 13:00 186 38 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

05/06/2012 09:45 12:45 77 0 0 2 0 0 1 2 0

05/06/2012 13:00 16:00 182 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

Table A1.4: Lesser black-backed Gull, Herring Gull and Great Black-backed Gull Summary

Date Start Finish

Lesser black-backed gull (height)

Herring gull (height)

Great black-backed gull (height)

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3

18/02/2010 11:15 14:15 0 0 0 93 2 0 2 0 0

01/03/2010 09:30 12:30 0 0 0 44 22 0 0 0 0

01/03/2010 13:00 16:00 0 0 0 162 16 0 16 0 0

02/03/2010 13:00 16:00 0 0 0 163 6 0 34 1 0

16/03/2010 09:40 12:40 0 0 0 31 8 1 2 0 0

16/03/2010 13:10 16:10 0 0 0 21 16 5 1 3 0

29/03/2010 09:40 12:40 0 2 0 18 6 0 2 0 0

14/04/2010 11:00 12:30 1 1 0 21 4 0 4 3 0

23/04/2010 10:15 13:15 3 0 0 28 10 1 0 0 0

23/04/2010 13:40 15:10 0 1 0 7 1 0 0 0 0

17/05/2010 13:10 16:10 3 0 0 178 4 0 8 0 0

18/05/2010 09:30 12:30 5 1 0 43 11 2 4 1 0

18/05/2010 13:00 16:00 10 1 0 295 1 0 6 0 0

25/05/2010 09:30 12:30 0 0 0 24 14 1 3 0 0



Page 61

Date Start Finish

Lesser black-backed gull (height)

Herring gull (height)

Great black-backed gull (height)

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3

25/05/2010 13:00 16:00 0 0 0 43 5 0 3 1 0

16/06/2010 10:10 13:10 4 4 0 8 12 2 1 0 0

17/06/2010 13:30 16:30 10 9 0 38 14 0 1 1 0

25/06/2010 09:50 12:50 1 2 0 2 11 6 3 3 0

25/06/2010 13:05 16:05 1 1 0 7 15 4 19 16 4

26/07/2010 10:00 13:00 1 0 0 5 2 0 11 4 0

16/06/2011 09:40 12:40 8 3 0 12 11 3 2 2 0

16/06/2011 13:00 16:00 25 6 0 30 2 0 5 3 0

29/06/2011 09:40 12:40 0 1 0 2 5 14 1 0 0

29/06/2011 13:00 16:00 3 1 0 8 5 2 3 1 0

13/07/2011 09:45 12:45 1 0 0 7 4 5 0 2 0

13/07/2011 13:00 16:00 7 0 0 6 1 1 1 1 1

09/08/2011 09:30 12:30 1 1 0 7 6 4 3 1 0

09/08/2011 13:00 16:00 27 0 0 29 0 1 1 2 0

26/08/2011 09:15 12:15 20 2 0 8 2 0 19 8 1

26/08/2011 12:30 15:30 11 2 0 6 0 0 5 2 0

31/08/2011 09:30 12:30 4 0 0 13 1 1 8 4 0

31/08/2011 12:50 15:50 17 3 0 14 0 2 5 1 0

28/09/2011 10:10 13:10 0 0 0 34 11 3 1 0 2

28/09/2011 13:20 16:20 0 0 0 117 4 3 0 1 0

04/10/2011 09:20 12:20 0 0 0 20 4 3 3 4 1

04/10/2011 12:30 15:30 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 6 0

26/10/2011 09:45 12:45 0 0 0 15 8 2 1 1 0

26/10/2011 13:00 16:00 8 1 0 16 2 5 9 5 0

28/10/2011 09:20 12:20 1 0 0 14 11 4 2 1 1

28/10/2011 12:50 15:50 0 0 0 9 4 1 1 3 0

23/11/2011 09:15 12:15 0 0 0 7 1 0 9 1 0

23/11/2011 12:30 15:30 0 0 0 17 4 0 6 1 0

25/11/2011 10:15 13:15 0 0 0 14 4 1 20 2 1

02/12/2011 10:15 13:15 0 0 0 13 14 7 11 0 1

15/12/2011 11:55 14:55 0 0 0 35 25 26 5 2 0

20/12/2011 11:35 14:35 0 0 0 9 9 2 2 1 0

22/12/2011 10:50 13:50 3 0 0 27 6 2 15 5 0

05/01/2012 11:30 14:30 0 0 0 27 6 8 8 4 0

27/01/2012 09:45 12:45 0 0 0 31 8 1 3 0 0

27/01/2012 12:45 15:45 0 0 0 11 14 4 9 1 1

08/02/2012 09:35 12:35 0 0 0 22 8 3 6 2 0

08/02/2012 12:40 15:40 0 0 0 24 7 5 9 0 0

27/02/2012 09:50 12:50 0 0 0 10 7 1 0 1 1

27/02/2012 12:50 15:50 0 0 0 5 4 5 3 2 1

28/02/2012 09:30 12:30 0 2 0 15 9 2 3 0 0

28/02/2012 12:35 15:35 0 0 0 13 6 1 1 0 0

28/03/2012 10:00 13:00 0 0 0 28 9 2 2 0 0

28/03/2012 13:10 16:10 0 0 0 17 22 2 3 7 0

11/04/2012 09:10 12:10 0 1 0 47 14 1 0 0 0

11/04/2012 12:30 15:30 1 0 0 60 8 4 7 1 0

24/04/2012 10:00 13:00 0 1 0 20 6 2 5 1 0

24/04/2012 13:10 16:10 0 0 0 27 10 1 0 0 0

01/05/2012 09:15 12:15 1 1 0 21 10 0 0 0 0

01/05/2012 12:30 15:30 0 1 0 15 11 3 1 3 0

01/06/2012 13:40 16:40 1 1 0 39 29 5 1 1 0

01/06/2012 10:00 13:00 3 0 0 73 15 2 0 2 0

05/06/2012 09:45 12:45 9 1 0 180 36 1 7 1 0

05/06/2012 13:00 16:00 6 3 0 46 17 3 3 5 3


Forthwind Ltd

Page 62

2 APPENDIX 2

2.1 Sea Use Surveys

The data in Tables A2.1 to 2.21 provide the maximum count and average count per month (all sea use surveys combined).

Table A2.1: Sea Use Survey: Red-throated Diver Species Max. count Average count

December 2009 4 0.52

January 2010 1 0.11

February 2010 3 0.43

March 2010 2 0.23

April 2010 1 0.05

May 2010 0 0

June 2010 0 0

July 2010 0 0

June 2011 0 0

July 2011 0 0

August 2011 1 0.02

September 2011 1 0.07

October 2011 2 0.31

November 2011 1 0.1


January 2012 1 0.14

February 2012 1 0.1

March 2012 0 0

April 2012 3 0.32

May 2012 1 0.07

June 2012 0 0

Table A2.2: Sea Use Survey: Eider Species Max. count Average count


January 2010 30 13.4

February 2010 26 15.4

March 2010 26 8.44

April 2010 0 0

May 2010 0 0

June 2010 0 0

July 2010 16 2.18

June 2011 3 0.14

July 2011 0 0

August 2011 70 5.88

September 2011 0 0

October 2011 5 0.19

November 2011 2 0.1


January 2012 6 3.14

February 2012 16 4.19

March 2012 0 0

April 2012 3 0.21

May 2012 0 0

June 2012 1 0.04

Table A2.3: Sea Use Survey: Long-tailed Duck Species Max. count Average count


January 2010 32 8.68

February 2010 10 2.57

March 2010 4 0.28

April 2010 4 0.36



Page 63

Species Max. count Average count

May 2010 0 0

June 2010 0 0

July 2010 0 0

June 2011 0 0

July 2011 0 0

August 2011 0 0

September 2011 0 0

October 2011 0 0

November 2011 0 0


January 2012 12 3.76


March 2012 2 0.28

April 2012 0 0

May 2012 0 0

June 2012 0 0

Table A2.4: Sea Use Survey: Common Scoter Species Max. count Average count

December 2009 0 0

January 2010 0 0

February 2010 22 2.57

March 2010 37 3.21

April 2010 0 0

May 2010 20 0.57

June 2010 0 0

July 2010 0 0

June 2011 0 0

July 2011 0 0

August 2011 0 0

September 2011 0 0

October 2011 0 0

November 2011 6 0.57


January 2012 7 1.29

February 2012 13 2.64

March 2012 0 0

April 2012 10 0.79

May 2012 2 0.29

June 2012 0 0

Table A2.5: Sea Use Survey: Velvet Scoter Species Max. count Average count

December 2009 1 0.1

January 2010 2 0.07


March 2010 15 0.56

April 2010 12 2.05

May 2010 0 0

June 2010 0 0

July 2010 0 0

June 2011 0 0

July 2011 0 0

August 2011 0 0

September 2011 0 0

October 2011 0 0

November 2011 2 0.1


January 2012 3 0.86



Forthwind Ltd

Page 64


March 2012 3 0.43

April 2012 10 1.79

May 2012 4 1.29

June 2012 0 0

Table A2.6: Sea Use Survey: Scoter Species Species Max. count Average count

December 2009 3 0.238095

January 2010 13 1.178571

February 2010 15 2.071429

March 2010 52 2.153846

April 2010 30 2.272727

May 2010 0 0

June 2010 0 0

July 2010 0 0

June 2011 0 0

July 2011 0 0

August 2011 0 0

September 2011 0 0

October 2011 0 0

November 2011 0 0

December 2011 0 0

January 2012 0 0

February 2012 0 0

March 2012 0 0

April 2012 0 0

May 2012 0 0

June 2012 0 0

Table A2.7: Sea Use Survey: Red-breasted Merganser Species Max. count Average count

December 2009 0 0

January 2010 2 0.25

February 2010 0 0

March 2010 1 0.05

April 2010 0 0

May 2010 0 0

June 2010 0 0

July 2010 0 0

June 2011 0 0

July 2011 0 0

August 2011 0 0

September 2011 0 0

October 2011 0 0

November 2011 0 0

December 2011 0 0

January 2012 0 0

February 2012 0 0

March 2012 0 0

April 2012 0 0

May 2012 0 0

June 2012 0 0

Table A2.8: Sea Use Survey: Goosander Species Max. count Average count

December 2009 0 0

January 2010 0 0

February 2010 0 0

March 2010 0 0

April 2010 0 0

May 2010 1 0.03



Page 65


June 2010 0 0

July 2010 0 0

June 2011 0 0

July 2011 0 0

August 2011 0 0

September 2011 0 0

October 2011 0 0

November 2011 0 0

December 2011 0 0

January 2012 0 0

February 2012 0 0

March 2012 0 0

April 2012 0 0

May 2012 0 0

June 2012 0 0

Table A2.9: Sea Use Survey: Gannet Species Max. count Average count

December 2009 0 0

January 2010 0 0

February 2010 0 0

March 2010 0 0

April 2010 3 0.36

May 2010 20 0.63

June 2010 2 0.07

July 2010 1 0.04

June 2011 23 2.21

July 2011 0 0

August 2011 1 0.05


October 2011 1 0.02

November 2011 0 0

December 2011 0 0

January 2012 0 0

February 2012 0 0

March 2012 0 0

April 2012 1 0.07

May 2012 1 0.14

June 2012 2 0.18

Table A2.10: Sea Use Survey: Herring Gull Species Max. count Average count


January 2010 9 3.5

February 2010 11 4.07

March 2010 58 4.79

April 2010 8 0.59

May 2010 52 4.63

June 2010 0 0

July 2010 1 0.04

June 2011 40 3.54

July 2011 12 1.5

August 2011 11 1.24


October 2011 4 0.33

November 2011 0 0

December 2011 0 0

January 2012 0 0

February 2012 0 0

March 2012 0 0


Forthwind Ltd

Page 66


April 2012 6 1.32

May 2012 3 0.64

June 2012 43 4.89

Table A2.11: Sea Use Survey: Great Black-backed Gull Species Max. count Average count


January 2010 2 0.32


March 2010 15 0.59

April 2010 3 0.41

May 2010 2 0.11

June 2010 2 0.11

July 2010 8 0.68

June 2011 2 0.18

July 2011 0 0

August 2011 15 1.21

September 2011 0 0

October 2011 2 0.17



January 2012 2 0.19


March 2012 1 0.07

April 2012 3 0.32

May 2012 0 0

June 2012 2 0.11

Table A2.12: Sea Use Survey: Common Gull Species Max. count Average count

December 2009 0 0

January 2010 0 0


March 2010 1 0.03

April 2010 0 0

May 2010 0 0

June 2010 0 0

July 2010 0 0

June 2011 0 0

July 2011 0 0

August 2011 0 0

September 2011 0 0

October 2011 0 0

November 2011 0 0

December 2011 0 0

January 2012 0 0


March 2012 5 0.36

April 2012 0 0

May 2012 0 0

June 2012 0 0

Table A2.13: Sea Use Survey: Black-headed Gull Species Max. count Average count

December 2009 0 0

January 2010 40 4.61

February 2010 0 0

March 2010 3 0.08



Page 67


April 2010 0 0

May 2010 0 0

June 2010 0 0

July 2010 0 0

June 2011 0 0

July 2011 0 0

August 2011 1 0.05


October 2011 20 1.29

November 2011 0 0

December 2011 0 0

January 2012 0 0


March 2012 0 0

April 2012 1 0.04

May 2012 0 0

June 2012 0 0

Table A2.14: Sea Use Survey: Kittiwake Species Max. count Average count

December 2009 0 0

January 2010 0 0

February 2010 0 0

March 2010 0 0

April 2010 0 0

May 2010 1 0.03

June 2010 0 0

July 2010 0 0

June 2011 40 3

July 2011 3 0.21

August 2011 1 0.02


October 2011 0 0

November 2011 0 0

December 2011 0 0

January 2012 0 0

February 2012 4 0.1

March 2012 0 0

April 2012 0 0

May 2012 0 0

June 2012 5 0.39

Table A2.15: Sea Use Survey: Lesser Black-backed Gull Species Max. count Average count

December 2009 0 0

January 2010 0 0

February 2010 0 0

March 2010 2 0.05

April 2010 0 0

May 2010 5 0.26

June 2010 1 0.04

July 2010 0 0

June 2011 15 1.25

July 2011 0 0

August 2011 22 2.17


October 2011 2 0.17

November 2011 0 0

December 2011 0 0

January 2012 1 0.05


Forthwind Ltd

Page 68


February 2012 0 0

March 2012 0 0

April 2012 1 0.04

May 2012 1 0.07

June 2012 1 0.04

Table A2.16: Sea Use Survey: Cormorant Species Max. count Average count


January 2010 1 0.07


March 2010 7 0.87

April 2010 1 0.36

May 2010 1 0.14

June 2010 1 0.14

July 2010 2 0.29

June 2011 1 0.04

July 2011 0 0

August 2011 2 0.19


October 2011 0 0



January 2012 4 0.57


March 2012 1 0.29

April 2012 2 0.18

May 2012 0 0

June 2012 0 0

Table A2.17: Sea Use Survey: Shag Species Max. count Average count


January 2010 6 1.36


March 2010 4 0.46

April 2010 1 0.14

May 2010 1 0.06

June 2010 0 0

July 2010 2 0.18

June 2011 1 0.11

July 2011 0 0

August 2011 6 1.21


October 2011 2 0.24


December 2011 4 1

January 2012 4 0.9


March 2012 3 0.64

April 2012 6 0.75

May 2012 4 0.50

June 2012 2 0.36

Table A2.18: Sea Use Survey: Guillemot Species Max. count Average count

December 2009 0 0

January 2010 1 0.11


March 2010 7 0.54

April 2010 1 0.05



Page 69


May 2010 5 0.17

June 2010 4 0.18

July 2010 7 0.75

June 2011 25 7.11

July 2011 9 2.5

August 2011 2 0.14


October 2011 16 1.26

November 2011 0 0

December 2011 0 0

January 2012 1 0.1


March 2012 6 0.93

April 2012 6 1.21

May 2012 6 1.86

June 2012 22 3.82

Table A2.19: Sea Use Survey: Puffin Species Max. count Average count

December 2009 0 0

January 2010 0 0

February 2010 0 0

March 2010 0 0

April 2010 0 0

May 2010 0 0

June 2010 1 0.04

July 2010 0 0

June 2011 8 1.29

July 2011 0 0

August 2011 0 0


October 2011 0 0

November 2011 0 0

December 2011 0 0

January 2012 0 0


March 2012 0 0

April 2012 2 0.07

May 2012 2 0.14

June 2012 2 2.85

Table A2.20: Sea Use Survey: Razorbill Species Max. count Average count

December 2009 0 0

January 2010 3 0.32


March 2010 0 0

April 2010 0 0

May 2010 0 0

June 2010 0 0

July 2010 1 0.04

June 2011 3 0.32

July 2011 0 0

August 2011 0 0

September 2011 0 0

October 2011 3 0.33



January 2012 1 0.14



Forthwind Ltd

Page 70


March 2012 2 0.14

April 2012 1 0.07

May 2012 0 0

June 2012 4 0.61

Table A2.21: Sea Use Survey: Great Skua Species Max. count Average count

December 2009 0 0

January 2010 0 0

February 2010 0 0

March 2010 0 0

April 2010 0 0

May 2010 0 0

June 2010 0 0

July 2010 0 0

June 2011 0 0

July 2011 0 0

August 2011 1 0.02

September 2011 0 0

October 2011 0 0

November 2011 0 0

December 2011 0 0

January 2012 0 0

February 2012 0 0

March 2012 0 0

April 2012 0 0

May 2012 0 0

June 2012 0 0

Forthwind Demonstration Project Technical Appendix

Habitat Regulations Appraisal

Page 1-1

1 HABITAT REGULATIONS APPRAISAL

1.1 Introduction

In Scotland, the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, and the Conservation

(Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 transpose the requirements of the EC Habitats Directive and EC Birds Directive into national law within Scottish Territorial Waters, (up to the

12 nautical mile (NM) territorial waters limit). The 2010 Regulations consolidate various

amendments to the 1994 Regulations and apply in Scotland to, among other things, Section 36 applications. The regulations which transpose the obligations imposed by both the Birds

and Habitats Directives are commonly abbreviated to the Habitat Regulations.

In order to comply with the Directives the Habitat Regulations require competent authorities

to carry out Appropriate Assessments (AA) in certain circumstances where a project (or plan)

affects a Natura 2000 (European) site, its qualifying features, or its Conservation Objectives. The competent authority must consider whether or not the project or plan is likely to result in

a Likely Significant Effect (LSE). This process is known as a Habitat Regulations Appraisal (HRA).

Consultation with Marine Scotland Licensing Operations Team (MS-LOT), the competent authority for offshore wind farm developments in Scottish Territorial Waters, and Scottish

Natural Heritage (SNH), the Scottish Government’s statutory nature conservation adviser,

have confirmed that an HRA is required for the proposed Forthwind Demonstration Project, with reference to SNH (2014)1.

The potential for significant effects of the proposed Forthwind Demonstration Project on Natura 2000 sites and their qualifying features and nature conservation objectives have been

assessed with information provided in this Chapter, following EC (2002)2 guidance, to help

inform an Appropriate Assessment by the competent authority.

1.2 Background to the Development

The proposed Forthwind Demonstration Project (hereafter referred to as "the Development") is located on the northern side of the Firth of Forth at Methil, Scotland and is approximately

1.5 km seaward from the mean high water springs (MHWS).

The Development Footprint Envelope consists of the following:

Two turbines and sub-structure (foundation and tubular jacket if required) located at

National Grid reference (NGR) 336964, 696677 (turbine 1), and NGR 337812, 697333

(turbine 2). A 100 m micrositing allowance from these centre points for the turbines andassociated infrastructure is required for the final selection of turbine locations.

An electricity export cable corridor of up to 121 ha in area, within which cables will be laid

in up to 2 trenches measuring not more than 3100 m in length. These will contain thecables that transmit the electricity generated by each turbine to the onshore transformer.

Further details of the Development are provided in Chapter 3: Project Description of this ES.

1.3 Methodology

The approach taken within this HRA is as follows:

Details provided on relevant SPAs and Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) and theirrespective Conservation Objectives following SPA screening.

1 SNH (2014) Interim guidance on apportioning impacts from marine renewables developments to breeding seabird populations

in Special Protection Area. 2 EC (European Commission) (2002) Assessment of plans and projects significantly affecting Natura 2000 sites: Methodological

guidance on the provisions of Article 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.

Technical Appendix Forthwind Demonstration Project


Page 1-2

A summary of the baseline condition and screening of SPA qualifying species based on the assessment of impacts for specific receptors provided in Chapter 7: Ornithology , Chapter 8: Marine Mammals and Chapter 13: Fish and Shellfish Ecology of this ES.

The potential effects and Likely Significant Effect Assessment on identified Natura 2000 sites and their qualifying features.

Summary of Likely Significant Effects.

1.4 Special Protection Areas Screening

Consultation has indicated that potential effects on the Firth of Forth SPA and Forth Islands SPA should be considered as part of this HRA. These SPAs were assessed in Chapter 7:

Ornithology of the Environmental Statement. Two other sites designated for ornithological value within the vicinity of the site (Loch Leven SPA and Cameron Reservoir SPA) are not

considered to be close enough to be affected by the Development based on the lack of

meaningful connectivity. There is unlikely to be meaningful connectivity between the Development site and any other designated site that would result in the Development

undermining any of the conservation objectives for the designated sites’ qualifying interests.

With the exception of the Firth of Forth SPA and Forth Islands SPA, there are therefore no

potentially LSEs on any other designated sites and they have been screened out of further

detailed assessment. SNH provided details of a draft Special Protection Area (dSPA), at present referred to as the Outer Firth of Forth and Tay Bay Complex dSPA3. SNH

recommended that this draft designated site is considered in regards to the Development HRA, although at this stage the designation does not hold any legal standing4.

1.4.1 SPA Conservation Objectives

The conservation objectives for the Firth of Forth SPA and the Forth Islands SPA are the

same. There are no conservation objectives set for the Outer Firth of Forth and Tay Bay

Complex dSPA, but it is assumed that they would also be the same as those of the Firth of Forth SPA and Forth Islands SPA if the site was granted SPA status. The conservation

objectives for the SPAs are below (SNH 2015)5:

To avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species or significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained; and

To ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term:

Population of the species as a viable component of the site; Distribution of the species within site; Distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; Structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species; and No significant disturbance of the species.

1.5 Special Areas of Conservation Screening

There are three SACs on the east coast of Scotland that relate to marine mammals which could be affected by the Development: Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary SAC, Isle of May SAC,

and Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast SAC. Other SACs have been screened out in Chapter 8: Marine Mammals of this ES, and other qualifying features for these SACs (e.g.

referring to Annex I habitats) have also been screened out and are not considered further.

One SAC that relates to fish and shellfish that could be affected by the Development was identified in Chapter 13: Fish and Shellfish Ecology of this ES: River Teith SAC. Five other

SACs have been screened out for potential connectivity with the Development during the

3 Release pack for Marine SPAs http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/A1350044.pdf4 If the dSPA was adopted as a proposed SPA (pSPA) the site would have the full legislative protection afforded to SPAs and

would therefore be subject to HRA. 5 SNH (2015) Site details for Firth of Forth SPA http://gateway.snh.gov.uk/sitelink/siteinfo.jsp?pa_code=8499



Page 1-3

assessment: River Spey SAC, Ricer Dee SAC, River South Esk SAC, River Tay SAC, River

Tweed SAC. These five SACs are not discussed further.

Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary SAC, Isle of May SAC, Berwickshire and North Northumberland

Coast SAC and River Teith SAC are considered further below.

1.5.1 SAC Conservation Objectives

The conservation objectives for the Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary SAC, Isle of May SAC, and

the Berwickshire and North Northumberland SAC are the same and are provided below (SNH 2015)6:

To avoid deterioration of the qualifying habitats thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained and the site makes an appropriate contribution to achieving favourable conservation status for each of the qualifying features; and

To ensure for the qualifying habitats that the following are maintained in the long-term:

Extent of the habitat on site; Distribution of the habitat within the site; Structure and function of the habitat; Processes supporting the habitat; Distribution of typical species of the habitat; Viability of typical species as components of the habitat; and No significant disturbance of typical species of the habitat.

The conservation objectives for the River Teith SAC are different to those above and are

provided below (SNH 2015)7:

To avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species or significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained and the site makes an appropriate contribution to achieving favourable conservation status for each of the qualifying features; and

To ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long-term:

Population of the species, including range of genetic types for salmon, as a viable component of the site;

Distribution of the species within the site; Distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; Structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species; and

No significant disturbance of the species.

1.6 Identified European Sites, Potential Effects and Likely Significant Effects Assessment

Table 1.1 lists the European sites considered further: Firth of Forth SPA, Forth Islands SPA,

Outer Firth of Forth and Tay Bay Complex dSPA, Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary SAC, Isle of May SAC, Berwickshire and North Northumberland SAC, and River Teith SAC, and relevant

designated features identified above.

In addition, Table 1.1 identifies the potential effects associated with each site and outlines the

results of the Likely Significant Effect Assessment. This takes any proposed mitigation (during construction, operation and decommissioning) into consideration.

6 SNH (2015) Site details for Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary SAC http://gateway.snh.gov.uk/sitelink/siteinfo.jsp?pa_code=8257

(NB conservation objectives are the same for Isle of May SAC, and the Berwickshire and North Northumberland SAC. 7 SNH (2015) Site details for River Teith SAC http://gateway.snh.gov.uk/sitelink/siteinfo.jsp?pa_code=8367

http://gateway.snh.gov.uk/sitelink/siteinfo.jsp?pa_code=8257



Page 1-4

Table 1.1 European sites, potential effects, mitigation and Likely Significant Effects assessment Site Name and Distance

Features Potentially Affected Potential Impacts to Features based on EIA Assessment

Mitigation Measures Proposed

Likely Significant Effects

Firth of Forth SPA

Adjacent to terrestrial parts of Development, 1.2 km from turbine locations

“The Firth of Forth SPA is a complex of estuarine and coastal habitats in south east Scotland stretching east from Alloa to the coasts of Fife and East Lothian. The site includes extensive invertebrate-rich intertidal flats and rocky shores, areas of saltmarsh, lagoons and sand dune”

This site qualifies under Article 4.1 of the Directive (2009/147/EC) by supporting populations of European importance of the following species listed on Annex I of the Directive:

Over winter:

Red-throated diver: 90 birds, 2 % of GB population (5-year peak mean 1993/94–1997/98)

Oystercatcher: 7,846 birds, 2 % of GB population (5-year peak mean 1993/94–1997/98)

Slavonian grebe: 84 birds, 21 % of GB population (5-year peak mean 1993/94–1997/98)

Bar-tailed godwit: 1,974 birds, 4 % of GB population (5-year peak mean 1993/94–1997/98)

Golden plover: 2,949 birds, 2 % of GB population

(5-year peak mean 1993/94–1997/98)

On Passage:

Sandwich tern: 1,617 birds, 6 % of GB population (5-year peak mean 1993/94–1997/98)

This site also qualifies under Article 4.2 of the Directive (2009/147/EC) by supporting populations of European importance of the following migratory species:

Over winter:

Pink-footed goose: 10,852 birds, 6 % of Eastern Greenland/Iceland/UK population (5-year peak mean 1993/94–1997/98)

Qualifying species Slavonian grebe, bar-tailed godwit, golden plover, redshank and turnstone, and assemblage species great crested grebe, wigeon, ringed plover, grey plover, lapwing, dunlin and bar-tailed godwit were not recorded in the Core Survey Area (CSA) during the baseline surveys. There is therefore considered to be no connectivity between the CSA and the SPA for these species and they are not considered further in this HRA.

Qualifying species oystercatcher, pink-footed goose, shelduck, knot, and sandwich tern and other qualifying assemblage species mallard, scaup, goldeneye and curlew were all recorded infrequently and in low numbers. There is therefore considered to be no meaningful connectivity between the CSA and the SPA for these species and they

are not considered further in this HRA.

The remaining seven SPA qualifying/assemblage species were recorded more frequently during the survey period: red-throated diver, cormorant, eider, long-tailed duck, common scoter, velvet scoter and red-breasted merganser. It is considered likely that there is connectivity between the CSA and the SPA for these species and it was considered that there is therefore potential for likely significant

effects as a result of the following potential impacts of the Development during construction/decommissioning, and operation.

1. Disturbance/displacement and indirect habitat loss

A Pollution Prevention Plan will be in place to protect birds from pollution during construction, operation and decommissioning.

No additional mitigation measures are proposed as a result of the EIA.

A Likely Significant Effect on non-breeding red-throated diver is predicted with temporary disturbance/displacement during the construction and decommissioning stage.

A Likely Significant Effect on non-breeding red-throated diver, long-tailed duck, common scoter and velvet scoter is predicted due to disturbance/ displacement during the operational stage.

No Likely Significant

Effects are predicted for the remaining Firth of Forth SPA features as a result of disturbance/ displacement during construction, decommissioning and operation.

No Likely Significant Effects are predicted for the Firth of Forth SPA as a result of barrier effect, collision risk, or indirect effect during construction, decommissioning and operation.



Page 1-5

Site Name and Distance




Shelduck: 4,509 birds, 2 % of North-western Europe population (5-year peak mean 1993/94–1997/98) Knot: 9,258 birds, 3 % of North-eastern Canada/Greenland/Iceland/North-western Europe population (5-year peak mean 1991/92–1995/96) Redshank: 4,341 birds, 3 % of Eastern Atlantic – wintering population (5-year peak mean 1993/94–1997/98) Turnstone: 860 individuals, 1 % of Western Palearctic wintering population (5-year peak mean 1993/94–1997/98) Assemblage qualification: An internationally important assemblage of birds. The area qualifies under Article 4.2 of the Directive (2009/147/EC) by regularly supporting at least 20,000 waterfowl: Over winter, the area regularly supports 95,000 individual waterfowl (5-year peak mean 01/08/2000) including: red-throated diver, great crested grebe, Slavonian grebe, cormorant, pink-footed goose, shelduck, wigeon, mallard, scaup, eider, long-tailed duck, common scoter, velvet scoter, goldeneye, red-breasted merganser, oystercatcher, ringed plover, golden plover, grey plover, lapwing, knot, dunlin, bar-tailed godwit, curlew, redshank and turnstone.

to foraging or roosting birds; 2. Barrier effect as a result of turbines

blocking flight paths of foraging and migrating birds;

3. Collision leading to direct mortality; and

4. Indirect effects, e.g. as a result of changes in the abundance/distribution of their fish prey.

The residual effect to the SPA, after mitigation of the Development, as a result of collision risk, barrier effect and indirect effects was considered to be negligible during construction and decommissioning for all SPA features. For disturbance/ displacement during construction and decommissioning, effects were considered as follows:

Low (temporary): eider, red-breasted merganser, cormorant (breeding season);

Medium (temporary): long-tailed duck, common scoter, velvet scoter and cormorant (non-breeding season);

High (temporary): red-throated diver.

The residual effect to the SPAs, after mitigation of the Development, as a result of collision risk, barrier effect and indirect effects was considered to be negligible during operation for all SPA species. For disturbance/displacement during operation

effects were considered as follows:

Low (long term): red-breasted merganser, cormorant (breeding season);

Medium (long term): eider, and cormorant (non-breeding season);



Page 1-6





High (long term): long-tailed duck,common scoter, velvet scoter, and red-throated diver.

Forth Islands SPA

17 km to south-east

“Forth Islands SPA consists of a series of islands supporting the main seabird colonies in the Firth of Forth. The islands of Inchmickery, Isle of May, Fidra, The Lamb, Craigleith and Bass Rock were classified on 25 April 1990. The extension to the site, classified on the 13th February 2004 consists of the island of Long Craig, which supports the largest colony of roseate tern in Scotland. It is the most northerly of only six regular British colonies”

This site qualifies under Article 4.1 of the Directive (2009/147/EC) by supporting populations of European importance of the following species listed on Annex I of the Directive:

Breeding Season:

Arctic tern: 540 pairs, 1.2 % of GB population (5-year mean 1992–1996)

Roseate tern: 8 pairs, 13 % of GB population (5-year mean 1997–2001)

Common tern: 334 pairs, 3 % of GB population (5-year mean 1997–2001)

Sandwich tern: 440 pairs, 3 % of GB population (SCRC 1985–1988)

This site also qualifies under Article 4.2 of the Directive (2009/147/EC) by supporting populations of European importance of the following migratory species:

Breeding Season:

Gannet: 21,600 pairs, 8.2 % of world population (SCRC 1985–1988)

Shag: 2,400 pairs, 1.9 % of northern Europe population (SCRC 1985–1988)

Lesser black-backed gull: 1,500 pairs, 1.2 % of graellsii subspecies world breeding population (SCRC 1985–1988)

SPA qualifying and assemblage species Arctic tern, roseate tern and common tern were not recorded during the baseline surveys. There is therefore considered to be no connectivity between the CSA and the SPA for these species and they are not

considered further within this HRA.

SPA qualifying species sandwich tern was recorded infrequently. There is therefore considered to be no meaningful connectivity between the CSA and the SPA for this species and it is not considered further within this HRA.

Qualifying species gannet, shag, lesser black-backed gull and puffin, and other assemblage species razorbill, fulmar, herring gull, cormorant, kittiwake and guillemot were all recorded frequently during the baseline surveys. It is considered likely that there is connectivity between the CSA and the SPA for these species and it was considered that there is therefore potential for likely significant effects as a result of the following potential impacts of the Development during construction/decommissioning, and operation.

1. Disturbance/displacement and indirect habitat lossto foraging or roosting birds;

2. Barrier effect as a result of turbinesblocking flight paths of foraging andmigrating birds;

3. Collision leading to direct mortality;

A Pollution Prevention Plan will be in place to protect birds from pollution during construction, operation and decommissioning.

No additional mitigation measures are proposed as a result of the Environmental Impact Assessment carried out.

No Likely Significant Effects are predicted for the Forth Islands SPA as a result of disturbance/ displacement, barrier effect, collision risk, or

indirect effect during construction, decommissioning and operation.



Page 1-7





Puffin: 14,000 pairs, 1.5 % of grabae subspecies world population (SCRC 1985–1988) Assemblage qualification: Assemblage qualification: An internationally important assemblage of birds. The area qualifies under Article 4.2 of the Directive (2009/147/EC) by regularly supporting at least 20,000 waterfowl: During the breeding season, the area regularly supports 90,000 seabirds (SCRC 1985-1988) including: razorbill, puffin, fulmar, herring gull, lesser black-backed gull, gannet, shag, cormorant, kittiwake, roseate tern, common tern, Arctic tern, sandwich tern and guillemot.

and 4. Indirect effects, e.g. as a result of

changes in the abundance/distribution of their fish prey.

The residual effect to the SPA, after mitigation of the Development, as a result of collision risk, barrier effect and indirect effects was considered to be negligible

during construction and decommissioning for all SPA features. For disturbance/ displacement during construction and decommissioning, effects were considered as follows:

Negligible (temporary): fulmar, gannet, kittiwake, and puffin;

Low (temporary): cormorant (breeding season), shag, herring gull, lesser black-backed gull, guillemot, and razorbill;

Medium (temporary): cormorant (non-breeding season).

The residual effect to the SPAs, after mitigation of the Development, as a result of collision risk, barrier effect and indirect effects was considered to be negligible during operation for all SPA species. For disturbance/displacement during operation, effects were considered as follows: Negligible (long term): fulmar, gannet,

kittiwake, and puffin; Low (long term): cormorant (breeding

season), shag, herring gull, lesser black-backed gull, guillemot, and razorbill;

Medium (long term): cormorant (non-breeding season).

Outer Firth of Forth Currently a draft SPA included in this HRA at request dSPA qualifying and assemblage species A Pollution Prevention Plan A Likely Significant



Page 1-8





and Tay Bay Complex8 dSPA

Development site is within this Draft SPA (dSPA)

“A large marine area covering 312,982.11 ha”

of SNH. The species listed for dSPAs do not always occur in important numbers throughout the dSPA and throughout the year. Rather, some species have distinct areas of elevated densities or foraging effort within the overall boundary and most exhibit strong seasonal variations in abundance (though this information is not provided within the Release Pack).

Qualifying bird species in the dSPA include:

Annex 1 species (presumably meeting Article 4.1 criteria): red-throated diver, Slavonian grebe, little gull, common tern and Arctic tern.

Migratory species (presumably meeting Article 4.2 criteria): eider, long-tailed duck, common scoter, velvet scoter, goldeneye, red-breasted merganser, gannet, Manx shearwater, shag, kittiwake, guillemot, razorbill, puffin, black-headed gull, common gull, herring gull.

Slavonian grebe, little gull, common tern and Arctic tern were not recorded during the baseline surveys. There is therefore considered to be no connectivity between the CSA and the dSPA for these species and they are not considered further within this HRA.

The dSPA qualifying species goldeneye,

Manx shearwater, black-headed gull and common gull were all recorded infrequently and in low numbers during the baseline surveys. There is therefore considered to be no meaningful connectivity between the CSA and the Outer Firth of Forth and Tay Bay Complex dSPA for the above four species and they are not considered further within this HRA.

The remaining 13 dSPA qualifying species were recorded more frequently during the survey period: red-throated diver, eider,

long-tailed duck, common scoter, velvet scoter, red-breasted merganser, gannet, shag, kittiwake, guillemot, razorbill, puffin and herring gull. It is considered likely that there is connectivity between the CSA and the dSPA for these species and it was considered that there is therefore potential for likely significant effects as a result of the following potential impacts of the Development during construction/decommissioning, and

operation.

1. Disturbance/displacement and indirect habitat lossto foraging or roosting birds;

will be in place to protect birds from pollution during construction, operation and decommissioning.


Effect on non-breeding red-throated diver is predicted with temporary disturbance/displacement during the construction and decommissioning stage.

A Likely Significant Effect on non-breeding red-throated diver, long-tailed duck, common scoter and velvet scoter is predicted due to disturbance/ displacement during the operational stage.

No Likely Significant Effects are predicted for the remaining Outer Firth of Forth and Tay Bay Complex dSPA features as a result of disturbance/ displacement during construction, decommissioning and operation.

No Likely Significant Effects are predicted for the Outer Firth of Forth and Tay Bay Complex dSPA

as a result of barrier effect, collision risk, or indirect effect during construction, decommissioning and

8 Release pack for Marine SPAs http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/A1350044.pdf



Page 1-9





2. Barrier effect as a result of turbinesblocking flight paths of foraging andmigrating birds;

3. Collision leading to direct mortality;and

4. Indirect effects, e.g. as a result ofchanges in the abundance/distributionof their fish prey.

The residual effect to the SPA, after mitigation of the Development, as a result of collision risk, barrier effect and indirect effects was considered to be negligible during construction and decommissioning for all SPA features. For disturbance/ displacement during construction and decommissioning effects were considered as follows:

Negligible (temporary): gannet,kittiwake, and puffin;

Low (temporary): eider, red-breasted

merganser, shag, herring gull, guillemot,and razorbill;

Medium (temporary): long-tailed duck,common scoter, velvet scoter andcormorant (non-breeding season);

High (temporary): red-throated diver.

The residual effect to the SPAs, after mitigation of the Development, as a result of collision risk, barrier effect and indirect effects was considered to be negligible during operation for all SPA species. For disturbance/displacement during operation effects were considered as follows:

Negligible (long term): gannet, kittiwake,and puffin;

Low (long term): red-breastedmerganser, shag, herring gull, guillemot,

operation.



Page 1-10





and razorbill; Medium (long term): eider; High (long term): long-tailed duck,

common scoter, velvet scoter, and red-throated diver.

Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary SAC

15,412.53 ha

Annex II species that are a primary reason for selection of this site: Harbour seal

Annex II species present as a qualifying feature, but not a primary reason for site selection: N/A

The potential effects from the Development on harbour seal will arise from:

Direct habitat loss during construction;

Disturbance during construction,operation and decommissioning; and

Indirect changes to prey availability.

The residual effect to the harbour seal, after mitigation of the Development, as a result of the above effects, was considered to be negligible.

The following measures have been included to reduce potential impacts to marine mammals:

Drilled piles rather thandriven piles if pilingrequired, to reduceunderwater noise levels;

Presence of a MarineMammal Observer duringpre-construction andgeophysical surveys.

No additional mitigation measures are proposed as a result of the EIA.

No Likely Significant Effects are predicted for the Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary SAC during construction, decommissioning and operation.

Isle of May SAC

356.75 ha

Annex II species that are a primary reason for selection of this site: Grey seal

Annex II species present as a qualifying feature, but not a primary reason for site selection: N/A

The potential effects from the Development on grey seal will arise from:

Direct habitat loss during construction; Disturbance during construction,

operation and decommissioning; and Indirect changes to prey availability.

The residual effect to the marine mammals, after mitigation of the Development, as a result of the above effects, was considered to be negligible.


Drilled piles rather thandriven piles if pilingrequired, to reduceunderwater noise levels;

Presence of a MarineMammal Observer duringpre-construction andgeophysical surveys.


No Likely Significant Effects are predicted for the Isle of May SAC during construction, decommissioning and operation.



Page 1-11





Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast SAC 65,045.5 ha

Annex II species that are a primary reason for selection of this site: Grey seal Annex II species present as a qualifying feature, but not a primary reason for site selection: N/A

The potential effects from the Development on grey seal will arise from:

Direct habitat loss during construction; Disturbance during construction,

operation and decommissioning; and Indirect changes to prey availability.

The residual effect to the grey seal, after mitigation of the Development, as a result of

the above effects, was considered to be negligible.


Drilled piles rather than driven piles if piling required, to reduce underwater noise levels;

Presence of a Marine Mammal Observer during pre-construction and geophysical surveys.


No Likely Significant Effects are predicted for the Berwickshire and North Northumberland SAC during construction, decommissioning and operation.

River Teith SAC 1,312.4 ha 143.76 km in length

Annex II species that are a primary reason for selection of this site: Sea lamprey

Brook lamprey River lamprey Annex II species present as a qualifying feature, but not a primary reason for site selection: Atlantic salmon

Construction/Decommissioning Effects Underwater noise and vibration; Increased suspended sediment

concentrations; Increased deposition of sediment

plumes; Seabed habitat disturbance; Unplanned accidental spill and release of

environmentally harmful substances; and Re-release of sediment bound

contaminants. Operational Effects Operational noise;

Net loss of seabed habitat; Introduction of new habitat; Electromagnetic field and heat

emissions; Changes in hydrodynamic regimes; and Unplanned accidental spill and release of

environmentally harmful substances.

The following measures have been included to reduce potential impacts:

Drilled piles rather than driven piles if piling required, to reduce underwater noise levels;

Buried, or covered electricity cables to ensure separation between cables and fish and shellfish receptors to reduce electromagnetic fields;

If gravity beds are used, spoil will either be re-used as ballast or removed and disposed off-site to reduce the amount of sediment to

No Likely Significant Effects are predicted for the River Teith SAC during

construction, decommissioning and operation.



Page 1-12





Each of the above effects was assessed in terms of their likely effect on fish and shellfish ecology as a result of the Development. The residual effect to the SAC, after mitigation of the Development during construction, operation and decommissioning, was considered to be negligible for all SAC features.

cause effects relating to increased suspended sediment/smothering;

A pollution/spillprevention plan will beoperated and a MarinePollution ContingencyPlan (MPCP) will be inplace.


Forthwind Offshore Turbines Technical Appendix

Environmental Statement

Page 1-13

1.7 Likely Significant Effects Summary

The Development has the potential to result in Likely Significant Effects on four species associated with the Firth of Forth SPA and the Outer Firth of Forth and Tay Bay Complex dSPA

during the non-breeding season as a result of predicted disturbance/displacement of foraging/roosting birds:

Red-throated diver (construction/decommissioning and operation);

Long-tailed duck (operation); Common scoter (operation);

Velvet scoter (operation).

There are no Likely Significant Effects predicted on the Forth Islands SPA, Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary SAC, Isle of May SAC, Berwickshire and North Northumberland SAC, and River Teith SAC as a result of the Development. These sites are therefore not considered further.

In order to comply with the Directives the Habitat Regulations require competent authorities to carry out Appropriate Assessments (AA) in certain circumstances where a project (or plan) affects a Natura 2000 (European) site, its qualifying features, or its Conservation Objectives.

FUGRO EMU LIMITED

Fugro EMU Limited Trafalgar Wharf (Unit 16), Hamilton Road, Portchester, Portsmouth, Hampshire, PO6 4PX, United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0)2392 205 500, Fax: +44 (0)2392 205 555, http://www.fugroemu.com

Prepared for: 2-B Energy Limited

Scott Harper

Quayside House

Dock Road

Methil Dock

Methil

KY8 3SR

Client Reference Number:

2 Final Luke Betteridge

Evelina Capasso

Peter Barfield Richard Walters 24th

April 2015

1 Draft Luke Betteridge

Evelina Capasso

Peter Barfield Richard Walters 2nd

March 2015

Rev. Description Prepared Checked Approved Date

METHIL OFFSHORE WIND

DEMONSTRATOR BENTHIC SUB-TIDAL

ECOLOGY SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No: 15/J/3/03/2590/1782

METHIL OFFSHORE WIND DEMONSTRATOR BENTHIC SUB-TIDAL ECOLOGY

SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page i

AMENDMENTS PAGE

This table contains a record of amendments.

Issue

Number

Amendment

Number Section/Paragraph Date

Authoriser’s

Signature


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page ii

SIGN OFF PAGE

Document Release and Authorisation Record

Fugro EMU Document No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782

Issue Number 2

Hard Copy -

Issued To Scott Harper

Date Issued 24 April 2015

This Version

Authorised By Name Date Signature

Author(s)

Luke Betteridge 02/03/15

Evelina Capasso 16/02/15

Technical Checker Peter Barfield 02/03/15

QA Proof Reader Heather Shepherd 02/03/15

Project Manager Tom Morris 02/03/15

Group Manager/Director Richard Walters 24/04/15

Contact Details

Fugro EMU Limited

Trafalgar Wharf (Unit 16)

Hamilton Road

Portchester

Portsmouth

Hampshire

PO6 4PX

United Kingdom

Tel: +44 (0)2392 205 500

Fax: +44 (0)2392 205 555

www.fugroemu.com


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page iii

CONTENTS

Page

1. INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Aims and Objectives 1

2. METHODS 2

2.1 Survey design 2

2.2 Sampling and site positioning 2

2.2.1 Seabed Drop Down Video (DDV) 2

2.2.2 Grab Sampling 3

2.2.3 Sediment Chemistry Sampling 3

2.2.4 Epibenthic Beam Trawling 4

2.3 Video Data Analysis 6

2.3.1 Assessment of Annex I Reef 6

2.4 Grab Data Analysis 8

2.4.1 Particle size distribution (PSD) analysis 8

2.4.2 Macrobenthic analysis 8

2.4.3 Statistical analysis of the data 9

2.4.4 Biotope classification 10

2.4.5 Sediment Chemistry 10

2.4.6 Total Organic Content 11

3. RESULTS 12

3.1 Overview 12

3.2 Seabed video data 12

3.2.1 Assessment of Annex I Reef 15

3.3 Sediment Grab Sample Data 17

3.4 Macrofaunal grab sample data 24

3.4.1 Faunal abundance 24

3.4.2 Biomass 29

3.4.3 Diversity Index 29

3.4.4 Multivariate Analysis 32

3.5 Biotopes 38

3.6 Epibenthic Trawl 43

3.7 Sediment Chemistry 46

4. DISCUSSION 47

4.1 Subtidal benthic ecology 47

4.1.1 Features on conservation importance 49

4.2 Sediment Chemistry 50

4.2.1 PAH 50

4.2.2 Metals 50

4.2.3 Organotins 51

4.2.4 PCBs 51


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page iv

4.2.5 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons 51

5. REFERENCES 52

6. APPENDICES 56

TABLES

Table 1.1: Benthic Sub-tidal Ecology Sampling Techniques 1

Table 2.1: Parameters for Recording the Length of Fish and Shellfish. 4

Table 2.2: Marine Nature Conservation Review (MNCR) SACFOR* Abundance Scale 6

Table 2.3: The Main Characterising Features of a Stony Reef (from Irving 2009) 7

Table 3.1: Total Sites Successfully Sampled 12

Table 3.2: Most Frequent Species Recorded from DDV Survey 12

Table 3.3: Biotopes Assigned at Each Site Following Video Data Analysis 14

Table 3.4: Summary of the Measure of Reefiness of Rocky Substrates Encountered within the Vicinity of the

Methil Benthic Survey Area 16

Table 3.5: The Proportions of Folk Sediment Classification from the Sediment Samples for the Methil Benthic

Survey Area 18

Table 3.6: Top 10 Most Abundant and Most Frequently Recorded Species in the Grab Samples 26

Table 3.7: Diversity Indexes 30

Table 3.8: Species Composition of Each SIMPER Group 34

Table 3.9: Biotopes Described for the Survey Area 38

Table 3.10: Total Abundance and Frequency of the Top Ten Most Abundant Enumerated Taxa, and Frequency

of the Non–enumerated Taxa Recorded from the 2 m Beam Trawl Survey 45

Table 3.11: Total Abundance and Frequency of the Top Ten Fish Taxa Recorded from the 2 m Beam Trawl

Survey 45

Table 3.12: Integrated Assessment Classes Linking TBT Effects in Gastropod Species with Concentrations of

TBT In Water and Sediment 46

Table 4.1: Summary Table 48

FIGURES

Figure 2.1 Actual sample positional data. 5

Figure 3.1 Sediment components with folk classifications 19

Figure 3.2 Dendrogram showing the statistically significant clusters for the sediment in the survey area

(a) and the distribution of the Folk 1954 classification within the clusters (b). 21

Figure 3.3 Sorting categories overlaid on the Folk 1954 classification, indicating the variability of the

sediment composition in the survey area. 22

Figure 3.4 Principal components analysis ordination of percentage fractional weight particle size

distribution data collected from grab samples and their distribution across the survey sites 23

Figure 3.5 Summary of the percentage number of taxa (a) and individuals (b) recorded in the grab

samples and presented per major groups 25

Figure 3.6 Distribution of number of individuals across the survey area 27

Figure 3.7 Distribution of number of taxa across the survey area 28

Figure 3.8 Contribution to biomass by all major groups (AFDW). Epifauna is included in ‘Other’ taxa 29


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page v

Figure 3.9 Shannon -Weiner diversity index across the survey area 31

Figure 3.10 Cluster analysis dendrogram and Multidimensional Scaling plot of the multivariate statistical

analysis of the macrofaunal grab data 33

Figure 3.11 Faunal primer groupings 36

Figure 3.12 MDS plots with species highlighted as driving SIMPER group differences 37

Figure 3.13 Biotopes from grab faunal assemblages 41

Figure 3.14 Predicted habitat distribution based on geophysical and grab/trawl data 42

Figure 3.15 Percentage contributions of major taxonomic groups to the total number of taxa recorded (a)

to the total abundance for enumerated only (b) 44


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 1

1. INTRODUCTION

Fugro EMU Limited (Fugro EMU) were commissioned by 2-B Energy to undertake a sub-tidal

ecological survey in the Firth of Forth. The work is in support for the 2-B Energy Offshore Wind

Turbine Demonstrator project at Methil, Fife. The purpose of this survey was to acquire sufficient data

to characterise the seabed habitats and associated communities within and in the vicinity of the

proposed development area to inform the EIA.

1.1 Aims and Objectives

The sub-tidal benthic ecology survey was conducted following Cefas Guidelines (Cefas, 2004) and

based on updated sampling methods described in Ware and Kenny (2011) as well as JNCC

Procedural Guidance No. 3.9 (Davies et al., 2001). Following receipt of advice from Marine Scotland,

the benthic subtidal survey included the techniques and proposed number of samples listed in Table

1.1:

Table 1.1: Benthic Sub-tidal Ecology Sampling Techniques

Sampling Technique No. of Samples Purpose

Drop down seabed video and photographic stills

at each benthic sub-tidal sample station.

19 Assessment of benthic habitat and

epibenthic communities.

Stainless steel grab sample at each soft

sediment benthic sub-tidal sample station.

19 Quantitative sampling of sediment fauna

and particle size distribution (PSD).

Stainless steel grab sampling at selected soft

sediment benthic sub-tidal sample stations.

3 Seabed sediment chemical analyses.

Epibenthic scientific beam trawling at selected

benthic sub-tidal sample stations

5 Assessment of mobile epibenthic

assemblages.


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 2

2. METHODS

2.1 Survey design

19 sites were selected within and around the site boundary in the Firth of Forth with Drop down videos

and Faunal grab samples taken at each. Three of the sites within the site boundaries were also

selected for sediment chemistry samples using a stainless steel grab. Five trawl sites were selected

across the survey array for 2 m scientific beam trawling.

2.2 Sampling and site positioning

All survey work was carried out between the 9th October and 13th October 2014 on board the MV

Conserver. The actual sample locations are presented in Figure 2.1.

Sample positioning was achieved using EMU’s Hemisphere Crescent V110 DGPS which has a stated

horizontal accuracy of <0.6 m (95% confidence). Navigation and position recording was achieved

using Trimble’s HYDROPro software version 2.4.

A list of target site positions was used to guide the vessel to the planned sampling locations. At each

site, the actual position of each sampling event was recorded at the moment the winch wire went

slack, indicating that the sampling device reached the seabed.

2.2.1 Seabed Drop Down Video (DDV)

Drop down video footage was successfully collected at all 19 sites. Five of the sites were of extended

length due to trawl locations present at the same site; these were site numbers 4, 5, 10, 16 and 18. At

these sites the video was extended to cover the full length of the proposed trawl transects.

At site 3 the video was extended due to the substrate observed being deemed to be sufficiently

obstructive that the grab sample was not attempted. The proposed site had contained both grab

samples for benthic fauna and PSD as well as a sediment chemistry sample.

The seabed at each benthic sub-tidal sample station was initially surveyed using a Kongsberg 208

video and stills camera mounted on a drop down frame. Seabed habitat types and epibenthic

communities were recorded for the duration of the seabed video deployment together with any

additional observations of seabed features, such as burrows or tubes. The duration of the seabed

video was a minimum of five minutes, although this was extended up to 15 minutes in areas of high

local substrate complexity or where the substrate was observed to be sufficiently obstructive that a

grab sample was not attempted. The duration of video surveillance was also extended where any

feature of interest was encountered. In addition, a minimum of five photographic stills was taken per

deployment.

All video footage was overlaid with dGPS positions and all stills images geo-referenced. Field

recordings include the time and date of each deployment and the different seabed habitats present

(sediment descriptions), characterising epibenthic species and seabed features at each benthic sub-

tidal sample location.


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 3

The drop down video logs are presented in Appendix B. The video analysis descriptions and

associated images are presented in Appendix F.

2.2.2 Grab Sampling

Grab samples were attempted at 18 of the 19 sites with site 3 not attempted due to the obstructive

sediment observed. Grab samples were successfully collected at 17 sites using a 0.1m2 mini Hamon

grab for determination of particle size distribution and invertebrate faunal content. Up to three attempts

were made to retrieve an acceptable sample. A minimum grab sample size of 5 litres volume was

deemed acceptable with no further attempts required.

At site 2 only indicative benthic fauna and no PSD samples were collected due to repeated small

sample sizes significantly below the acceptable amount.

Upon recovery of each sample, the sediment within the grab bucket was viewed to assess whether the

sample was acceptable (i.e., has not been subject to partial washout during retrieval and is of

sufficient volume relating to the depth of bite). Smaller samples were accepted at sites 6 and 12 where

three attempts were made resulting in three low volume samples. Low volume samples were not

pooled, therefore the benthic fauna and PSD samples were taken from separate attempts at these two

sites.

On receipt of an acceptable sample, the sample was released into a suitable container. An

assessment of the sample volume (in litres) was then made and a visual description recorded

including basic sediment description, quantity of shell, conspicuous fauna and/or flora and evidence of

any anoxia. A photograph of the sediment was taken prior to sample processing which is displayed in

Appendix A.

A sub-sample for PSD analysis was then taken. The volume of the sub-sample was approximately

500 ml, although the exact volume depended on the nature of the sediment. The PSD sub-sample

was then transferred into a pre-labelled heavy duty container and sealed to ensure no loss of fine

material.

The remaining sample was sieved on a 1 mm aperture mesh sieve to remove the finer sediment

fractions. The contents of the sieve were transferred into a pre-labelled bucket with internal label and

fixed on-site using 4% buffered saline formaldehyde solution.

The grab sampling logs are presented in Appendix C.

2.2.3 Sediment Chemistry Sampling

Sediment chemistry samples were attempted at two of the three sites with site 3 not attempted due to

the obstructive sediment. A sediment chemistry sample was successfully collected at site 5, within the

proposed development area, using a stainless steel Day grab. The Day grab was cleaned with

Acetone between stations to prevent cross contamination. At site 12 a successful sample was not

taken due to the grab being prevented from closing fully due to obstructive substrate being trapped in

the jaws of the grab on all attempts.


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 4

Sediment was collected from the top five centimetres of the sample, with a cleaned metal scoop used

for hydrocarbon samples and a plastic scoop for metals. The sample obtained was placed in

appropriate pre-labelled container then frozen and stored at the Edinburgh office.

The sediment chemistry sampling log is presented in Appendix D.

2.2.4 Epibenthic Beam Trawling

Epibenthic beam trawling was attempted at three of the five sites due to obstructive substrate being

observed at T3 and T5. T2 was also shortened to prevent the trawl from being deployed across an

area of obstructive substrate. At all of the sites attempted a successful sample was recovered.

The Epibenthic beam trawling was carried out using an industry standard (Lowestoft design) 2 m

scientific beam trawl fitted with a knotless cod end liner (5 mm mesh). The trawl was fitted with a chain

mesh to prevent cobbles and boulders entering the trawl. A dispensation was given by Marine

Scotland for the use of a 5 mm mesh cod end liner. The length of each trawl tow was approximately

500 m and collected at a speed of 1-2 knots, except for Trawl 2 which was reduced to approximately

250 m. Start and end dGPS positions of each trawl were recorded.

At the end of each trawl, the catch was brought on board the vessel and emptied into a trawl

processing tray. Records of the catch, including species identities and abundance as well as

photographs were taken. The trawl photographs are displayed in Appendix A. This includes notes of

any substrate material and conspicuous sessile epifauna. The catch was processed on-site including

the identification and enumeration of fish, prawns and crabs, prior to its return to the sea. However,

where the field identification was uncertain, a representative of that species was returned to the

laboratory for confirmation. Any sub-sampling of large catches was recorded.

The length of fish was measured to the nearest centimetre (rounded down), with shellfish measured to

the nearest millimetre according to the parameters outlined in Table 2.1. The sex, carapace length and

shell softness of macro-crustaceans was also recorded where possible, including the presence of any

berried females. The sex of elasmobranch species was recorded where possible.

Table 2.1: Parameters for Recording the Length of Fish and Shellfish.

Taxon Measurement

Fish Total length (TL)

Rajids Disk width and TL

Lobster, spider crab, edible crab Carapace length

Squid, cuttlefish Mantle length

Bivalves (scallop) Shell width

Gastropod (whelk) Shell length

The epibenthic beam trawling logs are presented in Appendix E.


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 5

Figure 2.1: Actual sample positional data


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 6

2.3 Video Data Analysis

Seabed video data collected in the field were reviewed upon return to Fugro EMU’s office to identify

and describe the characterising habitat types and associated epifauna for each transect.

Substrate types for each video station were recorded as % cover of the seabed whilst the species

abundance was calculated using the industry standard SACFOR abundance scale (Hiscock, 1996)

which uses the average species size and abundance to classify the population (Table 2.2). In addition,

the digital still images were used to assist identification of species and improve habitat descriptions.

Biotopes were classified based on the Marine Biotope Classification for Britain and Ireland Version

04.05 (Connor et al., 2004) and was aided by the use of the biotope decision support tool BioScribe

(Hooper et al., 2011).

Table 2.2: Marine Nature Conservation Review (MNCR) SACFOR* Abundance Scale

Growth Form Size of Individuals / Colonies

Density %cover

Crust

/Meadow

Massive

/Turf <1 cm 1-3 cm 3-15 cm >15 cm

>80% S S >1/0.001 m2

40-79% A S A S 1-9/0.001 m2

20-39% C A C A S 1-9/0.01 m2

10-19% F C F C A S 1-9/0.1 m2

5-9% O F O F C A 1-9/1 m2

1-5% or

density R O R O F C 1-9/10 m

2

<1% density R R R O F 1-9/100 m2

R O 1-9/1000 m2

R <1/1000 m2

*Key: S=Superabundant, A=Abundant, C=Common, F=Frequent, O=Occasional, R=Rare, P=present

(used when the abundance of an organism could not be estimated accurately)

2.3.1 Assessment of Annex I Reef

Where rocky and stony substrates were encountered they were compared with the existing criteria for

defining geogenic reef for the purposes of Annex I of the EC Habitats Directive.

Clarification of geogenic reef as ‘stony reef’ under the Habitats Directive was attempted during an

inter-agency workshop and subsequent discussions in 2008 (Irving, 2009). Table 2.3 presents several

key parameters of ‘reefiness’ that were proposed to assess the main characterising features of a stony

reef. Using these criteria, a measure of the resemblance of the stony and rocky seabed habitats

observed at Methil with Annex I geogenic reef criteria has been attempted.


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 7

Table 2.3: The Main Characterising Features of a Stony Reef (from Irving 2009)

Measure of ‘reefiness’ NOT a REEF LOW MEDIUM HIGH

Composition Diameter of cobbles

/ boulders being greater than

64 mm.

Percentage cover relates to a

minimum area of 25 m2.

This ‘composition’ characteristic

also includes ‘patchiness’.

<10%

10-40%

Matrix

supported

40-95% >95%

Clast supported

Elevation

Minimum height (64 mm) relates

to minimum size of constituent

cobbles.

This characteristic could also

include ‘distinctness’ from the

surrounding seabed.

Note that two units (mm and m)

are used here.

Flat seabed <64 mm 64 mm-5 m >5 m

Extent <25 m2 >25 m

2

Biota

Dominated by

infaunal

species

>80% of

species present

composed of

epifaunal

species


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 8

2.4 Grab Data Analysis

2.4.1 Particle size distribution (PSD) analysis

PSD analysis was undertaken at Fugro EMU’s sediment laboratory using in house methods based on

BS1377: Parts 1 3: 1990 (dry sieving), and BS 13320:2009 (laser diffraction). The latter method was

used when the fine fraction of sediment (<63 μm) was greater than 5% of the total sample by weight.

Representative sub-samples of each sediment sample were oven dried to constant weight at 105 ±

5°C before routinely wet sieving to remove silt and clay-sized particles of <63 μm (unless there was no

sample cohesion after drying, where dry sieve analysis only is undertaken). The remaining coarser

material was again oven dried to constant weight at 105 ± 5°C followed by dry sieving through a series

of mesh apertures corresponding to units as described by the Wentworth scale. The weight of the

sediment fraction retained on each mesh was subsequently measured and recorded and merged with

the laser diffraction data where appropriate. Sediments were then classified according to the Folk

sediment classification system (Folk, 1954) (Appendix I).

2.4.2 Macrobenthic analysis

Grab and beam trawl samples were returned to Fugro EMU’s benthic laboratory for analysis. Fugro

EMU’s benthic lab are long time participants in the National Marine Biological Analytical Quality

Control (NMBAQC) scheme which provides a source of external Quality Assurance (QA) for

laboratories engaged in the production of marine biological data.

Samples were re-sieved over a 1 mm mesh to remove all remaining fine sediment and fixative. Fauna

were sorted from the sediment by elutriation and subsequent examination under a stereomicroscope.

Macro-invertebrates were identified to the lowest practical level (species level, when possible) and

enumerated. Any colonial, encrusting epifaunal species were recorded as present (P). A reference

collection was prepared with one individual of each species identified retained. Nomenclature used is

consistent with the World Register of Marine Species (WoRMS, 2015).

Fugro EMU undertook quality control (QC) checks on a representative number of whole samples, as

well as the entire reference collection in compliance with internal analytical QC criteria.

Faunal biomass analysis was based on a wet-blot method with estimates of ash-free dry weight

(AFDW) based on conversion factors provided by Eleftheriou and Basford (1989). Mollusc biomass

included the weight of the flesh plus shell. The retained infauna was then separated into the following

phyla and weighed to 0.0001 g:

Polychaeta;

Crustacea;

Echinodermata;

Mollusca; and

Others.


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 9

Specimens caught in the 2 m beam trawls were identified and enumerated on site prior to being

returned to the sea. Specimens returned to the laboratory were identified to species levels, where

possible and enumerated and added to the field list. Sessile epifauna was recorded as P (present).

2.4.3 Statistical analysis of the data

For multivariate statistical analyses the Plymouth Marine Laboratories PRIMER v6 (Plymouth Routines

in Multivariate Ecological Research) suite of programs was used (Clarke and Warwick, 2001; Clarke

and Gorley, 2006). The recorded macro-invertebrate assemblages were also analysed using

univariate measures (Shannon-Wiener diversity index, Pielou’s evenness and Simpson’s dominance

index). Univariate analyses are used to extract features of communities which are not the function of

specific taxa, i.e. these methods are species independent and therefore assemblages with no species

in common can theoretically have equal values.

The Shannon-Wiener diversity index is a measure of biodiversity based on the number of species

present and the number of individuals of each species. If a few species dominate, the index value is

low. A greater number of species and a more even distribution of species both result in an increase in

Shannon's diversity. Pielou’s evenness is a measure of how the numbers of individuals are distributed

across the number of species found in a sample. If the numbers of individuals are equally spread

amongst the species then the community is considered to be even. The closer Pielou’s evenness is to

1, the more even the distribution of abundance is amongst the species. The nearer the value is to 0,

the less even the community is with some species having much higher abundances than others.

Simpson’s dominance index is a measure of the probability that two individuals randomly selected

from a sample will belong to the same species. Simpson's dominance index ranges from 0 (all taxa

are equally present) to 1.0 (one taxon dominates the community completely).

Faunal data for multivariate analysis were imported into PRIMER and initially subjected to a square

root (grab samples) transformation to reduce the influence of any highly abundant taxa allowing less

abundant species a greater role in driving the emergent multivariate patterns. The transformed data

were then subjected to hierarchical clustering to identify sample groupings based on the Bray-Curtis

index of similarity. This process combines samples into groups starting with the highest mutual

similarities and then gradually lowers the similarity level at which groups are formed. The process

ends with a single cluster containing all stations and is best expressed as a dendrogram diagram

showing the sequential clustering of stations against relative similarity. The SIMPROF (similarity profile

analysis) routine was used to identify statistically significant groupings.

The MDS (Multi-dimensional Scaling) procedure uses the same similarity matrix as that used by the

cluster analysis to produce an ordination of stations which is multi-dimensional. This attempts to

satisfy all of the between-samples relationships indicated by the similarity matrix. This multi-

dimensional ordination is then reduced to a two-dimensional representation that is a more accessible

and useable representation. The representativeness of this two-dimensional version, in comparison to

the multi-dimensional array, is indicated by a stress level. The closer this stress level is to zero, the

better, and more useful, is the representation.


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 10

SIMPER analysis was then applied to the data to rank species in terms of their contribution to both the

internal group similarity and “between” group dissimilarity and thereby assist the assessment of the

distinctiveness of each community identified and the identification of the characterising taxa.

Sediment data were also imported into PRIMER and subjected to hierarchical clustering using

Euclidean distance as the similarity measure. In addition, Principal Components Analysis (PCA)

ordination analysis was performed on the sediment data. PCA is a multivariate statistical technique

principally used to investigate variability in environmental data through the ordination of the results of

sediment analyses. The analysis identifies a reduced set of ‘principal components’ that account for

most of the variance of the original variables.

2.4.4 Biotope classification

Biotope code allocations were made using the current UK Marine Classification System v4.05 (Connor

et al., 2004). Biotopes were allocated to faunal composition at individual grab sites.

Biotopes were assigned with the aid of the biotope decision support tool BioScribe (Hooper et al.,

2011). The tool matches the species list from a sample to the biological communities usually recorded

with potential biotope matches. Confidence indicators and direct links to habitat descriptions from the

Marine Habitat Classification for Britain and Ireland are provided to facilitate the process. The tool was

used by an experienced ecologist practised in matching UK biotopes to field survey data with codes

applied through expert judgement informed by outputs from BioScribe and knowledge of the current

biotope classification system. All survey data were used to inform the biotope allocation process

including the PSD analysis results and the video ground truthing data.

2.4.5 Sediment Chemistry

The sediment samples for analysis included the following:

Metals – Aluminium (Al), Arsenic (As), Cadmium (Cd), Chromium (Cr), Copper (Cu), Iron (Fe),

Lithium (Li) Mercury (Hg), Nickel (Ni), Lead (Pb), Zinc (Zn);

Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) (ICES 7 and 25);

Organotins (TBT, DBT);

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) – Acenaphthene, Acenaphtylene, Anthracene,

Fluorene, Naphthalene, Phenanthrene, Benzo[a]anthracene, Benzo[b]fluoranthene,

Benzo[k]fluoranthene, Benzo[a]pyrene, Benzo[g, h, i]perylene, Dibenzo[a, h]anthracene,

Chrysene, Fluoranthene, Pyrene, Indeno (1, 2, 3cd) pyrene;

Total PAH;

Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH); and

Total organic carbon (loss of ignition).

Polychlorinated biphenyls were analysed at Fugro EMU’s UKAS accredited Sediment Laboratory in

Edinburgh. The rest of the analysis, apart from the Total organic carbon, was subcontracted to the

UKAS accredited National Laboratory Service (NLS).


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 11

NLS use Ekofisk crude oil both for the standards and calibration when analysing total petroleum

hydrocarbon.

The results of the analyses and notes on analysis methods are presented in Appendix J and are

compared against the Scottish Guidelines for Assessment of Disposal of Dredged Sediments and any

elevated concentrations highlighted.

2.4.6 Total Organic Content

The method for the Determination of the Mass Loss on Ignition (Fugro EMU MET/01) is based on

BS1377: 1990 Part 3 Clause 4.1 and describes the procedure for determining the proportion by mass

that is lost from a sediment sample by ignition at a specific temperature. The mass Loss on Ignition

(LOI) can be used as a rough estimate of the organic matter content of certain sediments, such as

sand, provided that the sediment contains little, or none, of the following: clay, chalky material, peats

and organic clays which may contain more that 10% organic matter. It must be recognised that, in

sediments where such components may be present, factors unrelated to the organic content could be

responsible for a proportion of the mass loss on ignition.

A representative sub-sample is oven dried at 50 ±5°C and weighed to constant mass. The sample is

then subjected to ignition in a muffle furnace at 440 ±250 C for 4 hours (or subject to client specific

requirements). The organic matter content is then calculated from the subsequent loss in mass.


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 12

3. RESULTS

3.1 Overview

Table 3.1 presents the total number of sites successfully sampled for each sample type.

Table 3.1: Total Sites Successfully Sampled

Sampling Technique Number of Samples

Successfully Collected

Purpose

Drop down seabed video and photographic stills

at each benthic sub-tidal sample station.

19 Assessment of benthic habitat

and epibenthic communities.

Grab sample at each soft sediment benthic sub-

tidal sample station.

17 Quantitive sampling of

sediment fauna and particle

size distribution (PSD).

Stainless steel grab sampling at selected soft

sediment benthic sub-tidal sample stations.

1 Seabed sediment chemical

analyses.

Epibenthic scientific beam trawling at selected

benthic sub-tidal sample stations

3 Assessment of mobile

epibenthic assemblages.

3.2 Seabed video data

A total of 19 sites were investigated by DDV. These included five extended transects (4, 5, 10, 16 and

18) carried out to assess the full length of a proposed trawl site and one transect (3) extended due to

the nature of the sediment obstructing grab sampling from taking place. Asterias rubens, the common

sea star, was the most frequently occurring species being observed in 18 out of 19 of the videos. This

was closely followed by Gobiidae and Liocarcinus which were observed in 17 out of 19 videos. Table

1.1 presents the species recorded at more than 50% of the sites surveyed.

Table 3.2: Most Frequent Species Recorded from DDV Survey

Conspicuous Species Common Name No. of Sites Frequency (%)

Asterias rubens Common Sea Star 18 out 19 94.7%

Gobiidae Goby 17 out 19 89.5%

Liocarcinus Swimming crab 17 out 19 89.5%

Alcyonium digitatum Dead – man’s fingers 11 out 19 57.9%

Astropecten irregularis Sand star 11 out 19 57.9%

Echinus esculentus Edible sea urchin 11 out 19 57.9%

HYDROZOA/BRYOZOA turf 10 out 19 52.6%

Paguridae Hermit crab 10 out 19 52.6%

PLEURONECTIFORMES Flat fish 10 out 19 52.6%

The highest number of conspicuous species recorded from a single transect was 21 at site 5, in the

centre of the survey array. At this site substrate was observed to be mainly coarse sediment with

boulders, interspersed with some open patches of shelly sand, although this was obscured for about

the last 100 m of the transect by the presence of an Ophiothrix bed.

The lowest number of conspicuous species recorded was eight and this occurred at two sites; Site 9,

the most offshore site in the survey array and one of the sites adjacent to this, site 14. At site 9 the

sediment was observed to consist of slightly shelly sand whilst at site 14 slightly shelly rippled sand

was recorded. The presence of visible holes and burrows at both sites indicated the presence of a

hidden, more infaunal component to the communities at these locations.


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 13

After being analysed and the observed species abundances converted into SACFOR the video data

were used to determine biotopes visible at each site.

Seapens and burrowing megafauna in circalittoral fine mud (SS.SMU.CFiMu.SpnMeg) at 6 out of 19

sites, and circalittoral mixed sediment (SS.SMx.CMx), at 6 out of 19 sites, were the two joint most

commonly occurring biotopes, observed in the survey area. The former encountered from the central

survey area and continued out to the southern offshore sites and the latter spread across the middle to

inshore and northern edge of the survey area.

Ophiothrix fragilis and/or Ophiocomina nigra brittlestar beds on sublittoral mixed sediment

(SS.SMx.CMx.OphMx), characterised by dense brittlestar beds were observed at five sites within the

survey area. The sites were aligned with the coarser substrate described for the area (more details in

the following PSD section) and were located within the proposed development site, extending out to

the most northerly point at site 18.

The Echinoderms and Crustose communities (CR.MCR.EcCr) biotope was observed at three sites

including the two most inshore ones. Due to the rocky nature of the substrate grabbing was not

attempted at one of the sites and was unsuccessful at another. Therefore these two sites, sites 2 and

3, are described by the video data only.

Details and examples of the biotopes described are presented in Table 3.3 whilst full video data

analysis results are presented in Appendix F.


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 14

Table 3.3: Biotopes Assigned at Each Site Following Video Data Analysis

Biotope Image Biotope Description Sites

Observed

SS.SMx.CMx Circalittoral mixed

sediment

5, 10, 15,

16, 18 and

19

SS.SMU.CFiMu.SpnMeg Seapens and

burrowing megafauna

in circalittoral fine

mud

1, 4, 8, 9,

13 and 14

SS.SMx.CMx.OphMx Ophiothrix fragilis

and/or Ophiocomina

nigra brittlestar beds

on sublittoral mixed

sediment

2, 5, 6, 12,

and 18

SS.SSa.CMuSa Circalittoral muddy

sand

2, 7, 11, 15

and 17

CR.MCR.EcCr Echinoderms and

crustose communities

2, 3 and 17


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 15

Biotope Image Biotope Description Sites

Observed

CR.HCR.XFa Mixed faunal turf

communities

15

SS.SMu.CSaMu.VirOphPm

ax.HAs

Virgularia mirabilis

and Ophiura spp. with

Pecten maximus,

hydroids and

ascidians on

circalittoral sandy or

shelly mud with

stones

16

SS.SSa Sublittoral sands and

muddy sands

17

3.2.1 Assessment of Annex I Reef

Table 3.4 presents the results of the measure of reefiness of the rocky substrates encountered within

the survey area. A full assessment of the attributes of these substrates in terms of resemblance to

Annex I criteria is provided in Appendix M.


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 16

Table 3.4: Summary of the Measure of Reefiness of Rocky Substrates Encountered within the

Vicinity of the Methil Benthic Survey Area

Site Seabed description Reef Representative Image Biotope

2 <25°m2

cobbles and/or

boulders/bedrock

Not a Reef

CR.MCR.EcCr

3 50%

cobbles and/or

boulders/bedrock

Medium

CR.MCR.EcCr

6 50%

cobbles and/or boulders

Medium

SS.SMx.CMx.O

phMx

15 30%

bedrock

Low

CR.HCR.XFa

17 40%

cobbles and/or

boulders/bedrock

Low

CR.MCR.EcCr

And

SS.SSa.CMuSa


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 17

As indicated in the Table above, the rocky substrate at site 2 was considered to not have a

resemblance to Annex I geogenic reef. Although this site contained some large boulders the overall

area of rocky substrate was less than the extent required to be given Low to High reef resemblance.

Site 3 and 6 had Medium geogenic reef resemblance. Site 3 consisted of a large area of boulders and

bedrock covered with encrusting and mobile epifauna interspersed with pebbles, cobbles and

occasional patches of sand, thus fulfilling the Medium reef requirements. Site 6 featured brittlestar

beds on slightly shelly sand with cobbles and boulders.

Sites 15 and 17 were given a low measure of reefiness. Site 15 was determined to have patches of

bedrock (including areas of sand/mudstone ledging) mixed with slightly shelly silty sand, resulting in a

30% composition of bedrock. Site 17 was determined to have patches of cobbles and boulders with

mud/sandstone ledging (including areas with relatively large holes bored in the surface) interspersed

with slightly pebbly gravelly sand.

Typical fauna associated with the rocky and stony habitats included encrusting and sessile species

(e.g. Corallinaceae, Spirobranchus, Alcyonium digitatum, Hydroid/Bryozoan turf species), grazers

(Echinus esculentus) and mobile fauna (e.g. Asterias rubens, Liocarcinus, Cancer pagurus). Dense

aggregations of the epifaunal brittlestar Ophiothrix fragilis were observed on cobbles and boulders at

one of the medium reef resembling sites.

The biotopes associated with the potential Annex I habitats included, either on their own or as a

mosaic with another biotope, CR.MCR.EcCr (Echinoderms and crustose

communities)SS.SMx.CMx.OphMx (Ophiothrix fragilis and/or Ophiocomina nigra brittlestar beds on

sublittoral mixed sediment) and CR.HCR.XFa (Mixed faunal turf communities).

3.3 Sediment Grab Sample Data

Results of the sediment particle size analysis of the 17 acquired grab samples, including fractional

weight and percentage data and Folk sediment classifications, are presented in Appendix I.

A total of seven different Folk Classifications have been recorded across the benthic survey area, the

relative proportions of which are presented in Table 3.5. The dominant fraction was slightly gravelly

muddy sand ((g)mS) which accounted for 29% of the results (five sites), followed by slightly gravelly

sand ((g)S) which accounted for 24% of the results (four sites).

Figure 3.1 shows the distribution of the sediment classifications and the distribution of principal

sediment components (%mud, %sand, %gravel).


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 18

Table 3.5: The Proportions of Folk Sediment Classification from the Sediment Samples for the Methil

Benthic Survey Area

Slightly gravelly muddy sand Slightly gravelly sand

Sandy gravel Gravelly sand


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 19

Figure 3.1: Sediment components with folk classifications


SURVEY DRAFT REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 20

Data were further analysed using multivariate techniques, presenting the ordinations of percent

fractional weight sediment data based on a Euclidean distance resemblance matrix. Application of the

PRIMER SIMPROF routine, (Figure 3.2a) highlighted seven statistically significant groups. The Folk

1954 classification for the sites is overlaid on the clusters in Figure 3.2b.

Group e is the largest group and encompasses 8 sites out of 17. The sites were characterised by high

percentage of the fine sand fraction. This group was dominated by samples categorised as slightly

gravelly sand ((g)S) according to the Folk 1954 classification’.

Group c includes 3 sites out of 17 and they are characterised by very fine sand. This group is

distinguished by a slightly ‘finer’ nature as captured by the Folk 1954 classification with each of the

three samples categorised as slightly gravelly muddy sand ((g)mS).

Group g includes only 2 sites out of 17 and they are characterised by a higher percentage of gravel.

This coarser component is also highlighted by the Folk 1954 classification for the two sites concerned

as being composed of gravel (G) and sandy gravel (sG) substrates.

Groups a, b, d and f are each formed by a single site. Although the sediments at these sites do not

differ greatly, in overall terms, from the sites in the other groups, the different proportions of gravel,

sand and mud vary enough such that the SIMPROF routine has not grouped them with any of the

other sites. Site 9 (group a) is the most offshore location and has a higher component of ‘fines’

(<63µm fraction); site 19 (group d) is located to the east of the survey array and has higher coarse,

medium and fine gravel fractions; site 15 (group f) is located inshore to the west of the survey array

and has higher coarse sand fraction; and finally, site 8 (group b) is located offshore to the south of the

survey array and has the highest very fine sand fraction.

The degree of variability in the sediment distribution is also indicated by the sorting coefficient (Figure

3.3). Sorting indicates the spread of the grain sizes around the average and it provides a proxy

measure of the energy of the environment (Blott and Pye 2001; Garrison, 2009). Sorting categories for

the sites varied from extremely poorly sorted (eps), with very high sorting coefficients, to moderately

well sorted (mws), with low sorting coefficients. Other sorting categories present were very poorly

sorted (vps), poorly sorted (ps) and moderately sorted (ms). Well sorted sediments can indicate a

consistent input of energy with little fluctuation; on the contrary poorly sorted sediments can indicate

the reverse, i.e. an inconsistent energy input and a consequently wide fluctuation in the sediment

matrix (Garrison, 2009).


SURVEY DRAFT REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 21

a)

b)

Figure 3.2: Dendrogram showing the statistically significant clusters for the sediment in the

survey area (a) and the distribution of the Folk 1954 classification within the clusters (b)


SURVEY DRAFT REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 22

Figure 3.3: Sorting categories overlaid on the Folk 1954 classification, indicating the variability

of the sediment composition in the survey area

Figure 3.4a below presents a PCA ordination plot for percentage fractional sediment data used to

identify the sediment fractions driving the variability of the sediment composition amongst the sites.

The principal component axis (PC1) is very strongly positively correlated with percentage fine sand

(250 µm) and accounts for 53.4% of the variation. The second principal component axis (PC2) is

strongly correlated with the percentage of very fine sand (125 µm) and accounts for a further 31.8% of

the variation. The 2-dimensional PCA can be considered a good description of the higher multi-

dimensional space with PC1 and PC2 together accounting for 85.3% of the variability. The importance

of the percentage of these fractions in structuring the multivariate patterns observed is visible from the

bubble plots in Figure 3.4b, and c.


SURVEY DRAFT REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 23

a)

b)

c)

Figure 3.4: Principal components analysis ordination of percentage fractional weight particle size distribution data collected from grab

samples and their distribution across the survey sites


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 24

3.4 Macrofaunal grab sample data

Seventeen grab samples were successfully collected for macrofaunal analysis. Raw data including

infaunal and epifaunal species abundance generated from the analysis of the faunal samples are

available in Appendix G. The data are presented with the relevant AphiaID included as a reference to

names currently accepted by the World Register of Marine Species (WoRMS) (WoRMS Editorial

Board (2015).

Biomass (as blotted wet weight) per major phyla was also recorded and the results presented in

Appendix H.

3.4.1 Faunal abundance

A total of 233 quantitative taxa (including juveniles) were recorded from the grab samples collected.

As no juveniles were listed in the top 20 most abundant species, they were included in the statistical

analysis as their recorded presence was very unlikely to skew any assessment of the pattern of site

relatedness. An additional 16 non-quantitative taxa were identified from the grab samples and

recorded as present (P). These were not included in the statistical analysis. One fish taxon

(Ammodytes sp. – sand eel) was recorded in the grab sample. It was included in the descriptive

analysis of the grab sample data, but removed for the statistical analysis of the benthic invertebrate

macrofaunal species.

The total number of individuals recorded was 4,320.

Quantitative taxa were split into the five major taxonomic groups:

Annelida, mainly including polychaetes, or bristle worms, but also including some

oligochaetes;

Mollusca;

Crustacea;

Echinodermata; and

‘Others’, which includes a range of minor phyla such as anemones, flatworms, ribbon worms,

acorn worms, horseshoe worms and sipunculids or peanut worms.

The percentage contribution by each of the major taxonomic groups in terms of number of species and

abundance is presented in Figure 3.5a and b respectively. The distribution of these across the survey

area is presented in Figure 3.6 and Figure 3.7.


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 25

a)

b)

Figure 3.5: Summary of the percentage number of taxa (a) and individuals (b) recorded in the

grab samples and presented per major groups

As expected, polychaetes are the most abundant and the most taxonomically diverse group in the

macrobenthic communities sampled in the survey area constituting 45% of the recorded species

(Figure 3.5a) and 34% of the individuals forming the benthic communities (Figure 3.5b). The group

with the second highest number of recorded taxa was molluscs (21%) followed by crustaceans (19%),

Echinodermata (8%) and Others (3%).

The group with the highest abundance was Annelida (34%). This was due to the high abundance of

Magelolona filiformis and Magelona johnstoni particularly at sites 17 and 18 both located close to the

shore to the north of the survey area and described as slightly gravelly sand. The second highest

abundant group was ‘Others’, due to the large abundance of the genus Phoronis with a total number

of 935 individuals across the survey area. These animals are commonly found in soft substrates such

Annelida 45%

Mollusca 21%

Crustacea 19%

Echinodermata 8%

Others 4%

Epifauna (quantitative)

3%

Annelida 34%

Others 25%

Mollusca 21%

Echinodermata 14%

Crustacea 5%

Epifauna (quantitative)

1%


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 26

as mud or sand. The abundance of molluscs (21%) was third highest with Kurtiella bidentata and

Tellina fabula being relatively abundant. Echinoderm abundance at 14% was determined by the high

numbers of Amphiura filiformis present at many sites across the survey area and Ophiothrix fragilis

being particularly abundant at Site 6 and Site 12. As shown by the drop down video analysis

(Section 2.3) Ophiothrix beds were observed at Site 6 and site 12. Crustacea at 5% were recorded in

limited abundances in the grab samples.

Amongst the top ten most abundant species recorded from the grab samples there are four species

which are also amongst the most frequently recorded (Table 3.6). The most abundant species found in

76% of the samples (13 sites) was the taxon Phoronis. The second most abundant species, recorded

in 65% of samples (11 sites) was the brittlestar Amphiura filiformis. The bivalve Kurtiella bidentata was

the third most abundant species, and was the most frequently occurring species being found in 88% of

samples (15 sites).

Table 3.6: Top 10 Most Abundant and Most Frequently Recorded Species in the Grab Samples

Most abundant species Most frequently occurring species (n=17)

Scientific Name Common Name Total Scientific Name Common Name %

Phoronis Polychaete worm 935 Kurtiella bidentata Bivalve 88

Amphiura filiformis A brittlestar 224 Owenia borealis Polychaete worm 82

Kurtiella bidentata Bivalve 219 NEMERTEA Ribbon worm 82

Ophiothrix fragilis Common brittlestar 177 Phoronis Polychaete worm 76

Magelona filiformis Polychaete worm 128 Lumbrineris cingulata Polychaete worm 71

Magelona johnstoni Polychaete worm 118 Spiophanes bombyx Polychaete worm 71

NEMERTEA Ribbon worm 113 Pholoe baltica Polychaete worm 65

Tellina fabula Bean-like tellin 100 Ampelisca tenuicornis An amphipod 65

Rodhine Polychaete worm 93 Amphiura filiformis A brittlestar 65

Phaxas pellucidus Razor shell 86 Glycinde nordmanni Polychaete worm 59

In 10 of the 17 grab samples collected in the survey area a total of 16 species and higher taxa of non-

quantitative colonial epifaunal animals were identified. The dominant taxa present was Bryozoa (8

taxa), followed by Cnidaria (5 taxa), Porifera (2 taxa) and Entoprocta (1 taxa).

The full record of the epifaunal (non-enumerated) species identified from the grab samples is

presented in Appendix G.


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 27

Figure 3.6: Distribution of number of individuals across the survey area


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 28

Figure 3.7: Distribution of number of taxa across the survey area


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 29

3.4.2 Biomass

Biomass weight for Mollusca included shells. The phylum contributing the most (Figure 3.8) was the

Echinodermata which accounted for 40% of the total AFDW. This was mainly due to the presence of

large specimens of the brittlestar O. fragilis with a smaller contribution from A filiformis at sites 6 and

12. The particularly high abundance of these two brittlestars is due to the presence of extensive

brittlestar beds at these sites. Mollusca contributed 38%, Annelida and Other taxa contributed 10%

each and Crustacea accounted for 2% of the total AFRW. Biomass data are presented in Appendix I.

Figure 3.8: Contribution to biomass by all major groups (AFDW). Epifauna is included in

‘Other’ taxa

3.4.3 Diversity Index

The number of species recorded in the survey area ranged from 9 species at Site 9 to 71 species at

Site 19. The site where species richness was less than 10 was characterised by a high percentage of

very fine sand and various fractions of silt. This type of habitat can typically, be species poor. The

video survey also found a paucity of fauna at this location which was the most offshore site in the

survey array. The Shannon-Weiner diversity index combines species richness and their abundances,

giving high values where the numbers of individuals are evenly distributed across the species

recorded. Figure 3.9 shows the distribution of the index across the survey area, reflecting the

variations of species richness and abundance at the sites described.

Table 3.7summarises the diversity indexes for the study area.

Echinodermata 40%

Mollusca 38%

Other taxa 10%

Annelida 10%

Crustacea 2%


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 30

Table 3.7: Diversity Indexes

Site No of Species

(N)

No of

Individuals (N)

Pielou’s

Evenness (J')

Simpsons

Dominance

(1-Lambda')

Shannon-Wiener

(H'(loge))

1 25 137 0.588 0.6955 1.893

4 59 309 0.7576 0.9045 3.089

5 54 205 0.8752 0.959 3.491

6 45 261 0.6374 0.8019 2.426

7 54 168 0.7365 0.8464 2.938

8 23 75 0.7954 0.8771 2.494

9 9 12 0.9206 0.9091 2.023

10 57 385 0.7276 0.8731 2.942

11 65 354 0.7843 0.929 3.274

12 35 134 0.611 0.7101 2.172

13 48 421 0.5782 0.7282 2.238

14 39 258 0.473 0.5472 1.733

15 49 251 0.836 0.9432 3.254

16 68 334 0.7456 0.8911 3.146

17 49 405 0.7554 0.9086 2.94

18 46 351 0.8096 0.9301 3.1

19 71 260 0.8168 0.934 3.482


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 31

Figure 3.9: Shannon -Weiner diversity index across the survey area


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 32

3.4.4 Multivariate Analysis

The multivariate statistical analysis returned eight statistically significant groups. The cluster analysis

dendrogram and the MDS plot are presented in Figure 3.10. The SIMPROF (Figure 3.10a) groupings

are based on the 5% significance levels. The ordination of grab faunal samples (Figure 3.10b) has

labelled sites with the Folk sediment classifications, indicating how faunal groupings may be related to

sediment characteristics.

The SIMPER routine aided in the identification of the species characterising each group it also

highlighted those species determining their difference. The species composition of each group,

contributing to up to 50% of the similarity within the group, is presented in Table 3.8.

Groups f, d and e show comparable species suits and the differences between these groups are

mostly due to differences in relative abundance of particular species as well as differences in species

composition. Species such as Phoronis sp., K. bidentata, A. filiformis and Owenia borealis were found

amongst the species contributing to the within group similarity of each of these groups. Buchanan et al

(1978) considered Phoronis to be associated with A. filiformis – A. chiajei communities, in particular on

muddy sand with A. filiformis sub-communities off the coast of Northumberland, just south of the Firth

of Forth.

These species are typically found on fine sediment such as sand or mud (MarLIN, 2006). The

sediment type of the groups was slightly gravelly Sand ((g)S) with a proportion of mud.


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 33

a)

b)

Figure 3.10: Cluster analysis dendrogram and Multidimensional Scaling plot of the multivariate

statistical analysis of the macrofaunal grab data

The two species contributing to 50% of the similarity within Group h were the common brittlestar

O. fragilis and the polychaete worm Subadyte pellucida. The former being quite abundant resulting in

brittlestar beds (see video analysis – 3.2), on coarser grounds. These two species have shown to be


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 34

commensal with S. pellucida previously being reported on the discs and arms of O. fragilis (Pettibone,

1969 and 1993).

Group b was characterised by the presence of high abundance of M. filiformis and M. johnstoni as well

as the mollusc bivalve molluscs T. fabula and K. bidentata.

The other groups included single samples only. It is worth mentioning the high abundance of the

bivalve Musculus subpictus at site 19 (group c). This is the only site where the grab samples collected

the taxa Ascidiidae, Ascidiella and Ascidiella aspersa and M. subpictus is known to frequently occur

embedded in the flesh of tunicates (Neal, 2004).

Table 3.8: Species Composition of Each SIMPER Group

Group Sites in Group

and Dominant

Sediment

Characteristics

Species Av. Abundance Cum %

Average similarity:

38.36 %

1, 7, 8 and 14

slightly gravelly

muddy Sand

poorly sorted

Phoronis

Kurtiella bidentata

Owenia borealis

Ampelisca tenuicornis

Glycera unicornis

8.38

2.7

1.49

1.47

1.35

28.02

36.77

43.65

49.59

54.78

Average similarity:

56.61 %

4, 13, and 16

slightly gravelly

muddy Sand

poorly sorted

Phoronis

Amphiura filiformis

Rhodine

NEMERTEA

Melinna palmata

Magelona alleni

Owenia borealis

Anobothrus gracilis

Lucinoma borealis

10.94

5.51

4.34

3.16

3.6

3.64

2.88

2.31

2.2

14.46

21.3

26.64

31.64

36.26

40.49

44.43

48.09

51.22

Average similarity:

54.03%

5, 10 and 11

slightly gravelly

Sand

poorly sorted

Amphiura filiformis

Kurtiella bidentata

Phoronis

Phaxas pellucidus

Acrocnida brachiata

Thracia (juv.)

Cylichna cylindracea

Thracioidea (juv.)

Ophiuridae (juv.)

Pholoe baltica

Owenia borealis

5.52

5.27

7

3.36

3.44

3.22

2.29

2.23

2.39

2.55

2.72

8.33

15.46

21.85

27.26

31.74

35.29

38.78

42.28

45.57

48.86

52.07

Average similarity:

33.87%

6 and 12

Sandy Gravel

Very poorly

sorted

Ophiothrix fragilis

Subadyte pellucida

9.34

2.74

38.39

50.44

Average similarity:

58.67%

17 and 18

slightly gravelly

Sand

moderately (well)

sorted

Magelona filiformis

Magelona johnstoni

Tellina fabula

Kurtiella bidentata

Spio symphyta

NEMERTEA

Thracia phaseolina

7.58

7.51

6.7

4.74

3.97

3.41

3.5

11.6

22.98

30.39

37.62

43.09

47.56

51.73


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 35

Group Sites in Group

and Dominant

Sediment

Characteristics

Species Av. Abundance Cum %

15

gravelly muddy

Sand

very poorly sorted

Scoloplos armiger

Glycera lapidum

Pholoe baltica

NEMERTEA

Mediomastus fragilis

9

slightly gravelly

sandy Mud

Poorly sorted

Nephtys incisa

NEMERTEA

Abra nitida

Aphelochaeta marioni

Crangon allmanni

19

sandy gravel

Very poorly

sorted

Musculus subpictus

Kurtiella bidentata

Amphiura filiformis

NEMERTEA

Phoronis

Note: The single site groups g, a and c do not have species identified by SIMPER which requires a

minimum of two sites within a group. Instead the top five species by abundance have been included in

the Table for comparative purposes.

The distribution of faunal groupings across the survey area is shown in Figure 3.11 and reflects the

natural environment variability of the survey area.


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 36

Figure 3.11: Faunal primer groupings


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 37

As well as describing the species forming each statistical group, SIMPER also returns the list of

species driving the differences between groups. These were mainly related to variation in the density

of Phoronis sp., but in some cases also to the high abundance of species such as O. fragilis,

Turritella communis, Magelona filiformis and Magelona johnstoni at some locations and the lack of

them at other sites. Details are presented in Figure 3.12.

Figure 3.12: MDS plots with species highlighted as driving SIMPER group differences


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 38

3.5 Biotopes

Macrofaunal species abundance data and sediment particle size data were analysed together to

determine the biotopes present in the survey area. Data from the seabed imagery analysis and depth

of the sites were also used to support the defined biotopes. The list of species for each site was run

through BioScribe, the biotope decision support tool, to cross-check whole community data against the

reference samples used by the JNCC to originally describe the habitats in the marine classification

system (Hooper et al., 2010, Connor et al., 2004). Finally, a biotope was allocated to each of the 17

sites included in the analysis. A total of six biotopes were identified in the survey area and they were

consistent with Connor et al. (2004) and the EUNIS habitat Classification 2012. Of these, two were

described as full Level 5 biotopes and four were described as Level 4 biotope complexes. Details

related to these biotopes are presented in Table 3.9.

Table 3.9: Biotopes Described for the Survey Area

Biotope EUNIS

Code

Sites Faunal

Groups

Example Image

SS.SSA.OSa A5.27 1, 4, 5, 10, 11,

13, 14 and 16

d, e, f

SS.SMu.CSaMu A5.35 8 and 9 a, f

SS.SMU.CFiMu A5.36 7 f

SS.SMx.CMx A5.44 15 and 19 g and c


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 39

Biotope EUNIS

Code

Sites Faunal

Groups

Example Image

SS.SSA.IMuSa.FfabMag A5.242 17 and 18 b

SS.SMx.CMx.OphMx A5.445 6 and 12 h

Based on the biotopes described, the survey area can be divided in four blocks following the sediment

gradient from the offshore sites to the inshore ones (Figure 3.13 and Figure 3.14). This confirms the

pattern already noticed in the faunal groupings (Figure 3.11).

As will become clear from the description below, it is considered important to note here that work is

being carried out by the JNCC in order to update the marine classification system. The area of main

concern, due to lack of data, is the offshore coarse sediments, in particular the circalittoral coarse and

mixed sediments (JNCC, 2014). Communities associated with offshore mixed sediments are believed

to be found in the survey area and the biotope allocations described are based on the best available

current evidence. Alternatives that were considered but then discarded are also discussed briefly

within the text.

Biotopes such as SS.SMx.CMx.OphMx indicating the presence of Ophiothrix beds and the biotope

complex SS.SMx.CMx indicating mixed coarse substrate were confirmed by the video analysis and

were located in the inshore part of the survey area. The biotope SS.SSA.IMuSa.FfabMag was also

found at two locations close to shore where the species Tellina fabula1 and two species of Magelona

were abundant and the sediment observed as muddy sand matches the one characteristic for this

biotope.

Careful consideration was given to the selection of the biotopes in the central part of the survey area

particularly with regard to the possible presence of two Level 5 biotopes SS.SMU.AfilMysAnit and

SS.SSA.OSa.OfusAfil. The presence of species such as Amphiura filiformis, Kurtiella bidentata 2,

which characterise this biotope, although in variable abundances at most of the sites, suggested the

1 Please note change of name Fabulina fabula is now called Tellina fabula as per the World Register of Marine

Species (WoRMS) (Appeltans et al., 2012).

2 Please note change of name Mysella bidentata is now called Kurtiella bidentata as per the World Register of

Marine Species (WoRMS) (Appeltans et al., 2012).


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 40

former biotope. However, the low percentage of mud present in no way supported selection of this

biotope. Therefore the second option was considered. This observation was supported by a recent

study carried out in Scottish waters, SNH (2013), highlighting that in areas where burrowed mud

habitat was observed from video footage (SS.SMU.CFiMu.SpnMeg) grab samples collected were

classified as either SS.SSa.OSa.OfusAfil, which comprise coarse sandy sediments or

SS.SMu.CSaMu.AfilMysAnit which comprise sandy mud sediments. The former one was reported as

found in muddier conditions (between 10% and 30%) (Howson et al., 2012). The data behind the

description of SS.SMu.CSaMu.AfilMysAnit provided by Connor et al. (2004) indicates this biotope was

defined from very muddy sediments with a silt/clay (i.e. mud) fraction of over 50%. Moreover, in this

biotope, the brittlestar A. filiformis is expected to be found in large numbers (SNH, 2013) and, although

definitely present in the communities observed in this study, its abundance is not considered to

support this description. SS.SMu.CSaMu.AfilMysAnit was therefore not selected.

Similar consideration was given to those sites (Site 1 and Site 13) where higher abundance of

Phoronis (horseshoe worm) and Rhodine (bamboo worm) where recorded. The high abundance

observed for these species at few sites suggested the biotope SS.SSA.OSa.MalEdef Maldanid

polychaetes and Eudorellopsis deformis in offshore circalittoral sand or muddy sand. Although

sufficient data are not available, and therefore there is high degree of uncertainty (e.g. contribution of

Phoronis spp. is unknown), maldanid polychaetes such as Rhodine contribute significantly to the

classification of this assemblage, but are not considered as important in the alternative biotopes

considered.

It was clear that a definite decision could not be made to describe the habitat to biotope level with

confidence (for the currently described full Level 5 biotopes); therefore the final choice was to attribute

the biotope complex SS.SSA.OSa to the sites in question, as evidence strongly suggests that the type

of biotopes hierarchically below this complex are good candidates in describing the communities and

the environment.

For the offshore area, two biotope complexes were identified: SS.SMu.CSaMu and SS.SMU.CFiMu.

As the species assemblages did not indicate any clear biotope, but rather an impoverished area, these

were left at complex level and derived largely, on the basis of the sediment composition and depth.

However, some observations on the faunal composition were made. The presence of

Turritella communis on this ground is possibly indicative of transitional communities. As highlighted by

the video analysis, the area is characterised by the presence of the biotope SS.SMU.CFiMu.SpnMeg

whose infaunal composition is described as very similar to the one occurring beneath another biotope

called SS.SMU.CFiMu.BlyrAchi Brissopsis lyrifera and Amphiura chiajei in circalittoral mud. Although

described as occurring in deeper and siltier muds, it is worth mentioning this biotope as it is also

similar to the biotope called SS.SMU.AfilMysAnit which was also considered for other sites within the

present study. High numbers of T. communis are found in communities which are considered

transitional between the two (SS.SMU.CFiMu.BlyrAchi and SS.SMU.AfilMysAnit) (Connor et al., 2004).

The biotopes from the video and grab data described above have been viewed in conjunction with the

Geophysical data provided in order to produce a broad indicative habitat map (Figure 3.14).


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 41

Figure 3.13: Biotopes from grab faunal assemblages


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 42

Figure 3.14: Predicted habitat distribution based on geophysical and grab/trawl data


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 43

3.6 Epibenthic Trawl

Large and more mobile epibenthic communities were investigated by a series of 2 m beam trawls (see

Appendix K for raw data).

The most common epibenthic group sampled was that of bony fish in the Class Actinopterygii (21%),

followed by Crustacea and Mollusca (19%), Echinodermata (14%) and Annelida (11%). All the other

major groups accounted for less than 10% each (Figure 3.15a)

The non-enumerated taxa included all of the colonial organisms. The abundance calculations only

included numerable taxa, therefore colonial organisms, such as Porifera, Bryozoa and some Cnidaria

were excluded. A total of 2,636 individuals were recorded. Of these, Echinodermata were the most

abundant group (36%), due mainly to the very high abundance of Astropecten irregularis and the high

abundance of Asterias rubens. Other major taxa contributing to the total abundance included Tunicata

(24%), Crustacea (14%), Mollusca (13%) and Actinopterygii (12%). Annelida counted for 1% of the

total abundance with Cnidaria counting for less than 1% (Figure 3.15b).

The high abundances of sand star Astropecten irregularis present in some trawls and of Acrocnida

brachiata in the grab data indicate the potential presence of SS.SSA.CMuSa.AbrAirr Amphiura

brachiata with Astropecten irregularis and other echinoderms in circalittoral muddy sand as an

epifaunal overlay. Site 10 (T1) and site 11 appear to have SS.SSA.CMuSa.AbrAirr present as an

overlay, as well as at site 4 (T2) and site 5 although more marginally. This fits with the description of

this biotope which states that in some areas it forms an epifaunal overlay which may cover a wide

range of biotopes in years of good recruitment but does not develop into a settled or established

community (Connor et al., 2004). The presence of Kurtiella bidenta, a characteristic species of

SS.SSA.CMuSa.AbrAirr which may have a commensal association with A. brachiata (Southward and

Campbell, 2006) supports this as its highest abundance was found at site 11 and picked out by

SIMPER for group e (sites 5, 10 and 11).

Amongst the enumerated taxa, the most abundant species and their frequency are presented in Table

3.10; the table also presents the most frequent taxa amongst the non-enumerated species. The sea

squirt Ascidiella was the most numerous species overall, being the most abundant in Trawl 4 and the

second most abundant in Trawl 1 and 2. Ascidiella was mainly composed of Ascidiella aspersa

(counting for 509 out of 634 individuals), with Ascidiella (juv.) (96 individuals), Ascidiella scabra (21

individuals) and Ascidiella (8 individuals). The sea star Astropecten irregularis was the second most

abundant species overall, with only nine less individuals than Ascidiella, being the most abundant

species in Trawls 1 and 2 but only seventh most abundant in Trawl 4. All of the ten most abundant

species were recorded at all three trawl sites.

Amongst the non–enumerated colonial sessile taxa the Bryozoan Alcyonidium parasiticum was the

most frequently recorded species found in all three trawls (Table 3.10). The hydroid Hydrallmania

falcata and cnidaria Alcyonium digitatum were present in two of the trawls.


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 44

Figure 3.15: Percentage contributions of major taxonomic groups to the total number of taxa

recorded (a) to the total abundance for enumerated only (b)

At the three trawling sites, a total of 13 fish taxa were recorded. Of these, 11 were identified to species

level with the remaining two identified to a higher level. Abundance and frequency recorded for the top

ten most abundant taxa are presented in

a).

b).

21%

19%

19%

14%

11%

3%

7%

3% 3%

Actinopterygii

Crustacea

Mollusca

Echinodermata

Annelida

Tunicata

Cnidaria

Porifera

Bryoza

36%

24%

14%

13%

12% 1% 0%

Echinodermata

Tunicata

Crustacea

Mollusca

Actinopterygii

Annelida

Cnidaria


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 45

Table 3.11. The flat fish Pleuronectes platessa accounted for 34% of the total abundance of fish taxa

and were recorded at all sites. This was followed by the sand goby Pomatoschistus minutus (27%)

and dab Limanda limanda (15%), both of which were found at all three sites.

Table 3.10: Total Abundance and Frequency of the Top Ten Most Abundant Enumerated Taxa,

and Frequency of the Non–enumerated Taxa Recorded from the 2 m Beam Trawl Survey

Species (enumerated) Total abundance No. of trawls Species (non - enumerated)

No. of

trawls

Ascidiella 634 3 Alcyonidium parasiticum 3 Astropecten irregularis 500 3 Hydrallmania falcata 2

Asterias rubens 229 3 Alcyonium digitatum 2

Philine aperta 181 3 Suberites ficus (agg.) 1

Liocarcinus depurator 176 3 Halichondria 1

Ophiothrix fragilis 167 3 Abietinaria abietina 1

Crangon crangon 136 3 Eucratea loricata 1

Aequipecten opercularis 111 3

Pleuronectes platessa 102 3

Pomatoschistus minutus 81 3

Table 3.11: Total Abundance and Frequency of the Top Ten Fish Taxa Recorded from the 2 m

Beam Trawl Survey

Fish species

Total

abundance Frequency % of total abundance

Pleuronectes platessa 102 3 34

Pomatoschistus minutus 81 3 27

Limanda limanda 46 3 15

Syngnathus acus 22 3 7

Agonus cataphractus 15 3 5

Callionymus lyra 8 3 3

Pomatoschistus 8 1 3

Gadus morhua 6 1 2

Myoxocephalus scorpius 4 3 1

Pholis gunnellus 2 2 1


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 46

3.7 Sediment Chemistry

Contaminant samples for the analysis of total PAH, metals, PCB, organotin (TBT, DBT) compounds,

TPH and total organic carbon (loss of ignition) were successfully sampled at site 5 (within the

application boundary), one of the three sediment chemistry sample locations in the survey area. The

results of these analyses are presented in Appendix J and are compared against the Marine Scotland

pre-dredge guidelines and other criteria where relevant.

PAHs

Total PAH levels at site 5 were 169 µg/kg. All of the single PAH concentrations were below the revised

Marine Scotland Action Levels as described in the Marine Scotland pre-dredge guidelines (Marine

Scotland, 2011).

When compared against the OSPAR assessment criteria all of the individual PAH concentrations are

below the Effects Range Low (ERL). The ERL values used by OSPAR were developed by the United

States Environmental Protection Agency for assessing the ecological significance of sediment

concentrations. Concentrations below the ERL rarely cause adverse effects in marine organisms

(MERMAN, 2015).

Metals

All metal concentrations were below the revised Marine Scotland Action Levels (Marine Scotland,

2011). All of the metal concentrations are also all below the OSPAR ERLs except for Arsenic, which

had a concentration of 9.25 mg / kg against an ERL of 8.2 mg / kg.

A summary of the concentrations is presented in Appendix J.

Organotins

Tributyltin concentration was below the Marine Scotland revised action limit. The level of TBT fell

within class C of the OSPAR reference levels, which is a six class assessment scheme for TBT

specific biological effects in the reproductive capability of sensitive gastropod species (OSPAR,

2009a). Other organotins had similar levels, <4 µg / kg or lower except for Dibutyltin which had a level

of 7.04 µg / kg.

Table 3.12: Integrated Assessment Classes Linking TBT Effects in Gastropod Species with

Concentrations of TBT In Water and Sediment

Assessment Class TBT Sediment (µg TBT / kg dw)

A n.d.

B <2

C 2 - <50

D 50 - <200

E 200 - 500

F >500


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 47

PCB (ICES 7 and 25)

Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) concentrations for PCB (ICES 7) was 1.2 µg / kg and the

concentration for PCB (CEN 25) was 2.68 µg / kg. There were no Action Levels in the Marine Scotland

pre-dredge guidelines to compare against; however when compared against the OSPAR

Environmental Assessment Criteria (EAC) all of the individual PCB concentrations analysed were

below the assessment concentration. EACs were developed by OSPAR and the International Council

for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) for assessing the ecological significance of sediment

concentrations with concentrations below the EAC not expected to cause any chronic effects in marine

organisms (MERMAN, 2015).

Total petroleum hydrocarbons

The TPH concentration was 370 mg / kg, which is above the existing and revised Marine Scotland

Action Levels of 100 mg / kg. Ahmed et al. (2006) reported that the Forties crude oil equivalent

concentrations for Firth of Forth sediments varied between samples from 47.1 to 351.5 mg/kg dry

weight with a mean concentration of 161.8 mg/kg dry weight. The TPH analysis reported here was

carried out using an Ekofisk crude oil standard for calibration.

Total organic content

Total organic content after loss on ignition at site 5 was 2.52 %. The mean background organic matter

content reported for central North Sea sediments by UKOOA (2001) was 1.63% and the 95th percentile

value was 4.48% (UKOOA 2001).

4. DISCUSSION

4.1 Subtidal benthic ecology

The survey area was mainly circalittoral with the offshore part characterised by silty sediments, the

middle part characterised by sandy sediments and the more inshore area characterised by mixed

sediment and an infralittoral sandy element in the most northerly inshore sites. These zonations were

evident from the analysis presented in the results, and were consistent across the sampling

methodologies employed. They also reflected the natural variations of the physical characteristics of

the seabed.

Multivariate analysis of the grab faunal data showed that there were eight statistically different groups

across the survey area, as illustrated in Figure 3.11. Each group was determined by the composition

of the species that each site contained (Table 3.8), which is influenced by the physical characteristics

encountered at each site. The faunal groupings reflected the gradient shown by sediment

characterisation and a summary is presented in Table 4.1.

The analysis of the biotopes also reflected the zonation observed by the sediment analysis and the

faunal groupings derived by the multivariate biological analysis. Biotopes are determined by their

physical habitat conditions together with the community of characteristic benthic species found within

them although these defining attributes, such as what species are present and in what numbers have

a degree of flexibility. The process of assigning biotopes from grab data to some of the locations

investigated was, therefore, not straight forward and a number of considerations were made. Based


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 48

on the grab data the area was then described by two level 5 biotopes, namely SS.SMx.CMx.OphMx

and SS.SSA.IMuSa.FfabMag, and four level 4 biotope complexes, namely SS.SMx.CMx,

SS.SSA.OSa, SS.SMu.CSaMu, SS.SMU.CFiMu. These biotopes are similar to biotopes previously

encountered in the Firth of Forth by Fugro EMU (Fugro EMU, 2013).

The biotopes assigned divided the survey area into an offshore area consisting of circalittoral sandy

mud (SS.SMu.CSaMu) and circalittoral fine mud (SS.SMU.CFiMu), a central offshore area of

circalittoral sand (SS.SSA.OSa), a near shore circalittoral mixed sediment (and with brittlestar beds)

(SS.SMx.CMx and SS.SMx.CMx.OphMx) and a nearshore infralittoral muddy sand area

(SS.SSA.IMuSa.FfabMag).

The analysis suggested that offshore sand sediments are found in the survey area and the biotope

allocations described are based on the best available current evidence. The biotope complex

SS.SSA.OSa was chosen as best describing the habitats for a large part of the survey area. Data

analysis highlighted the need of some careful considerations with respect to assigning biotopes and in

this way SS.SMU.AfilMysAnit, SS.SSA.OSa.OfusAfil, and SS.SSA.OSa.MalEdef were considered

and rejected. The SS.SMU.AfilMysAnit has, with a degree of uncertainty, been recorded further

offshore in deeper water within the Firth of Forth (MESH Atlantic, 2015). Both AfilMysAnit and

OfusAfil have also been found underlying borrowed mud habitats described by video data analysis in

other locations in Scottish waters (SNH, 2013). However this was not considered to appropriately

describe the sites in question as muddier conditions should be present (SNH, 2013; Connor et al.,

2004)

The biotope analysis of the video data highlighted coarser sediment close to shore which were well

described by the biotope complex SS.SMx.CMx and by the biotope SS.SMx.CMx.OphMx. Also

CR.MCR.EcCr and CR.HCR.XFa were described for inshore sites. SS.SSa was a biotope complex

describing the northern part of the inshore area, characterised by finer sediment. Moving offshore,

finer sediments were noticed and described by biotope complexes (such as SS.SSa.CMuSa) with a

prevalence of burrowed mud to which the biotope SS.SMU.CFiMu.SpnMeg was mainly assigned.

This is in accordance with the distribution of the burrowed mud MPA search feature (SNH, 2013 and

documents mentioned within).

Video data is useful for describing broad picture epifaunal biotopes and grab data fills in the detail

describing the infaunal, underlying communities. Table 4.1 summarises the biological communities

described for the area by the sampling methodologies employed.

Table 4.1: Summary Table

Site Faunal

Groupings

Sediment

Groupings

Biotope (Grab Data) Biotope (Video Data)

1 f c SS.SSA.OSa SS.SMU.CFiMu.SpnMeg

2 no data no data not suitable data SS.SMx.CMx.OphMx

SS.SSa.CMuSa

CR.MCR.EcCr


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 49

Site Faunal

Groupings

Sediment

Groupings

Biotope (Grab Data) Biotope (Video Data)

3 no data no data no data CR.MCR.EcCr

4 d e SS.SSA.OSa SS.SMu.CFiMu.SpnMeg

5 e e SS.SSA.OSa SS.SMx.CMx

SS.SMx.CMx.OphMx

6 h g SS.SMx.CMx.OphMx SS.SMx.CMx.OphMx

7 f c SS.SMU.CFiMu SS.SSa.CMuSa

8 f b SS.SMu.CSaMu SS.SMu.CFiMu.SpnMeg

9 a a SS.SMu.CSaMu SS.SMu.CFiMu.SpnMeg

10 e e SS.SSA.OSa SS.SMx.CMx

11 e e SS.SSA.OSa SS.SSa.CMuSa

12 h g SS.SMx.CMx.OphMx SS.SMx.CMx.OphMx

13 d e SS.SSA.OSa SS.SMu.CFiMu.SpnMeg

14 f c SS.SSA.OSa SS.SMu.CFiMu.SpnMeg

15 g f SS.SMx.CMx CR.HCR.XFa

SS.SMx.CMx

SS.SSa.CMuSa

16 d e SS.SSA.OSa SS.SMu.CSaMu.VirOphPmax.

HAs

SS.SMx.CMx

17 b e SS.SSA.IMuSa.FfabMag SS.SSa

CR.MCR.EcCr

SS.SSa.CMuSa

18 b e SS.SSA.IMuSa.FfabMag SS.SMx.CMx.OphMx

SS.SMx.CMx

19 c d SS.SMx.CMx SS.SMx.CMx

4.1.1 Features on conservation importance

Burrowed mud is a Priority Marine Feature (PMF) in Scotland’s seas. One of the component biotopes

identified for this PMF is SS.SMu.CFiMu.SpnMeg Seapens and burrowing megafauna in circalittoral

fine mud’. This biotope was observed within the Methil survey area. This habitat is also on the OSPAR


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 50

list of threatened and declining habitats as ‘Sea-Pen and burrowing megafauna communities’

(OSPAR, 2010).

Both rocky biotopes encountered (CR.MCR.EcCr and CR.HCR.XFa) were only described to level 4

due to the data available as further precision would have been less accurate and therefore not

suitable. It should be noted that some of the level 5 biotopes for these classifications are included on

the Scottish Natural Heritage list of PMFs. However, both require the presence of the Northern sea

fan, Swiftia pallida, the known distribution of which is restricted to the west coast of Scotland (Marine

Scotland 2015).

Rocky features identified in the Video analysis were identified to have medium resemblance to being

classed as stony reef at two sites. These were sites 3 and 6 in the inshore area which were assigned

to CR.MCR.EcCr and SS.SMx.CMx.OphMx respectively. Sites 15 and 17 were identified to have low

resemblance to stony reef and were assigned to CR.HCR.XFa and CR.MCR.EcCr (as a mosaic with

SS.SSA.CMuSa). The rest of the sites were considered to be not reef. Sites 15 and 17 were also

found to have areas of mud/sandstone with the latter site also having relatively large holes bored in

the surface. This would appear to be consistent with the biotope CR.MCR.SfR Soft rock communities

which is illustrative of the UK BAP habitat ‘Peat and Clay Exposures with Piddocks’. However, it is

worth noting that this habitat was not included in the Scottish biodiversity list.

Three fish species listed as SNH PMF’s were identified during this survey, Sandeel Ammodytes, Sand

goby Pomatoschitus minutus and Cod Gadus morhua. A Sandeel was found at site 15 to the

north west inshore survey area. Sand goby were found at all three trawl sites and were the second

most abundant fish species caught. The Firth of Forth is a known nursery ground of Cod (Ellis et al.,

2012). During this survey six juvenile cod were caught in the 2 m beam trawl T1 at site 10 within the

application boundary.

4.2 Sediment Chemistry

4.2.1 PAH

PAHs in the marine environment have both natural and anthropogenic sources. They are natural

components of coal and oil and are also found during the combustion of fossil fuels and organic

material (OSPAR, 2009a and OSPAR, 2010). All PAHs analysed were detected as being below the

Marine Scotland Action Levels (Marine Scotland, 2011). Naphthalene and Anthracene were above the

OSPAR background concentrations although they did not exceed the upper assessment criterion

(ERL) (OSPAR, 2009a).

At the majority of stations around the UK the concentrations of PAHs exceed the ERL suggesting,

where this is the case that there may be some potential for adverse biological effects. However where

two or more are still significantly below the ERL the concentrations of contaminants are at levels

where it can be assumed that little or no risks are posed to the environment (OSPAR, 2009a)

4.2.2 Metals

All metals analysed were below the Marine Scotland revised action limits as well as the OSPAR ERLs

except for Arsenic which had a concentration just above the ERL.


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 51

Arsenic occurs naturally in the environment from natural diffuse sources as well as anthropogenic

point and diffuse sources (UK Marine SACs Project, 2001).

4.2.3 Organotins

The level of TBT in the sediment was below the level of the Marine Scotland Revised Action Limit. It

fell into class C of the OSPAR assessment classes which means that it would not be expected to

affect the reproductive capability of sensitive gastropod species (OSPAR, 2009a).

4.2.4 PCBs

Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) have varied harmful effects on marine organisms. Contamination

from PCBs is widespread and there are a few areas where concentrations are close to zero (OSPAR,

2010). The results show that the concentrations of PCB total ICES 7 was above the BAC, although

when compared against the Environmental Assessment Criteria (EAC) all of the individual PCB

concentrations were lower. The EAC represents the contaminant concentration in the environment

below which no chronic effects are expected to occur in marine species, including the most sensitive

species (OSPAR 2009b).

4.2.5 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons

Although Ekofisk equivalent concentrations of TPH were above the existing and revised Marine

Scotland Action levels with a value of 370 mg / kg against 100 mg / kg, Forties crude oil equivalent

concentrations as high as 351.5 mg/kg dry weight have been recorded in the Firth of Forth previously

(Ahmed et al., 2006). As there is no absolute measure of fluorescence emission spectrofluorimeters

must first be calibrated with solutions of reference standards (Cefas 2000). Commonly used standards

include both Ekofisk and Forties crude oil. It should be noted that different standards were used for the

above reported values and therefore direct comparison is hampered. Nevertheless, the results from

Ahmed et al. (2006) indicate that similarly high values of total hydrocarbons have been reported from

the Firth of Forth more broadly.

It is also worth noting that multivariate statistical analysis showed the infaunal community sampled at

Site 5 grouping with Sites 10 and 11 (rather than grouping out individually for example). All these sites

had high numbers of the brittlestar Amphiura filiformis compared to the majority of sites sampled

during the survey. A. filiformis is a species known to be highly intolerant of oil pollution (Olsgard and

Gray 1995). On this basis the high value of total hydrocarbons reported at Site 5 would seem not to be

having a negative effect on the biological community sampled. This site also had the highest

Shannon-Wiener diversity index reported from the survey.


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 52

5. REFERENCES

Ahmed, A. S., Webster, L., Pollard, P., Davies, I. M. and Moffat, C. F. (2006). Description and

evaluation of a sampling system for monitoring hydrocarbons in sediments. Fisheries Research

Services Internal Report No 09/06

Blott, S.J. and Pye, K. (2001). GRADISTAT: a grain size distribution and statistics package for the

analysis of unconsolidated sediments. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 26, 1237-1248.

Buchanan, J. B., Sheader, M. and Kingston, P. F. (1978). Sources of Variability in the Benthic

Macrofauna off the South Northumberland Coast, 1971–1976 JMBA UK 58 191-209.

Cefas (2000). Methods for the analysis for hydrocarbons and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH)

in marine samples. Sci. Ser. Aquat. Environ. Prot.: Analyt. Meth., CEFAS, Lowestoft, (12), 18pp.

Cefas (2004). Offshore Wind Farms: Guidance note for Environmental Impact Assessment In respect

of FEPA and CPA requirements. Version 2 – June 2004

Clarke, K.R., Gorley, R.N., 2006. PRIMER v6: User Manual/Tutorial. PRIMER-E, Plymouth.

Clarke, K.R., Warwick R.M. (2001). Change in marine communities: an approach to statistical analysis

and interpretation, 2nd edition. PRIMER-E, Plymouth.

Connor, D. W., Allen, J. H., Golding, N., Howell, K. L, Lieberknecht, L. M., Northen, K. O. and Reker,

J. B., (2004) The Marine Habitat Classification for Britain and Ireland Version 04.05 JNCC,

Peterborough ISBN 1 861 07561 8 (internet version)

www.jncc.defra.gov.uk/MarineHabitatClassification

Davies, J., Baxter, J., Bradley, M., Connor, D., Khan, J., Murray, E., Sanderson, W., Turnbull, C. &

Vincent, M. 2001. Marine Monitoring Handbook. Available online: http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-

2430#download

Eleftheriou, A. Basford, D.J. 1989. The macrobenthic infauna of the offshore northern North Sea.

Journal of Marine Biological Association 69: 123-143

Ellis, J.R., Milligan, S.P., Readdy, L., Taylor, N. and Brown, M.J. (2012). Spawning and nursery

grounds of selected fish species in UK waters. Sci. Ser. Tech. Rep., Cefas Lowestoft, 147: 56 pp.

EMODnet, 2015. Seabed Habitats. www.searchmesh.net/webGIS

Folk, R.L., 1954. The distinction between grain size and mineral composition in sedimentary rock

nomenclature. Journal of Geology 62 (4), 344-359

Fugro EMU Limited (2013). Report for Inch Cape Offshore Limited. Appendix 12C, Benthic Ecology

Baseline Offshore Export Cable Corridor, Technical Report

http://www.jncc.defra.gov.uk/MarineHabitatClassification

http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-2430#download

http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-2430#download

http://www.searchmesh.net/webGIS


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 53

Garrison, T. (2009). Oceanography: An Invitation to Marine Science. Cengage Learning. 582 pages.

Hiscock, K. (ed.) (1996) Marine Nature Conservation Review: rationale and methods. Coasts and seas

of the United Kingdom MNCR Series, Peterborough, Joint Nature Conservation Committee.

Hooper, G.J., Barfield, P.D., Thomas N.S. and Capasso, E (2011). Redefining biotopes at a regional

scale and development of a new MNCR biotope decision support tool. First published 2011. ISBN No.

978 0 907545 58 3. Published by the MALSF. Emu Ltd Report No. 1/J/1/03/1552/1103.

Howson, C.M., Clark, L., Mercer, T.S. and James, B. (2012). Marine biological survey to establish the

distribution and status of fan mussels Atrina fragilis and other Marine Protected Area (MPA) search

features within the Sound of Canna, Inner Hebrides. Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report

No. 438

Irving, R., (2009) The identification of the main characteristics of stony reef habitats under the Habitats

Directive. JNCC Report No. 432. ISSN 0963-8091

JNCC, 2014. The Marine Habitat Classification for Britain & Ireland (v04.05).

http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/MarineHabitatClassification last updated: 23/07/2014; last visited: 23/01/2015

de Kluijver, M.J., Ingalsuo, S.S., and de Bruyne, R.H., – Mollusca of the North Sea http://species-

identification.org/about.php

Marine Scotland (2011), Guidance for the sampling and analysis of sediment and dredged material to

be submitted in support of applications for sea disposal of dredged material. Marine (Scotland) Act

2010, Available at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0044/00443832.pdf. Accessed 14-01-2015

Marine Scotland (2015). National marine plan interactive. Available online at:

http://marinescotland.atkinsgeospatial.com/nmpi/

MarLIN, 2006. BIOTIC - Biological Traits Information Catalogue. Marine Life Information Network.

Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. [Cited 21/01/2015] Available from

www.marlin.ac.uk/biotic

MERMAN, (2015). CSEMP — assessment criteria for Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH) in

sediments. Available online:

http://www.bodc.ac.uk/projects/uk/merman/assessments_and_data_access/csemp/help/assessment_

criteria/sediment/polycyclic_aromatic_hydrocarbons.html Accessed 10/02/2015

MESH Atlantic (2015). Mapping European Seabed Habitats - Interactive mapping portal. Available

online at: http://www.emodnet-seabedhabitats.eu/default.aspx?page=1974

Neal, K. (2004). Modiolarca tumida. Marbled crenella. Marine Life Information Network: Biology and

Sensitivity Key Information Sub-programme [on-line]. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the

http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/MarineHabitatClassification

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0044/00443832.pdf.%20Accessed%2014-01-2015

http://marinescotland.atkinsgeospatial.com/nmpi/

http://www.marlin.ac.uk/biotic

http://www.bodc.ac.uk/projects/uk/merman/assessments_and_data_access/csemp/help/assessment_criteria/sediment/polycyclic_aromatic_hydrocarbons.html%20Accessed%2010/02/2015

http://www.bodc.ac.uk/projects/uk/merman/assessments_and_data_access/csemp/help/assessment_criteria/sediment/polycyclic_aromatic_hydrocarbons.html%20Accessed%2010/02/2015

http://www.emodnet-seabedhabitats.eu/default.aspx?page=1974


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 54

United Kingdom. [cited 12/02/2015]. Available from:

http://www.marlin.ac.uk/speciesinformation.php?speciesID=3814

Olsgard, F. & Gray, J.S., (1995). A comprehensive analysis of the effects of offshore oil and gas

exploration and production on the benthic communities of the Norwegian continental shelf. Marine

Ecology Progress Series, 122, 277-306.

OSPAR (2009a). CEMP assessment report: 2008/2009 Assessment of trends and concentrations of

selected hazardous substances in sediments and biota Monitoring and Assessment Series.

Publication Number: 390/2009. ISBN 978-1-906840-30-3

http://qsr2010.ospar.org/media/assessments/p00390_2009_CEMP_assessment_report.pdf Accessed:

23/01/2015

OSPAR (2009b). Background Document on CEMP assessment criteria for the QSR 2010. OSPAR

Commission Monitoring and Assessment Series. ISBN 978-1-907390-08-1. Publication Number:

461/2009.

OSPAR (2010). OSPAR Recommendation 2010/11 on furthering the protection and restoration of sea-

pen and burrowing megafauna communities in the OSPAR Maritime Area. OSPAR 10/23/1-E, Annex

33.

OSPAR (2013). Levels and trends in marine contaminants and their biological effects – CEMP

Assessment report 2012. Monitoring and Assessment Series. ISBN 978-1-909159-29-7. Publication

Number: 596/2013. Available at:

http://www.ospar.org/documents/dbase/publications/p00596/p00596_assessment_report_2012_cemp.

pdf

Pettibone, M. H. (1969) Review of some species referred to Scalisetosus McIntosh (Polychaeta,

Polynoidae). Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, 82: 1-30.

Pettibone, M. H. (1993) Scaled Polychaetes (Polynoidae) Associated with Ophiuroids and Other

Invertebrates and Review of Species Referred to Malmgrenia Mclntosh and Replaced by

Malmgreniella Hartman, with Descriptions of New Taxa. Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology

NUMBER 538

Scottish Biodiversity List http://www.biodiversityscotland.gov.uk/advice-and-resources/scottish-

biodiversity-list/

SNH, 2013. Scottish MPA Project. Assessment against the MPA Selection Guidelines. Small isles

possible nature conservation MPA. SNH web publication [B1209026 / 27(#27)].

Southward, E.C.; Campbell, A.C. (2006). [Echinoderms: keys and notes for the identification of British

species]. Synopses of the British fauna (new series), 56. Field Studies Council: Shrewsbury, UK. ISBN

1-85153-269-2. 272 pp.

http://www.marlin.ac.uk/speciesinformation.php?speciesID=3814

http://qsr2010.ospar.org/media/assessments/p00390_2009_CEMP_assessment_report.pdf

http://www.ospar.org/documents/dbase/publications/p00596/p00596_assessment_report_2012_cemp.pdf

http://www.ospar.org/documents/dbase/publications/p00596/p00596_assessment_report_2012_cemp.pdf

http://www.biodiversityscotland.gov.uk/advice-and-resources/scottish-biodiversity-list/

http://www.biodiversityscotland.gov.uk/advice-and-resources/scottish-biodiversity-list/


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 55

UK Marine SACs Project, (2001). Available online: http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/activities/water-

quality/wq8_9.htm Accessed 11/02/15

UKOOA, 2001. An analysis of UK Offshore oil and gas environmental surveys 1975 – 1995,

Aberdeen: Heriot-Watt University, UKOOA.

Ware, S. J., and Kenny, A. J. (2011), Guidelines for the Conduct of Benthic Studies at Aggregate

Dredging Sites 2nd edition. Marine Aggregate Levy Sustainability Fund. 80pp

WoRMS Editorial Board (2015). World Register of Marine Species. Available from

http://www.marinespecies.org at VLIZ. Accessed 2015-01-28

http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/activities/water-quality/wq8_9.htm

http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/activities/water-quality/wq8_9.htm


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 56

6. APPENDICES


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 57

A. APPENDIX A DECK PHOTOS

Site 1 Site 2

Site 4 Site 5

Site 6 Site 7


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 58

Site 8 Site 9

Site 10 Site 11

Site 12 Site 13


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 59

Site 14 Site 15

Site 16 Site 17

Site 18 Site 19


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 60

T1

T2


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 61

T4


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 62

B. APPENDIX B VIDEO LOGS


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 63

Hyperdigital Log

Site Date Start Time (GMT) Start Depth (m BCD)

WGS84 UTM Z30N

Start Position End Position

Easting [m] Northing [m] Easting [m] Northing [m]

1 11/10/2014 08:10 27.8 499342.9 6221925.8 499220.3 6221928.7

2 10/10/2014 14:20 20 500158.5 6224769.1 500147.3 6224879.0

3 10/10/2014 15:12 11.6 498776.9 6224930.1 498613.1 6224717.6

4 11/10/2014 11:05 19.2 499783.7 6223461.2 499563.6 6223025.7

5 11/10/2014 10:26 18.7 498848.8 6223542.1 499023.9 6223798.6

6 10/10/2014 15:36 15.6 498924.3 6224229.2 498745.9 6224165.2

7 11/10/2014 08:46 28.5 501177.1 6222936.3 501078.1 6222895.2

8 11/10/2014 07:48 27.6 498296.5 6220938.9 498132.8 6220854.7

9 11/10/2014 08:29 32.1 501000.9 6221758.3 500902.5 6221737.6

10 11/10/2014 11:37 21.2 500011.0 6223762.0 500398.3 6224083.7

11 11/10/2014 10:09 17.3 498658.7 6223253.1 498560.6 6223198.3

12 10/10/2014 14:55 18.9 499735.5 6224490.9 499626.1 6224471.1

13 11/10/2014 09:16 22.5 499148.5 6222709.7 499072.7 6222630.7

14 11/10/2014 09:02 28.2 500053.8 6222528.0 499954.3 6222533.3

15 10/10/2014 15:55 14.2 497735.8 6223883.4 497609.9 6223776.3

16 11/10/2014 09:38 18.8 497691.2 6222491.0 498117.0 6222738.9

17 10/10/2014 14:38 13.6 499724.1 6225289.2 499610.6 6225175.5

18 10/10/2014 13:48 18.5 500607.7 6225008.0 500834.7 6225471.3

19 10/10/2014 09:54 24.6 501636.5 6224709.9 501598.2 6224690.5


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 64

Static Image Log

Site Stills PICT No. Date WGS84 UTM Z30N

Easting [m] Northing [m]

1 A128 11/10/2014

1 A129 11/10/2014 499274.6 6221929.9

1 A130 11/10/2014 499267.4 6221931.3

1 A131 11/10/2014 499263.3 6221932.0

1 A132 11/10/2014 499259.4 6221932.4

1 A133 11/10/2014 499256.5 6221932.9

1 A134 11/10/2014 499253.1 6221933.1

1 A135 11/10/2014 499249.7 6221933.1

2 A034 10/10/2014

2 A035 10/10/2014 500158.5 6224769.1

2 A036 10/10/2014 500157.6 6224776.8

2 A037 10/10/2014 500154.8 6224785.1

2 A038 10/10/2014 500150.9 6224791.0

2 A039 10/10/2014 500147.4 6224795.8

2 A040 10/10/2014 500145.4 6224799.1

2 A041 10/10/2014 500140.9 6224818.3

3 A066 10/10/2014

3 A067 10/10/2014 498757.2 6224945.7

3 A068 10/10/2014 498750.5 6224942.4

3 A069 10/10/2014 498741.7 6224940.7

3 A070 10/10/2014 498733.5 6224939.4

3 A071 10/10/2014 498725.0 6224938.1

3 A072 10/10/2014 498717.7 6224932.2

3 A073 10/10/2014 498698.8 6224915.0

3 A074 10/10/2014 498695.3 6224911.6

3 A075 10/10/2014 498669.7 6224886.7

3 A076 10/10/2014 498664.3 6224883.5

3 A077 10/10/2014 498659.3 6224880.3

3 A078 10/10/2014 498654.7 6224876.4

3 A079 10/10/2014 498651.3 6224871.9

3 A080 10/10/2014 498648.9 6224866.9

3 A081 10/10/2014 498632.3 6224848.2

3 A082 10/10/2014 498622.1 6224829.5

3 A083 10/10/2014 498616.0 6224810.8

3 A084 10/10/2014 498619.0 6224794.2

3 A085 10/10/2014 498619.4 6224760.3

3 A086 10/10/2014 498615.4 6224739.6

3 A087 10/10/2014 498614.8 6224730.1

4 A198 11/10/2014

4 A199 11/10/2014 499686.3 6223245.1

4 A200 11/10/2014 499683.5 6223241.0

4 A201 11/10/2014 499681.7 6223238.4

4 A202 11/10/2014 499679.6 6223235.9

4 A203 11/10/2014 499678.3 6223234.3

4 A204 11/10/2014 499675.6 6223231.8

4 A205 11/10/2014 499672.9 6223227.8

4 A206 11/10/2014 499670.8 6223224.6

5 A186 11/10/2014

5 A187 11/10/2014 498880.4 6223590.3

5 A188 11/10/2014 498881.9 6223594.7


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 65



5 A189 11/10/2014 498882.8 6223596.9

5 A190 11/10/2014 498883.5 6223598.9

5 A191 11/10/2014 498884.2 6223600.5

5 A192 11/10/2014 498884.9 6223601.8

5 A193 11/10/2014 498885.9 6223602.6

5 A194 11/10/2014 498887.6 6223604.6

5 A195 11/10/2014 498889.7 6223606.6

5 A196 11/10/2014 498891.3 6223608.0

5 A197 11/10/2014 498894.8 6223610.5

6 A088 10/10/2014

6 A089 10/10/2014 498876.0 6224250.3

6 A090 10/10/2014 498843.3 6224263.1

6 A091 10/10/2014 498839.4 6224262.1

6 A092 10/10/2014 498819.7 6224246.2

6 A093 10/10/2014 498804.2 6224235.4

6 A094 10/10/2014 498797.4 6224231.1

6 A095 10/10/2014 498795.1 6224230.1

6 A096 10/10/2014 498792.5 6224229.0

6 A097 10/10/2014 498790.3 6224227.4

6 A098 10/10/2014 498788.6 6224223.6

6 A099 10/10/2014 498784.9 6224220.2

6 A100 10/10/2014 498781.4 6224217.3

6 A101 10/10/2014 498758.2 6224192.9

6 A102 10/10/2014 498751.6 6224180.7

6 A103 10/10/2014 498750.2 6224175.9

7 A144 11/10/2014

7 A145 11/10/2014 501136.0 6222906.3

7 A146 11/10/2014 501132.0 6222905.9

7 A147 11/10/2014 501123.1 6222905.0

7 A148 11/10/2014 501120.1 6222904.7

7 A149 11/10/2014 501117.5 6222904.4

7 A150 11/10/2014 501114.2 6222904.0

7 A151 11/10/2014 501109.5 6222903.4

7 A152 11/10/2014 501104.4 6222902.7

8 A119 11/10/2014

8 A120 11/10/2014 498164.7 6220859.2

8 A121 11/10/2014 498158.2 6220858.4

8 A122 11/10/2014 498153.8 6220858.3

8 A123 11/10/2014 498149.6 6220858.0

8 A124 11/10/2014 498146.2 6220857.7

8 A125 11/10/2014 498143.6 6220857.4

8 A126 11/10/2014 498140.7 6220856.9

8 A127 11/10/2014 498136.6 6220855.8

9 A136 11/10/2014

9 A137 11/10/2014 500939.0 6221744.8

9 A138 11/10/2014 500929.9 6221746.6

9 A139 11/10/2014 500926.1 6221746.9

9 A140 11/10/2014 500923.8 6221746.8

9 A141 11/10/2014 500921.2 6221746.7

9 A142 11/10/2014 500918.5 6221746.4

9 A143 11/10/2014 500914.8 6221745.3


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 66



10 A207 11/10/2014

10 A208 11/10/2014 500202.0 6223918.0

10 A209 11/10/2014 500204.9 6223920.4

10 A210 11/10/2014 500207.0 6223922.0

10 A211 11/10/2014 500209.5 6223923.6

10 A212 11/10/2014 500211.3 6223924.9

10 A213 11/10/2014 500213.5 6223926.7

10 A214 11/10/2014 500214.8 6223927.9

11 A178 11/10/2014

11 A179 11/10/2014 498608.5 6223227.1

11 A180 11/10/2014 498605.4 6223225.2

11 A181 11/10/2014 498603.2 6223223.4

11 A182 11/10/2014 498600.3 6223221.0

11 A183 11/10/2014 498598.5 6223219.2

11 A184 11/10/2014 498596.8 6223217.6

11 A185 11/10/2014 498594.1 6223215.1

12 A055 10/10/2014

12 A056 10/10/2014 499667.9 6224520.1

12 A057 10/10/2014 499657.0 6224519.3

12 A058 10/10/2014 499646.2 6224516.1

12 A059 10/10/2014 499636.0 6224515.3

12 A060 10/10/2014 499620.0 6224505.7

12 A061 10/10/2014 499619.5 6224499.5

12 A062 10/10/2014 499619.9 6224496.1

12 A063 10/10/2014 499620.5 6224492.6

12 A064 10/10/2014 499621.0 6224489.4

12 A065 10/10/2014 499621.5 6224485.1

13 A160 11/10/2014

13 A161 11/10/2014 499127.4 6222674.2

13 A162 11/10/2014 499125.8 6222671.1

13 A163 11/10/2014 499124.1 6222668.3

13 A164 11/10/2014 499122.7 6222665.8

13 A165 11/10/2014 499120.8 6222663.2

13 A166 11/10/2014 499118.8 6222660.8

13 A167 11/10/2014 499117.1 6222658.9

14 A153 11/10/2014

14 A154 11/10/2014 500014.9 6222523.9

14 A155 11/10/2014 500010.0 6222527.3

14 A156 11/10/2014 500006.3 6222529.6

14 A157 11/10/2014 500002.5 6222531.9

14 A158 11/10/2014 499998.6 6222532.9

14 A159 11/10/2014 499995.1 6222533.3

15 A104 10/10/2014

15 A105 10/10/2014 497699.8 6223860.2

15 A106 10/10/2014 497695.6 6223858.1

15 A107 10/10/2014 497688.8 6223855.1

15 A108 10/10/2014 497679.3 6223849.5

15 A109 10/10/2014 497662.9 6223834.2

15 A110 10/10/2014 497660.9 6223831.2

15 A111 10/10/2014 497658.5 6223827.3

15 A112 10/10/2014 497656.5 6223823.4


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 67



15 A113 10/10/2014 497654.3 6223819.3

15 A114 10/10/2014 497645.8 6223809.9

15 A115 10/10/2014 497642.1 6223807.2

15 A116 10/10/2014 497637.0 6223803.3

15 A117 10/10/2014 497632.2 6223799.6

16 A168 11/10/2014

16 A170 11/10/2014 497893.8 6222610.5

16 A171 11/10/2014 497896.4 6222611.7

16 A172 11/10/2014 497900.4 6222613.7

16 A173 11/10/2014 497904.0 6222615.4

16 A174 11/10/2014 497906.8 6222616.9

16 A175 11/10/2014 497909.4 6222618.0

16 A176 11/10/2014 497912.1 6222619.4

16 A177 11/10/2014 497915.8 6222621.8

17 A042 10/10/2014

17 A043 10/10/2014 499698.3 6225266.5

17 A044 10/10/2014 499695.1 6225258.4

17 A045 10/10/2014 499690.5 6225250.4

17 A046 10/10/2014 499686.6 6225247.9

17 A047 10/10/2014 499662.8 6225238.6

17 A048 10/10/2014 499655.5 6225229.4

17 A049 10/10/2014 499638.3 6225205.1

17 A050 10/10/2014 499630.0 6225192.7

17 A051 10/10/2014 499628.1 6225190.0

17 A052 10/10/2014 499625.6 6225186.5

17 A053 10/10/2014 499622.7 6225182.8

17 A054 10/10/2014 499619.3 6225180.0

18 A022 10/10/2014

18 A023 10/10/2014 500714.2 6225210.2

18 A024 10/10/2014 500721.7 6225230.1

18 A025 10/10/2014 500725.0 6225237.3

18 A026 10/10/2014 500728.5 6225243.3

18 A027 10/10/2014 500730.7 6225246.9

18 A028 10/10/2014 500733.3 6225251.9

18 A029 10/10/2014 500735.4 6225255.4

18 A030 10/10/2014 500826.5 6225433.1

18 A031 10/10/2014 500829.2 6225449.0

18 A032 10/10/2014 500830.4 6225456.8

18 A033 10/10/2014 500831.8 6225463.5

19 A010 10/10/2014

19 A011 10/10/2014 501614.7 6224702.0

19 A012 10/10/2014 501576.3 6224692.2

19 A013 10/10/2014 501571.8 6224688.0

19 A014 10/10/2014 501570.5 6224685.8

19 A015 10/10/2014 501568.9 6224676.0

19 A016 10/10/2014 501568.4 6224672.0

19 A017 10/10/2014 501567.6 6224666.3

19 A018 10/10/2014 501566.4 6224663.7

19 A019 10/10/2014 501591.1 6224680.4

19 A020 10/10/2014 501595.4 6224686.1

19 A021 10/10/2014 501598.2 6224690.5


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 68

C. APPENDIX C GRAB LOGS


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 69

Site

No. Date

Fauna

Lab.

Ref.

No.

PSA

Lab.

Ref.

No.

Depth

(m

BCD)

WGS84 UTM Z30 N Fauna

(volume

L)

PSA

In-situ

Sediment

Description

Sediment

Features

Sediment

Anoxia

Anthropogenic

Features

Conspicuous

Fauna Easting [m]

Northing

[m]

1 12/10/14 13187 13206 27.4 499261.5 6221935.2 15 300 Clay / Mud - Streaks - -

2 11/10/14 13188 - 19.6 500151.7 6224779.2 2 -

Pebbly

gravelly sand

with cobble

(8cm) - Streaks Broken Glass Ophiothrix

3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 498661.8176 6224877.904 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

4 12/10/14 13190 13209 19.8 499680.6 6223233.3 12 300 Sand - Patches -

Astropecten

irregularis

5 12/10/14 13191 13210 19.1 498892.3 6223601.2 8 300 Sand - - - Ophiura

6 11/10/14 - 13211 15.1 498794.3 6224222.9 - 300

Shelly pebbly

sand - Streaks -

Ophiothrix,

Ophiura

6 11/10/14 13192 - 15.3 498797.6 6224230.9 3.5 -

Shelly sand

with 2 cobbles

(9 & 7cm) Tubes Streaks - Ophiothrix

7 12/10/14 13193 13212 28.6 501119.9 6222900.7 15 300 Clay / Mud - Patches - -

8 12/10/14 13194 13213 27.5 498153.0 6220858.5 15 300 Clay / Mud - Streaks - -

9 12/10/14 13195 13214 32.5 500929.2 6221746.0 15 300 Clay / Mud - Streaks - -

10 12/10/14 13196 13215 20.6 500218.3 6223918.4 9 300

Slightly shelly

sand Tubes Patches - -

11 12/10/14 13197 13216 17.8 498608.2 6223227.7 14 300 Shelly mud Tubes Patches - Nephtys

12 11/10/14 13198 - 17.6 499617.4 6224500.3 3.5 -

Slightly shelly

slightly pebbly

sand with

cobble (9cm) Tubes Streaks - Ophiothrix

12 11/10/14 - 13217 17.5 499621.8 6224496.4 - 300

Slightly shelly

slightly pebbly

sand with

cobble (8cm) Tubes Streaks - Ophiothrix

13 12/10/14 13199 13218 23.7 499118.6 6222665.6 15 300 Clay / Mud Tubes Streaks - -

14 12/10/14 13200 13219 28.1 499997.7 6222526.6 15 300 Clay / Mud - Streaks - -

15 12/10/14 13201 13220 14.1 497658.6 6223825.2 13 300

Sandy shelly

mud - Patches - -


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 70

Site

No. Date

Fauna

Lab.

Ref.

No.

PSA

Lab.

Ref.

No.

Depth

(m

BCD)

WGS84 UTM Z30 N Fauna

(volume

L)

PSA

In-situ

Sediment

Description

Sediment

Features

Sediment

Anoxia

Anthropogenic

Features

Conspicuous

Fauna Easting [m]

Northing

[m]

16 12/10/14 13202 13221 18.8 497900.7 6222612.3 14 300 Shelly mud Tubes - - -

17 11/10/14 13203 13222 14.1 499628.8 6225185.0 9.5 300 Sand - Patches - Echinocardium

18 11/10/14 13204 13223 16.4 500728.1 6225238.8 10 300 Sand - Streaks - Echinocardium

19 11/10/14 13205 13224 20.4 501584.2 6224686.0 6 300

Slightly pebbly

shelly sand Tubes Patches - Ophiothrix

Site

No. Attempts

Successful

Sample

Collected

(Y/N)

Brief Description of Problems with Sample

Size of

Sample

Retained

Additional Notes on Quality of Retained Samples

2 3 Fauna only Three attempts returned small samples 2 Indicative Fauna only obtained for first attempt

3 N/A N Sample not attempted due to obstructive sediment N/A N/A

12 4 Y First sample water only, Second sample fauna only, third sample PSA only 3.5 Fauna taken from second attempt, PSA taken from third attempt

6 4 Y First two samples were small volume, third was water only 3.5 PSA was taken from first attempt, Fauna was taken from forth attempt


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 71

D. APPENDIX D CONTAMINANT LOGS


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 72

Site

No. Date

Depth

(m

BCD)

WGS84 UTM Z30N Sample

Size

Hydro-

carbons Organotins

P

C

B

P

A

H

Metals

In-situ

Sediment

Description

Sediment

features

Sediment

Anoxia

Anthropogenic

Features

Conspicuous

Fauna Easting

[m]

Northing

[m]

3 N/A N/A 498661.8 6224877.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

5 12/10/2014 19.1 498887.6 6223597.9 3/4 Y Y Y Y - - - - - -

5 12/10/2014 19.1 498884.7 6223595.8 1/2 - - - - Y - - - - -

12 N/A N/A 499620.3 6224495.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Site

No. Attempts

Successful Sample

Collected (Y/N) Brief Description of Problems with Sample

Size of Sample

Retained Additional Notes on Quality of Retained Samples

3 N/A N Sample not attempted due to obstructive sediment N/A

12 3 N Cobble in jaw for all 3 attempts -

5 3 Y second attempt grab did not fire 3/4 and 1/2

Hydrocarbons, organotins, PCB and PAH from attempt 1, Metals from

attempt 2


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 73

E. APPENDIX E 2 M BEAM TRAWL LOGS


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 74

Site No Date Point on line WGS84 UTM (Z30N) Time

(GMT)

Depth

(BCD m)

Trawl Speed

(knots)

Distance

(m)

Direction of

Travel Comments


T1 12/10/14 Start 499956 6223736 14:52 20.4 1.8

517 Into Current

End 500374 6224041 15:01 21.2

T2 13/10/14 Start 499814 6223421 07:58 19.1 1.5

478 Into Current

End 499558 6223016 08:07 21.1

T3 N/A Start 499029 6223803 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Not attempted due to

obstructive sediment End 498745 6223392

T4 13/10/14 Start 497911 6222634 08:47 18.5 1.6

276 Into Current

Shortened due to obstructive

sediment End 497679 6222483 08:52 18.8

T5 N/A Start 500614 6225021 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Not attempted due to

obstructive sediment End 500846 6225464

Site

Number Date

Total

Volume

(Litres)

Sediment Character (Percentage) % Shell

Material % Algae Other Features

Mud Sand Granules Pebble Cobbles Lge Cobbles Boulders

T1 12/10/14 129 20 80 Twig, fucoid algae

T2 13/10/14 31 85 15 Trawl rubber, fucoid algae, stick, dead

leaves, chaetopterus tube

T4 13/10/14 115.3


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 75

F. APPENDIX F VIDEO ANALYSIS DATA


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 76

Site General Description Detailed Sediment Notes Conspicuous Species

Estimated

Abundance

Representative Image

1 Slightly shelly, slightly

muddy rippled sand

56°08.5427 N,

003°00.6337 W

To

56°08.5441 N,

003°00.7526 W

(123.2m2)

Fine muddy sand with occasional

shells and shelly patches. Ripples

and holes present and occasional

burrows and depressions. Some

tracks from mobile epifauna

observed.


Paguridae

Pennatula phosphorea

Asterias rubens

Liocarcinus

Astropecten irregularis

Metridium senile

PISCES

Gobiidae

PLEURONECTIFORMES

?Arctica islandica (?dead)

F

O

O

O

F

O

O

O

P

O

O

2 Ophiothrix beds overlying

rippled sand with cobbles

and boulders

56°10.0750 N,

002°59.8473 W

to

56°10.0951 N,

002°59.8619 W

(40.2m2)

Most detail obscured by Ophiothrix

fragilis.

Ophiothrix fragilis

Asterias rubens

Echinus esculentus

Necora puber

Gadidae

Ophiura albida

P

F

O

O

O

O


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 77


Estimated

Abundance


Slightly shelly, slightly

gravelly rippled sand.

56°10.0951 N,

002°59.8619 W

To

56°10.1277 N,

002°59.8592 W

(60.5m2)

Slightly shelly slightly gravelly fine

sand. Ripples and holes present,

some tubes visible.

Asterias rubens

DECAPODA

Ophiura

Cancer pagurus

Henricia

Liocarcinus

Gobiidae

ACTINIARIA

F

O

F

O

O

O

O

O

Slightly shelly gravelly,

pebbly, cobbly sand with

boulders

56°10.1277 N,

002°59.85.92 W

To

56°10.1350 N,

002°59.8577 W

(13.6m2)

Large boulders covered with

encrusting and mobile epifauna

overlaying slightly shelly gravelly,

pebbly, cobbly fine sand.

Echinus esculentus

Asterias rubens

Ophiothrix fragilis?

Alcyonium digitatum

Spirobranchus

Corallinaceae

F

F

O

P

P

P


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 78


Estimated

Abundance


3 Pebbles and cobbles with

large boulders and

bedrock with occasional

patches of sand

56°10.1620 N,

003°01.1821 W

To

56°10.0475 N,

003°01.3401 W

(268m2)

Large boulders and bedrock

covered with encrusting and

mobile epifauna and silt

flocculation, interspersed with

pebbles, cobbles and occasional

sand patches.

Echinus esculentus

Alcyonium digitatum

Asterias rubens

Spirobranchus

Gobiidae

LAMINARIALES

Cancer pagurus

Necora puber

Liocarcinus

Callionymidae

C

P

F

P

O

F

O

O

O

O

4 Slightly gravelly slightly

shelly rippled sand with

occasional pebble and

very occasional boulder

56°09.3706 N,

003°00.2090 W

To

56°09.1356 N,

003°00.4213 W

(488.2m2)

Slightly shelly fine sand. Burrows

and holes present, tubes visible.

Some tracks from mobile epifauna

observed.

Ascidiella aspersa

Asterias rubens

Metridium senile(

Ophiura

Gobiidae

Majidae


Psammechinus miliaris

Liocarcinus

Alcyonium digitatum


PISCES


Pagurus bernhardus

Hydractinia echinata

HYDROZOA/BRYOZOA

turf

PLEURONECTIFORMES

Paguridae

R

F

O

F

P

O

F

O

O

P

O

O

F

P

R

R

O

O


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 79


Estimated

Abundance


5

Slightly shelly sand mixed

with patches of coarse

mixed sediment including

cobbles and occasional

boulders. Area is soon

dominated by the coarse

sediment with boulders,

interspersed with some

open patches of the

shelly sand.

56o 09.3344 N

003o 01.1914 W

To

56o

09.5042 N

003o 01.0013 W

(371.4m2)

The shelly sand mixed with coarse

mixed sediment and boulders is

dominated by dense swathes of

Ascidiella aspersa and the starfish

Asterias rubens. Echinus

esculentus become notable around

larger cobbles and boulders. Small

patches with ophiuroid arms

(probably Ophiothrix) seen mixed

with Ascidiella on the boulders.

Some areas of the substrate

appearing to be compacted coarse

sediment. A few Pecten maximus

and some small flat fish are seen

within the more sandy sediment

patches.

Asterias rubens

Ascidiella aspersa

HYDROZOA/BRYOZOA

turf

Homarus gammarus

Echinus esculentus

Gobiidae

Pholis gunnellus

Pecten maximus

DECAPODA

Cancer pagurus

OPHIUROIDEA

Nemertesia antennina

PLEURONECTIFORMES

Alcyonium digitatum

Ophiura ophiura

Paguridae


Urticina

Gadidae

?Tubularia indivisa

F

F

R

O

F

P

O

O

O

O

R

O

O

R

P

P

O

O

O

R


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 80


Estimated

Abundance


Shelly sand with patches

of coarse sediment and

the occasional boulder.

56o

09.5042 N

003o 01.0013 W

To

56o

09.5520 N

003o

00.9436 W

(106.9m2)

Shelly sand dominates this section

but with some coarse sediment

present and occasional clusters of

boulders.

The brittlestar Ophiothrix fragilis

covers the area, forming a dense

carpet, appearing largely to

exclude Ascidiella aspersa, which

dominates the first section of the

transect. Asterias rubens and

Echinus esculentus are still

present in notable numbers.

Urticina and a few Pecten

maximus are also seen.

Ophiothrix fragilis

Asterias rubens

Ascidiella aspersa

HYDROZOA/BRYOZOA

turf

Echinus esculentus

Pecten maximus

DECAPODA

Urticina

85%

F

O

R

F

O

O

O

6 Patches of slightly shelly

sand with patches of

boulders and cobbles

56°09.7840 N,

003°01.0399 W

To

56°09.7500 N,

003°01.2111 W

(188.1m2)

Most detail obscured by

Ophiothrix. Patches of slightly

shelly rippled sand with patches of

boulders and cobbles. Where there

is a patch of clear shelly sand

burrows are visible.

Echinus esculentus

Corallinaceae

Asterias rubens

ACTINIARIA

PISCES

DECAPODA

Ophiothrix fragilis

Ophiura

Ophiura albida

F

R

F

O

O

O

A

O

O


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 81


Estimated

Abundance


7 Slightly shelly sand

56o

09.0872 N

002o 58.8629 W

To

56o 09.0652 N

002o 58.9581 W

(106.7m2)

Slightly shelly sand with many

tracks on the surface. Holes

present throughout with a few

burrows.

Pennatula phosphorea scattered

across the area. Lots of small

pagurid crabs in Turritellidae

shells.


Asterias rubens

ASTEROIDEA

Gobiidae

Paguridae

Majidae


Pectinidae

HYDROZOA/BRYOZOA

turf

Lanice conchilega

Chaetopterus tubes

DECAPODA

Liocarcinus

O

O

O

P

P

O

O

O

R

R

O

O

O

8

Slightly shelly rippled

sand

56o 08.0104 N

003o 01.6441 W

To

56o 07.9651 N

003o 01.8016 W

(183.5m2)

Slightly shelly rippled sand. Holes

and burrows present throughout.

Nephrops norvegicus seen in a

couple of burrows. Virgularia

mirabilis visible in patches. Crabs

present throughout.

DECAPODA

Paguridae

Gadidae

Chaetopterus tubes

Metridium senile

Asterias rubens

Nephrops norvegicus


Liocarcinus

PLEURONECTIFORMES


?Sabella tube

O

P

O

P

O

O

O

O

O

O

O

O


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 82


Estimated

Abundance


9

Slightly shelly sand

56o 08.4522 N

002o 59.0336 W

To

56o 08.4412 N

002o 59.1275 W

(99.4m2)

Slightly shelly sand with holes and

burrows.

Virgularia mirabilis seen across the

site. Nephrops norvegicus seen

within one burrow.

Chaetopterus tubes


Gadidae

Gobiidae

Paguridae

Liocarcinus

Metridium senile

Nephrops norvegicus

P

O

P

P

O

O

O

10

Slightly shelly rippled

sand. Few scattered

cobbles. One small

boulder seen.

56o 09.5324 N

002o 59.9894 W

To

56o

09.6790 N

002o 59.6665 W

(430.9m2)

Slightly shelly rippled sand with

small sparse but regular clumps of

Ascidiella aspersa across the area.

Small holes present in the

sediment. One small patch of

dense Ascidiella.

Asterias rubens and Astropecten

irregularis regularly seen. Rare

occurrence of Metridium senile and

very small rare presence of

Alcyonium digitatum.

Ascidiella aspersa

Paguridae

CARIDEA

HYDROZOA/BRYOZOA

turf

Asterias rubens

DECAPODA

Gobiidae

PLEURONECTIFORMES


Metridium senile

Aequipecten opercularis

Liocarcinus

Alcyonium digitatum

Pecten maximus

Lanice conchilega

R

O

P

R

F

O

P

O

F

O

O

O

R

O

R


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 83


Estimated

Abundance


Shelly gravelly sand with

pebbles and cobbles with

the occasional small

boulder.

56o 09.6790 N

002o 59.6665 W

To

56o

09.7056 N

002o 59.6152 W

(72.5m2)

The ground becomes coarser with

raised aggregated areas of

sediment, supporting dense

swathes of Ascidiella aspersa.

Where Ascidiella clusters around a

boulder, the arms of ophiuroids

can be seen within the faunal

mass. Starfish are still regularly

seen, and Echinus esculentus is

present.

Echinus esculentus

OPHIUROIDEA

Ascidiella aspersa

HYDROZOA/BRYOZOA

turf

Asterias rubens

Gobiidae


Alcyonium digitatum

Pecten maximus

Lanice conchilega

O

P

C

R

F

P

F

R

O

R

11

Slightly shelly sand with a

few pebbles.

56o 09.2580 N

003o 01.2955 W

To

56o 09.2285 N

003o 01.3897 W

(111.8m2)

Slightly shelly rippled sand with

small holes evident in places.

Sparse clumps of Ascidiella

aspersa. Small amounts of Lanice

conchilega. Asterias rubens dotted

throughout, with a few Ophiura

ophiura and Astropecten irregularis

also seen. Very little fauna seen

overall.

Lanice conchilega

Paguridae

Asterias rubens

Ascidiella aspersa

Gobiidae


Syngnathidae

Ophiura ophiura

Liocarcinus

Alcyonium digitatum

HYDROZOA/BRYOZOA

turf

R

R

F

R

P

O

O

O

O

R

R


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 84


Estimated

Abundance


12 Slightly shelly sand with

occasional boulders

56°09.9252 N,

003°00.2550 W

To

56°09.9142 N,

003°00.3610 W

(111.6m2)

Rippled shelly sand with pebbles

and boulders. Most detail obscured

by Ophiothrix. Camera lifted off

seabed before the end of the

video.

Ophiothrix fragilis

Asterias rubens

PISCES

Echinus esculentus

ACTINIARIA

Liocarcinus

Corallinaceae

Urticina

Gobiidae

A

F

O

F

O

O

R

O

P

13

Very slightly shelly sand

56o 08.9651 N

003o 00.8221 W

To

56o 08.9228 N

003o 00.8947 W

(108.7m2)

Sand with holes and burrows.

Pennatula phosphorea seen

regularly throughout the transect.

Asterias rubens also very frequent,

along with various small starfish

that were not easily identifiable due

to the visibility. Crabs and small

ophiuroids were also regularly

seen.

Asterias rubens


Paguridae


HYDROZOA/BRYOZOA

turf

OPHIUROIDEA

Gobiidae

Chaetopterus tubes

ASTEROIDEA

Gadidae

Liocarcinus


?Metridium senile

Ophiura ophiura

F

F

O

O

P

P

P

P

O

O

O

O

O

P


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 85


Estimated

Abundance


14 Slightly shelly sand

56°08.8671 N

002°59.9480 W

To

56°08.8700 N,

003°00.0434 W

(98.9m2)

Slightly shelly rippled sand. Mobile

epifauna tracks visible. Some

burrows present.

Asterias rubens

Liocarcinus


PISCES

HYDROZOA/BRYOZOA

turf Astropecten irregularis

DECAPODA

Gobiidae

F

F

F

O

R

O

O

O


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 86


Estimated

Abundance


15 Sand/mudstone ledging

and bedrock, mixed with

slightly shelly silty sand.

56°09.5977 N,

003°02.1868 W

To

56°09.5800 N,

003°02.2401 W

(64.2m2)

Slightly shelly silty sand with visible

burrows. Bedrock of mixed

composition emerging from the

sediment and forming flat ledges in

places. Other areas of dropped

edges appearing to be

sand/mudstone, with a thick

covering of shelly silty sand in

some places. Some coarser

sediment within the recesses.

Ophiura

Asterias rubens

Gobiidae

Nemertesia

Alcyonium digitatum

Corallinaceae

Cancer pagurus

Echinus esculentus

HYDROZOA/BRYOZOA

turf

PLEURONECTIFORMES

P

F

P

P

R

R

O

F

R

P


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 87


Estimated

Abundance


Slightly sandy pebbly

shelly gravel

56°09.5800 N,

003°02.2401 W

To

56°09.5585 N,

003°02.2728 W

(52.3m2)

An area of mixed coarse sediment

of sandy shelly gravel, forming

coarse shallow waves, with larger

pebbles and a few cobbles

aggregating within the recesses.

Cobbles and pebbles appear in

part, to comprise fragmented

mud/clay.

Asterias rubens

HYDROZOA/BRYOZOA

turf Cancer pagurus

Gobiidae

Liocarcinus

ACTINIARIA

F

A

O

O

O

O

Slightly gravelly slightly

shelly silty sand

56°09.5585 N,

003°02.2728 W

To

56°09.5405 N,

003°02.3077 W

(49.2m2)

Slightly gravelly slightly shelly silty

rippled sand. Mobile epifauna

tracks visible.

PLEURONECTIFORMES

Asterias rubens

DECAPODA

Liocarcinus

Gobiidae

O

F

O

O

O


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 88


Estimated

Abundance


16

Slightly shelly sand with

pebbles and cobbles.

Occasionally dense

aggregations of coarser

substrate within the main

sand matrix. Small holes

evident.

56o 08.8489 N

003o 02.2297 W

To

56o 08.9173 N

003o 02.0132 W

(257.6m2)

Sand with pebbles and cobbles,

with dense aggregations of

Ascidiella aspersa on the coarser

fraction. Substrate varying

between small coarser patches

and slightly open expanses of sand

with sparse pebbles and cobbles.

Very occasional small boulder.

Asterias rubens very common, rare

clumps of Nemertesia antennina,

sparse hydroid/bryozoan turf, A

few Astropecten irregularis and

Liocarcinus crabs. Pecten

maximus occasionally seen within

the sediment. Gastropod tracks

evident.

Ascidiella aspersa

Asterias rubens

Liocarcinus


Paguridae

Pecten maximus


Gobiidae

Alcyonium digitatum

HYDROZOA/BRYOZOA

turf Virgularia mirabilis

PLEURONECTIFORMES


CARIDEA

Urticina

O

F

O

O

O

O

O

P

R

R

O

O

O

P

O

Shelly sand with coarse

mixed sediment with

cobbles and pebbles and

small boulders.

56o 08.9173 N

003o 02.0132 W

To

56o 08.9806 N

003o 01.8188 W

(233.0m2)

Area coarser than the start of the

transect forming more dense

coarse sediment aggregations with

fewer expanse of sand. Coarse

sediment forming small raised

mounds in places. Small to

medium boulders regularly seen.

Ascidiella aspersa forming dense

aggregations across the site.

Within some patches, ophiuroid

arms seen in large numbers.

Asterias rubens common across

the area. Echinus esculentus now

evident on the coarse areas.

Ascidiella aspersa

Asterias rubens

Liocarcinus


Pecten maximus


Gobiidae

Alcyonium digitatum

HYDROZOA/BRYOZOA

turf CARIDEA

Urticina

Echinus esculentus

OPHIUROIDEA

Urticina

F

F

O

O

O

O

P

R

R

P

O

O

P

O


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 89


Estimated

Abundance


17

Shelly sand with

occasional boulder

56°10.3557 N,

003°00.2668 W

To

56°10.3512 N,

003°00.2700 W

(18.9m2)

Rippled shelly sand with burrows.

Occasional boulder visible.

Asterias rubens

PLEURONECTIFORMES

Ophiura

Liocarcinus

O

O

F

O


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 90


Estimated

Abundance


Slightly pebbly gravelly

shelly silty sand with

boulders and

sand/mudstone

(compacted sediment)

56°10.3512 N,

033°00.2700 W

To

56°10.3189 N,

003°00.3366 W

(91.3m2)

Slightly pebbly gravelly shelly sand

with cobbles and boulders. Areas

of mud/sand stone ledging, forming

shallow dropped steps in some

areas, and flat topped exposures in

others. Relatively large holes

bored in the surface. The

compacted sediment areas form a

mosaic with the bedrock and

boulders. Patches of rippled sand

fill the recesses between the

various hard substrata. A thin

sediment covering evident across

much of the area.

Large holes bored into the

mud/sand stone, and small holes

visible within the softer sediment.

Length of rope or cable visible and

possible tyre.

Asterias rubens

Echinus esculentus

Corallinaceae

Alcyonium digitatum

Ophiura

Ophiothrix fragilis

Spirobranchus

Liocarcinus

Gobiidae

F

F

R

R

F

F

R

O

P


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 91


Estimated

Abundance


Slightly shelly silty sand

with occasional

sand/mudstone outcrop

56°10.3189 N,

003°00.3366 W

To

56°10.2944 N,

003°00.3760 W

(61.1m2)

Slightly shelly silty rippled sand

with occasional sand/mudstone

outcrop. Burrows and tubes visible.

PISCES

Ophiura

Asterias rubens

PLEURONECTIFORMES

Liocarcinus

Gobiidae

O

F

F

O

O

P

18 Slightly gravelly shelly

sand with boulders

56°10.2057 N,

002°59.4122 W

To

56°10.2766 N,

002°59.3508 W

(146.1m2)

Most detail obscured by

Ophiothrix.

Ophiothrix fragilis

Asterias rubens

Callionymidae

Echinus esculentus

Alcyonium digitatum

ACTINIARIA

Corallinaceae

P

F

O

F

R

O

R


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 92


Estimated

Abundance


Slightly gravelly shelly

sand with gravelly pebbly

patches and occasional

boulder

56°10.2766 N,

002°59.3508 W

to

56°10.4194 N,

002°59.2070 W

(303.8m2)

Rippled shelly sand with gravelly

and pebbly patches and occasional

boulders. Occasional tube visible.

Liocarcinus

Asterias rubens

Echinus esculentus

Necora puber

Paguridae


Ascidiella aspersa

Gobiidae

PISCES


Ophiura

PLEURONECTIFORMES

O

F

F

O

O

O

R

P

O

O

P

O

Cobbly pebbly gravelly

shelly sand with boulders

56°10.4194 N,

002°59.2070 W

To

56°10.4534 N,

002°59.1942 W

(64.4m2)

Cobbly pebbly gravelly shelly sand

with boulders, and patches of

rippled sand. Encrusting and

mobile fauna visible.

Echinus esculentus

Asterias rubens

Corallinaceae

HYDROZOA/BRYOZOA

turf Alcyonium digitatum

F

F

R

R

R


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 93


Estimated

Abundance


19 Pebbly shelly gravelly

rippled sand

56°10.0432 N,

002°58.4188 W

To

56°10.0389 N,

002°58.4418 W

(25.1m2)

Pebbly shelly gravelly rippled sand

with clumps of Ascidiella aspersa

associated with the pebbles.

Asterias rubens

Ascidiella aspersa

Liocarcinus


Alcyonium digitatum

HYDROZOA/BRYOZOA

turf

F

F

O

O

R

R

Cobbly shelly pebbly

gravelly sand

56°10.0389 N,

002°58.4418 W

To

56°10.0372 N,

002°58.4599 W

(19.0m2)

Cobbly shelly pebbly gravelly sand

with occasional small boulders and

dense clumps of Ascidiella

aspersa. The mixed coarse

sediment becomes more

consolidated in some areas and

forms raised areas and occasional

depressions.

Ascidiella aspersa

Echinus esculentus


Corallinaceae

Majidae

Ophiura

Spirobranchus

Asterias rubens

HYDROZOA/BRYOZOA

turf

C

F

O

R

O

P

R

O

C


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 94


Estimated

Abundance


Slightly pebbly shelly

gravelly rippled sand with

occasional cobbles

56°10.0372 N,

002°58.4599 W

To

56°10.0288 N,

002°58.4834 W

(28.9m2)

Slightly pebbly shelly gravelly

rippled sand with occasional

clumps of Ascidiella aspersa

associated with the pebbles.

Burrows visible.

Asterias rubens

Ascidiella aspersa

Gobiidae

Callionymidae

PLEURONECTIFORMES

Liocarcinus

Spirobranchus

HYDROZOA/BRYOZOA

turf

O

R

P

O

O

O

R

R

Slightly cobbly pebbly

shelly gravelly rippled

sand with occasional

cobbles

56°10.0288 N,

002°58.4834 W

to

56°10.0352 N,

002°58.4533 W

(75.4m2)

Slightly cobbly pebbly shelly

gravelly rippled sand with clumps

of Ascidiella aspersa associated

with the pebbles and occasional

boulders. Burrows visible.

Asterias rubens

Ascidiella aspersa

HYDROZOA/BRYOZOA

turf PISCES

Alcyonium digitatum

Gobiidae

Echinus esculentus

Majidae

Spirobranchus

Ophiothrix fragilis

F

R

O

O

R

P

O

O

R

O


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 95

G. APPENDIX G GRAB FAUNAL ANALYSIS DATA


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 96

Epifauna Abundance Data Site 001 002 004 005 006 007 008 009 010

Species Name MCS Code Aphia ID TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL

PORIFERA C0001 558

Cliona (agg.) C0475 132026

ANTHOATHECATAE D0140 13551 P

CAMPANULINOIDEA D0338 13552 P

Sertularia D0433 117234

Campanulariidae D0491 1606

Alcyonium digitatum D0597 125333 P

ACTINIARIA D0662 1360 1

Pedicellina K0045 111796 P P

Verruca stroemia R0041 106257 1

CTENOSTOMATIDA Y0070 110723 P

Alcyonidium gelatinosum/Alcyonidioides mytili Y0077/Y0080 110783 P

Alcyonidium parasiticum Y0081 111604 P P

Membraniporoidea Y0167 153579

Conopeum reticulum Y0172 111351

Electra monostachys Y0177 111354

Electra pilosa Y0178 111355

Cribrilina punctata/Collarina balzaci Y0310/Y0314 110742 P

ASCIDIACEA (juv.) ZD0002 1839

Ascidiidae ZD0082 103443

Ascidiella ZD0083 103484

Ascidiella aspersa ZD0084 103718


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 97

Epifauna abundance data Site 011 012 013 014 015 016 017 018

Species Name MCS Code Aphia ID TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL

PORIFERA C0001 558 P

Cliona (agg.) C0475 132026 P P

ANTHOATHECATAE D0140 13551 P P

CAMPANULINOIDEA D0338 13552 P P P

Sertularia D0433 117234 P

Campanulariidae D0491 1606 P

Alcyonium digitatum D0597 125333

ACTINIARIA D0662 1360

Pedicellina K0045 111796

Verruca stroemia R0041 106257 4

CTENOSTOMATIDA Y0070 110723 P

Alcyonidium gelatinosum/Alcyonidioides mytili Y0077/Y0080 110783

Alcyonidium parasiticum Y0081 111604 P P

Membraniporoidea Y0167 153579 P P

Conopeum reticulum Y0172 111351 P

Electra monostachys Y0177 111354 P

Electra pilosa Y0178 111355 P

Cribrilina punctata/Collarina balzaci Y0310/Y0314 110742 P P P P

ASCIDIACEA (juv.) ZD0002 1839 4

Ascidiidae ZD0082 103443 3

Ascidiella ZD0083 103484 4

Ascidiella aspersa ZD0084 103718 7


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 98

Taxon

MCS

Code

Aphia

ID

001.1.1318

7

002.1.1318

8

004.1.1319

0

005.1.1319

1

006.1.1319

2

007.1.1319

3

008.1.1319

4

009.1.1319

5

010.1.1319

6

Cerianthus lloydii D0632 283798

2

1

Edwardsiidae D0759 100665

5

1

13

TURBELLARIA F0002 794

1

NEMERTEA G0001 152391

7 11 9 12 1

1 4

Golfingia elongata N0014 175026

Nephasoma minutum N0025 136060

Thysanocardia procera N0028 136063

1

Phascolion strombus N0034 410749 1

2

Pisione remota P0015 130707

Subadyte pellucida P0032 130833

2

7

Enipo kinbergi P0044 130738

Gattyana cirrhosa P0049 130749

Harmothoe P0050 129491

1

Malmgreniella darbouxi P0050 130812

1

1

Malmgrenia andreapolis P0051 147008

1

Harmothoe glabra P0062 571832

1

Pholoe baltica P0092 130599

1 3 2

6

Pholoe inornata P0094 130601

1

Pholoe assimilis P0091 130598

Sigalion mathildae P0104 131072

Sthenelais limicola P0109 131077

2

Eteone longa (agg.) P0118 130616

1

Hypereteone foliosa P0124 152250 1

Phyllodoce groenlandica P0141 334506

1

Phyllodoce rosea P0146 334514

2

Eumida P0163 129446

1

Eumida bahusiensis P0164 130641

1 1

1

Eumida sanguinea (agg.) P0167 130644

1

Glycera P0255 129296 1


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 99

Taxon

MCS

Code

Aphia

ID

001.1.1318

7

002.1.1318

8

004.1.1319

0

005.1.1319

1

006.1.1319

2

007.1.1319

3

008.1.1319

4

009.1.1319

5

010.1.1319

6

Glycera alba P0256 130116

1 1 1

Glycera celtica (?) P0257 130119

Glycera lapidum P0260 130123

Glycera unicornis P0255 130131 4

1 1

Glycinde nordmanni P0268 130136 1

1 1

1

1

Goniada maculata P0271 130140

1 1 2

1 1

Psamathe fusca P0305 152249

1

Oxydromus flexuosus P0313 710680

1

Podarkeopsis capensis P0319 130195

1 1 2

1

1

Syllis cornuta P0349 157583

2

Parexogone hebes P0421 757970

Exogone naidina P0422 131304

1

Eunereis longissima P0475 130375

1

Nephtys assimilis P0495 130353

1

Nephtys caeca P0496 130355

Nephtys hombergii P0499 130359 1

2 2

3

Nephtys incisa P0501 130362

3 4

Nephtys kersivalensis P0502 130363

2 2

2 1

Lumbrineris P0572 129337

1

Lumbrineris cingulata P0572 130240

9 2 19 3 1

1

Protodorvillea kefersteini P0638 130041

1

Orbinia sertulata P0665 130523

Scoloplos armiger P0672 334772

5 4

1

Levinsenia gracilis P0693 130578 1

1

Paradoneis lyra P0699 130585

1

Poecilochaetus serpens P0718 130711

1 3

2

Aonides oxycephala P0722 131106

1

Aonides paucibranchiata P0723 131107

Malacoceros girardi (?) P0736 338471

1


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 100

Taxon

MCS

Code

Aphia

ID

001.1.1318

7

002.1.1318

8

004.1.1319

0

005.1.1319

1

006.1.1319

2

007.1.1319

3

008.1.1319

4

009.1.1319

5

010.1.1319

6

Prionospio cirrifera P0747 131153

1

Dipolydora flava P0754 131118

3 1

Prionospio fallax P0765 131157

2

2

Pseudopolydora

paucibranchiata P0773 131168

1

Pseudopolydora pulchra P0774 131169

1

1

Spio symphyta P0787 596189

1

6

Spiophanes P0793 129626

Spiophanes bombyx P0794 131187

3 2

1

4

Spiophanes kroyeri P0796 131188 2

2

1 1

Magelona P0803 129341

1

Magelona alleni P0804 130266 8

8 2

1

9

Magelona filiformis P0805 130268

2

5

Magelona johnstoni P0803 130269

2

Aphelochaeta marioni P0824 129938

1

Caulleriella alata P0829 129943

Chaetozone christiei P0834 152217

1 1 1

Chaetozone setosa P0834 129955 1

6

Chaetozone zetlandica P0831 336485

2

Cirratulus (juv.) P0835 129243

2

Cirratulus cirratus P0836 129959

2

Cirriformia tentaculata P0839 129964

5

Diplocirrus glaucus P0878 130100

1

2 3

Pherusa plumosa P0885 130113

1

Capitella P0906 129211

Mediomastus fragilis P0919 129892

4

41 2 1

Notomastus P0920 129220 1

1

Peresiella clymenoides P0925 129906

1

Maldanidae P0938 923


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 101

Taxon

MCS

Code

Aphia

ID

001.1.1318

7

002.1.1318

8

004.1.1319

0

005.1.1319

1

006.1.1319

2

007.1.1319

3

008.1.1319

4

009.1.1319

5

010.1.1319

6

Microclymene tricirrata P0955 130309

2

Euclymene oerstedi P0964 130294

5

1

Rhodine P0989 129363 22

10

Ophelina acuminata P1014 130500

1

1

1

Scalibregma inflatum P1027 130980 1 2

1

7

Galathowenia oculata P1093 146950

2

1

Owenia P1097 129427

1

Owenia borealis P1097 329882 2

10 2

3 2

14

Amphictene auricoma P1102 152448

1

Lagis koreni P1107 152367 1

1 1

1

Sabellaria spinulosa P1117 130867

2

1

Melinna palmata P1124 129808

12 7 2

3

10

Ampharete P1133 129155

1

Ampharete lindstroemi (agg.) P1139 129781

1

4

2

Amphicteis gunneri P1142 129784 1

Anobothrus gracilis P1147 129789

5 6

7 2

3

Terebellides stroemii P1175 131573

1

1

Trichobranchus roseus P1178 131575

Terebellinae P1179 322588

Neoamphitrite edwardsi P1183 131503

Eupolymnia nesidensis P1190 131490

1

Lanice conchilega P1195 131495

Pista mediterranea P1216 131519

Lysilla loveni P1233 131500

Polycirrus P1235 129710

1

1 2

Polycirrus denticulatus P1239 131527

1

1

Streblosoma intestinale P1251 131540

Dialychone dunerificta P1257 558752

2

Hydroides norvegicus P1334 131009

2


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 102

Taxon

MCS

Code

Aphia

ID

001.1.1318

7

002.1.1318

8

004.1.1319

0

005.1.1319

1

006.1.1319

2

007.1.1319

3

008.1.1319

4

009.1.1319

5

010.1.1319

6

Spirobranchus (juv.) P1339 129582

Spirobranchus lamarcki P1340 560033

1

Spirobranchus triqueter P1341 555935

1

Tubificoides P1487 137393

1

Tubificoides amplivasatus P1489 137570

3

Tubificoides benedii P1490 137571

Tubificoides pseudogaster

(agg.) P1498 137582

Tubificoides swirencoides P1500 137584

1

Tubificoides galiciensis P1487 137576

25 1

Anoplodactylus petiolatus Q0044 134723

1

CRUSTACEA R0001 1066

1

Perioculodes longimanus S0131 102915

Synchelidium maculatum S0138 102928

1

Leucothoe incisa S0177 102460

Urothoe poseidonis S0250 103235

Harpinia antennaria S0254 102960

1

Acidostoma neglectum S0272 102495

1

Iphimedia obesa S0382 102347

Atylus vedlomensis S0413 102132

Ampelisca S0423 101445

1

Ampelisca brevicornis S0427 101891

2 3

1 2

Ampelisca diadema S0429 101896

1 2

Ampelisca tenuicornis S0440 101930 2

8 1

3 1

4

Ampelisca typica S0442 101933

1

2

Cheirocratus (female) S0503 101669

1

Cheirocratus sundevallii S0506 102798

1

Gammaropsis cornuta S0539 148545

Photis longicaudata S0552 102383

10


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 103

Taxon

MCS

Code

Aphia

ID

001.1.1318

7

002.1.1318

8

004.1.1319

0

005.1.1319

1

006.1.1319

2

007.1.1319

3

008.1.1319

4

009.1.1319

5

010.1.1319

6

Ericthonius (female) S0561 101567

Ericthonius punctatus S0564 102408

Unciola crenatipalma S0621 102057

Phtisica marina S0657 101864

1

Pseudoprotella phasma S0659 101871

Tanaopsis graciloides S1142 136458

1

Bodotria S1193 110387

Eudorellopsis (juv.) S1209 110413

Diastylis (juv.) S1247 110398

Diastylis laevis S1251 110481

Diastylis rugosa S1254 110488

CARIDEA S1293 106674

1

Hippolytidae S1334 106777

Hippolyte varians S1350 107518

Processa S1362 107054

Processa nouveli S1367 108345

1

Crangonidae S1380 106782

Philocheras bispinosus S1386 108207

1

Crangon allmanni S1384 107551

1

Callianassa subterranea S1415 107729

Paguridae (juv.) S1445 106738

Pagurus bernhardus S1457 107232

1 2

Pagurus cuanensis S1460 107235

1

Pisidia longicornis S1482 107188 2

Liocarcinus S1577 106925

1

Liocarcinus (juv.) S1577 106925

2

1

Liocarcinus depurator S1580 107387 1

Chaetoderma nitidulum W0009 139106

2 1

Gibbula (juv.) W0157 138590

1


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 104

Taxon

MCS

Code

Aphia

ID

001.1.1318

7

002.1.1318

8

004.1.1319

0

005.1.1319

1

006.1.1319

2

007.1.1319

3

008.1.1319

4

009.1.1319

5

010.1.1319

6

Gibbula tumida W0161 141799

Turritella communis W0270 141872

1

10 8

Hyala vitrea W0410 140129

2 3

Euspira nitida W0491 151894

Bela nebula W0801 139217

Philine (juv.) W1036 138339

Philine aperta W1038 140744

1

Cylichna cylindracea W1028 139476

4

4

5

Facelina W1467 137997

BIVALVIA W1560 105

Nucula (juv.) W1565 138262

Nucula nitidosa W1569 140589

1 4

1

5

Mytilidae (juv.) W1691 211

1

Musculus subpictus W1718 506128

Aequipecten opercularis W1773 140687

Anomiidae (juv.) W1805 214

Lucinoma borealis W1829 140283

7

1

Thyasiridae W1833 219

1

Thyasira W1835 138552

1

Thyasira flexuosa W1837 141662

1

Devonia perrieri W1898 140365

Kurtiella bidentata W1906 345281 4

5 17 2 1 20

20

Tellimya ferruginosa W1902 146952

3

Parvicardium W1947 137739

1

Spisula (juv.) W1973 138159

Ensis W1996 138333

1

Ensis (juv.) W1996 138333

1

Ensis magnus W1998 160539

Phaxas pellucidus W2006 140737

21 11

1

10


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 105

Taxon

MCS

Code

Aphia

ID

001.1.1318

7

002.1.1318

8

004.1.1319

0

005.1.1319

1

006.1.1319

2

007.1.1319

3

008.1.1319

4

009.1.1319

5

010.1.1319

6

Tellina fabula W2019 141587

1

Gari fervensis W2051 140870

4

Abra W2058 138474

1

Abra (juv.) W2058 138474

1

3

Abra alba W2059 141433 1

Abra nitida W2061 141435

1

1

Veneridae (juv.) W2086 243

4 5

3

1 7

Dosinia (juv.) W2126 138636

15

1 4

2

Dosinia lupinus W2128 141912 4

1 2

Dosinia exoleta W2130 141911

Polititapes rhomboides W2113 745846

1

Chamelea striatula W2098 141908

3 8

1 1

Mysia undata W2139 140728 1

2

Mya (juv.) W2144 138211

1

Mya truncata W2147 140431

1

Corbula gibba W2157 139410

1

Thracioidea (juv.) W2226 382318

4

6

Thracia (juv.) W2227 138549

8

3

Thracia convexa W2229 141644

Thracia phaseolina W2231 152378

2 3 3

1

Cochlodesma praetenue W2239 181373

2

Phoronis ZA0003 128545 72

68 4

64 15 1 125

Astropecten irregularis ZB0026 123867

3

OPHIUROIDEA (juv.) ZB0105 123084

Ophiothrix fragilis ZB0124 125131

55

105

Amphiuridae ZB0148 123206

1 1

3

Amphiuridae (juv.) ZB0148 123206

2 1 1

3

Acrocnida brachiata ZB0151 236130

6 5

20

Amphiura filiformis ZB0154 125080

59 21

3

39


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 106

Taxon

MCS

Code

Aphia

ID

001.1.1318

7

002.1.1318

8

004.1.1319

0

005.1.1319

1

006.1.1319

2

007.1.1319

3

008.1.1319

4

009.1.1319

5

010.1.1319

6

Amphipholis squamata ZB0161 125064

Ophiuridae (juv.) ZB0165 123200

2 4 3 5

9

Ophiura ZB0166 123574

3

Ophiura (juv.) ZB0166 123574

2

Ophiura albida ZB0168 124913

20

3 4

Ophiura ophiura ZB0170 124929

4

ECHINOIDEA (juv.) ZB0181 123082

SPATANGOIDA ZB0213 123106

Echinocardium ZB0222 123426 1

1

1

Echinocardium cordatum ZB0223 124392

3

1

Leptopentacta elongata ZB0280 124635

Leptosynapta inhaerens ZB0296 124465

1

ENTEROPNEUSTA ZC0012 1820

1

Ammodytes ZG0442 125909


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 107

Taxon MCS Code Aphia ID 011.1.13197 012.1.13198 013.1.13199 014.1.13200 015.1.13201 016.1.13202 017.1.13203 018.1.13204

Cerianthus lloydii D0632 283798

3

Edwardsiidae D0759 100665 4

7

2 1 5

TURBELLARIA F0002 794 1

1

NEMERTEA G0001 152391 3 3 9

16 10 16 8

Golfingia elongata N0014 175026 1

Nephasoma minutum N0025 136060

Thysanocardia procera N0028 136063

1 2

1

Phascolion strombus N0034 410749

1

1

Pisione remota P0015 130707

1

Subadyte pellucida P0032 130833

8

Enipo kinbergi P0044 130738

1

Gattyana cirrhosa P0049 130749

1

Harmothoe P0050 129491

Malmgreniella darbouxi P0050 130812

1

Malmgrenia andreapolis P0051 147008 1

1 3

Harmothoe glabra P0062 571832

1

Pholoe baltica P0092 130599 12

1 18 2 3 3

Pholoe inornata P0094 130601

1

Pholoe assimilis P0091 130598

4

Sigalion mathildae P0104 131072

2 3

Sthenelais limicola P0109 131077

Eteone longa (agg.) P0118 130616

1

Hypereteone foliosa P0124 152250

Phyllodoce groenlandica P0141 334506

Phyllodoce rosea P0146 334514

Eumida P0163 129446

1

Eumida bahusiensis P0164 130641 6

1

3 2 1

Eumida sanguinea (agg.) P0167 130644

1

Glycera P0255 129296


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 108


Glycera alba P0256 130116

1

Glycera celtica (?) P0257 130119 1

Glycera lapidum P0260 130123

1

20

Glycera unicornis P0255 130131 1

2 2

1

Glycinde nordmanni P0268 130136 1 1 1

4

2

Goniada maculata P0271 130140 1

2 3

4

1

Psamathe fusca P0305 152249

2

Oxydromus flexuosus P0313 710680

Podarkeopsis capensis P0319 130195

1 4 1

Syllis cornuta P0349 157583

1 1

Parexogone hebes P0421 757970

Exogone naidina P0422 131304

Eunereis longissima P0475 130375

4

1

Nephtys assimilis P0495 130353 1

1

Nephtys caeca P0496 130355 1

1

1

Nephtys hombergii P0499 130359 3

1

Nephtys incisa P0501 130362

Nephtys kersivalensis P0502 130363 1 1 1

2

Lumbrineris P0572 129337

1

Lumbrineris cingulata P0572 130240 5 10 3

3 19 2

Protodorvillea kefersteini P0638 130041

4

Orbinia sertulata P0665 130523

1

1

Scoloplos armiger P0672 334772

41

11

Levinsenia gracilis P0693 130578

Paradoneis lyra P0699 130585 1

6

Poecilochaetus serpens P0718 130711

Aonides oxycephala P0722 131106

Aonides paucibranchiata P0723 131107

7

Malacoceros girardi (?) P0736 338471

1


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 109


Prionospio cirrifera P0747 131153

Dipolydora flava P0754 131118

1 1

1

Prionospio fallax P0765 131157

2

Pseudopolydora paucibranchiata P0773 131168

1

1 2

Pseudopolydora pulchra P0774 131169

Spio symphyta P0787 596189 2

1 20 12

Spiophanes P0793 129626

1

Spiophanes bombyx P0794 131187 3 1 1 1

1 4 6

Spiophanes kroyeri P0796 131188

1 1

Magelona P0803 129341

Magelona alleni P0804 130266 4

32 7

6

4

Magelona filiformis P0805 130268

6 61 54

Magelona johnstoni P0803 130269 1

2 61 52

Aphelochaeta marioni P0824 129938

1

Caulleriella alata P0829 129943

1

Chaetozone christiei P0834 152217

7 6

Chaetozone setosa P0834 129955 1

1

3

Chaetozone zetlandica P0831 336485

1

Cirratulus (juv.) P0835 129243

Cirratulus cirratus P0836 129959

Cirriformia tentaculata P0839 129964

Diplocirrus glaucus P0878 130100

1

1

Pherusa plumosa P0885 130113

Capitella P0906 129211

1

Mediomastus fragilis P0919 129892 1

15

1

Notomastus P0920 129220

Peresiella clymenoides P0925 129906

2

Maldanidae P0938 923 1

Microclymene tricirrata P0955 130309


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 110


Euclymene oerstedi P0964 130294

4

2 10

Rhodine P0989 129363 2

41 6

12

Ophelina acuminata P1014 130500

2

Scalibregma inflatum P1027 130980 3

2

5

Galathowenia oculata P1093 146950 2

4

1 1

Owenia P1097 129427

Owenia borealis P1097 329882 9 2 12 2

4 4 16

Amphictene auricoma P1102 152448 2

1

1

Lagis koreni P1107 152367 3

1 2

Sabellaria spinulosa P1117 130867

Melinna palmata P1124 129808 4

10 6

25 4

Ampharete P1133 129155

1

Ampharete lindstroemi (agg.) P1139 129781 3

1

6

Amphicteis gunneri P1142 129784

Anobothrus gracilis P1147 129789

1 5 2

5

Terebellides stroemii P1175 131573

Trichobranchus roseus P1178 131575

1

Terebellinae P1179 322588 1

Neoamphitrite edwardsi P1183 131503

1

Eupolymnia nesidensis P1190 131490

Lanice conchilega P1195 131495 1

1

6

Pista mediterranea P1216 131519

5

Lysilla loveni P1233 131500

1

Polycirrus P1235 129710

1 1 3

Polycirrus denticulatus P1239 131527

2

Streblosoma intestinale P1251 131540

1

Dialychone dunerificta P1257 558752

Hydroides norvegicus P1334 131009

Spirobranchus (juv.) P1339 129582


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 111


Spirobranchus lamarcki P1340 560033

13

Spirobranchus triqueter P1341 555935

1

Tubificoides P1487 137393

Tubificoides amplivasatus P1489 137570

Tubificoides benedii P1490 137571

1

Tubificoides pseudogaster (agg.) P1498 137582

1

Tubificoides swirencoides P1500 137584

Tubificoides galiciensis P1487 137576

3

Anoplodactylus petiolatus Q0044 134723 1

CRUSTACEA R0001 1066

Perioculodes longimanus S0131 102915

1

Synchelidium maculatum S0138 102928 1 1

Leucothoe incisa S0177 102460

1

Urothoe poseidonis S0250 103235

5

Harpinia antennaria S0254 102960 2

3

1

Acidostoma neglectum S0272 102495

Iphimedia obesa S0382 102347

Atylus vedlomensis S0413 102132

1

6

Ampelisca S0423 101445

1

Ampelisca brevicornis S0427 101891 5

8 6

Ampelisca diadema S0429 101896 3

1

1

Ampelisca tenuicornis S0440 101930

6 3

2

2

Ampelisca typica S0442 101933 1 1 2

1

2

Cheirocratus (female) S0503 101669

8

Cheirocratus sundevallii S0506 102798

Gammaropsis cornuta S0539 148545

1

Photis longicaudata S0552 102383

4

Ericthonius (female) S0561 101567

Ericthonius punctatus S0564 102408


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 112


Unciola crenatipalma S0621 102057

1

Phtisica marina S0657 101864

Pseudoprotella phasma S0659 101871

Tanaopsis graciloides S1142 136458 1

1

Bodotria S1193 110387

1

Eudorellopsis (juv.) S1209 110413

1

Diastylis (juv.) S1247 110398

Diastylis laevis S1251 110481

Diastylis rugosa S1254 110488

1

CARIDEA S1293 106674

Hippolytidae S1334 106777

Hippolyte varians S1350 107518

1

1

Processa S1362 107054

1

Processa nouveli S1367 108345

1

Crangonidae S1380 106782

1

Philocheras bispinosus S1386 108207

Crangon allmanni S1384 107551

Callianassa subterranea S1415 107729

1

Paguridae (juv.) S1445 106738

1

Pagurus bernhardus S1457 107232

1 1 1

Pagurus cuanensis S1460 107235

Pisidia longicornis S1482 107188

3

Liocarcinus S1577 106925

Liocarcinus (juv.) S1577 106925

3

1

Liocarcinus depurator S1580 107387

1

Chaetoderma nitidulum W0009 139106 1

1

2

Gibbula (juv.) W0157 138590

Gibbula tumida W0161 141799

2

Turritella communis W0270 141872

4 1


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 113


Hyala vitrea W0410 140129

Euspira nitida W0491 151894

1 1

Bela nebula W0801 139217 2

Philine (juv.) W1036 138339

2

Philine aperta W1038 140744

1 1

4

Cylichna cylindracea W1028 139476 7

2

3 3 8

Facelina W1467 137997

BIVALVIA W1560 105

1

1

Nucula (juv.) W1565 138262 2

Nucula nitidosa W1569 140589 5

1 2 3

Mytilidae (juv.) W1691 211

1

Musculus subpictus W1718 506128

Aequipecten opercularis W1773 140687

Anomiidae (juv.) W1805 214

2

Lucinoma borealis W1829 140283

5

3

Thyasiridae W1833 219

Thyasira W1835 138552

Thyasira flexuosa W1837 141662

Devonia perrieri W1898 140365

1 1

Kurtiella bidentata W1906 345281 52

2 11 14 4 21 24

Tellimya ferruginosa W1902 146952 2

2

2 10

Parvicardium W1947 137739

Spisula (juv.) W1973 138159

3

1 1

Ensis W1996 138333

Ensis (juv.) W1996 138333

Ensis magnus W1998 160539 2

5

2

Phaxas pellucidus W2006 140737 13

2

5 4 13

Tellina fabula W2019 141587 1

76 22

Gari fervensis W2051 140870

1


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 114


Abra W2058 138474

Abra (juv.) W2058 138474

1

Abra alba W2059 141433

1 1

Abra nitida W2061 141435

Veneridae (juv.) W2086 243 2

1

3 1

Dosinia (juv.) W2126 138636

1

2 13 1

Dosinia lupinus W2128 141912

2 1

Dosinia exoleta W2130 141911

1

Polititapes rhomboides W2113 745846

5

Chamelea striatula W2098 141908 1 1

2 4

3

Mysia undata W2139 140728

4

Mya (juv.) W2144 138211

Mya truncata W2147 140431

Corbula gibba W2157 139410 2

Thracioidea (juv.) W2226 382318 5

1 3

Thracia (juv.) W2227 138549 26 1

Thracia convexa W2229 141644

1

Thracia phaseolina W2231 152378 3 1

2 19 7

Cochlodesma praetenue W2239 181373 1

2

Phoronis ZA0003 128545 61

212 173

100

32

Astropecten irregularis ZB0026 123867

OPHIUROIDEA (juv.) ZB0105 123084

6

Ophiothrix fragilis ZB0124 125131

71

Amphiuridae ZB0148 123206 4

10

Amphiuridae (juv.) ZB0148 123206 7

1

1 7 4

Acrocnida brachiata ZB0151 236130 13

3 3 7

Amphiura filiformis ZB0154 125080 33 1 14 3

26

4

Amphipholis squamata ZB0161 125064

5

Ophiuridae (juv.) ZB0165 123200 6 2 1

5 8


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 115


Ophiura ZB0166 123574

Ophiura (juv.) ZB0166 123574

3

1

Ophiura albida ZB0168 124913

6

Ophiura ophiura ZB0170 124929

ECHINOIDEA (juv.) ZB0181 123082

SPATANGOIDA ZB0213 123106

1 1

Echinocardium ZB0222 123426

2

4

Echinocardium cordatum ZB0223 124392

2

2

Leptopentacta elongata ZB0280 124635

1

1

Leptosynapta inhaerens ZB0296 124465

2 4

ENTEROPNEUSTA ZC0012 1820 2

1

Ammodytes ZG0442 125909

1


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 116

H. APPENDIX H BIOMASS DATA


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 117

TaxonName 001.1.13187 002.1.13188 004.1.13190 005.1.13191 006.1.13192 007.1.13193 008.1.13194 009.1.13195 010.1.13196 011.1.13197

Other taxa 0.9106 0.0160 2.8484 0.0910 0.0217 0.5803 0.0532 0.0023 4.9579 2.7158

Cnidaria 0.0000 0.0000 0.1097 0.0000 0.0000 0.0062 0.0000 0.0000 0.3760 0.0233

Polychaetes 1.9147 0.4944 1.5853 1.1929 0.6836 0.8860 0.5388 0.0581 2.1687 4.3280

Oligochaetes 0.0000 0.0003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0066 0.0003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Crustaceans 0.1507 0.0174 0.0221 0.0294 0.0143 0.2095 0.0104 0.0712 3.0516 0.0519

Molluscs 20.2117 0.2147 8.0193 5.3705 0.1941 8.0845 4.1104 0.0077 1.2904 3.7522

Echinoderms 0.0651 9.6652 4.1215 2.0459 55.5228 0.1043 0.1256 0.0000 2.9024 2.2131

TaxonName 012.1.13198 013.1.13199 014.1.13200 015.1.13201 016.1.13202 017.1.13203 018.1.13204 019.1.13205

Other taxa 0.0083 11.7360 1.1611 0.0140 4.2769 2.7662 0.4059 0.0635

Cnidaria 0.0000 0.4937 0.0000 0.0000 0.0252 0.0272 0.0826 0.0000

Polychaetes 0.3478 3.7716 2.2650 5.6915 2.9103 1.8863 1.8656 0.5013

Oligochaetes 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0008

Crustaceans 0.2041 0.1385 0.7947 0.0628 0.0291 0.1034 0.0518 0.0396

Molluscs 11.6410 8.7793 1.1506 16.8298 5.7744 6.0732 3.1018 17.5631

Echinoderms 38.5677 0.6365 2.1005 0.0038 0.3123 5.7451 12.6430 1.4473


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 118

I. APPENDIX I PSD ANALYSIS DATA


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 119

SAMPLE ID: 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 17

LAB ID: 13206 13209 13212 13213 13214 13215 13216 13218 13219 13220 13221 13222

Aperture [µm] Fractional [%]

Fractional [%]

Fractional [%]

Fractional [%]

Fractional [%]

Fractional [%]

Fractional [%]

Fractional [%]

Fractional [%]

Fractional [%]

Fractional [%]

Fractional [%]

63000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

31500 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

16000 0.00 9.98 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.75 0.00

8000 1.29 0.00 1.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.27 0.24

4000 0.42 0.19 1.45 0.40 1.36 0.43 0.00 0.57 0.98 3.79 3.31 0.13

2000 0.42 0.53 1.68 0.46 0.21 0.44 0.22 0.83 0.19 15.12 4.57 0.42

1000 0.55 0.78 0.99 0.32 0.17 0.53 0.35 0.88 0.51 20.95 2.75 0.46

500 1.42 1.47 2.38 0.35 0.10 1.29 0.85 2.16 1.34 14.98 2.57 1.20

250 5.38 8.33 7.63 1.41 0.44 11.84 15.99 7.77 3.19 19.07 10.46 9.80

125 18.08 50.18 21.60 3.57 2.33 59.38 56.91 48.63 23.30 7.85 47.07 67.83

63 42.93 19.73 37.19 47.00 27.85 20.57 16.06 25.54 39.83 2.58 18.01 14.74

31.25 8.15 1.52 6.07 10.79 25.86 1.05 1.59 2.78 8.98 3.00 2.26 0.98

15.63 7.60 2.11 6.73 11.32 16.57 1.27 2.46 3.42 7.87 3.90 2.39 1.13

7.81 5.86 2.10 5.59 10.11 10.25 1.29 2.43 3.18 6.00 3.48 1.95 1.21

3.91 4.19 1.65 3.99 7.58 7.55 1.02 1.75 2.31 4.18 2.61 1.41 0.97

1.95 2.20 0.89 2.10 4.02 4.16 0.54 0.86 1.17 2.16 1.55 0.74 0.53

0.98 0.91 0.35 0.86 1.63 1.89 0.22 0.32 0.46 0.89 0.71 0.30 0.23

0.49 0.55 0.20 0.50 0.95 1.16 0.13 0.19 0.27 0.54 0.39 0.18 0.13

< 0.49 0.05 0.01 0.04 0.08 0.10 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.01 0.01

TOTAL: 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 120

SAMPLE ID: 5 6 12 18 19

LAB ID: 13210 13211 13217 13223 13224

Sieve Aperture [µm] Fractional [%]

Fractional [%]

Fractional [%]

Fractional [%]

Fractional [%]

63000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

31500 0.00 31.66 31.20 0.00 0.00

16000 0.00 35.76 25.21 0.00 14.38

8000 0.88 10.17 2.09 0.00 12.30

4000 3.88 3.38 2.80 0.27 6.93

2000 2.20 1.10 2.60 0.34 3.12

1000 1.99 0.96 2.47 0.24 2.72

500 2.86 1.42 3.09 0.59 4.57

250 18.42 3.44 13.21 2.61 15.14

125 53.98 8.91 13.56 68.03 28.82

63 11.08 1.29 1.92 24.07 9.51

< 63 4.72 1.90 1.85 3.85 2.51

TOTAL: 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 121

J. APPENDIX J SEDIMENT CHEMISTRY ANALYSIS


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 122

Analysis of Fife Energy Park Sediment Sample Analytical Report

Marine Scotland

Revised AL OSPAR ERL Client ID

Sample

Description Analysis* Value** Units

STN005 Marine

Sediment

Total hydrocarbons 370 mg/kg 100 mg/kg

Naphthalene 25.2 µg/kg 0.1 mg/kg 160 µg/kg

Acenaphthylene <1 µg/kg 0.1 mg/kg

Acenaphthene 3.03 µg/kg 0.1 mg/kg

Fluorene <5 µg/kg 0.1 mg/kg

Phenanthrene 19.3 µg/kg 0.1 mg/kg 240 µg/kg

Anthracene 6.62 µg/kg 0.1 mg/kg 85 µg/kg

Fluoranthene 21 µg/kg 0.1 mg/kg 600 µg/kg

Pyrene 21.3 µg/kg 0.1 mg/kg 665 µg/kg

Benzo(a)anthracene 11.9 µg/kg 0.1 mg/kg 261 µg/kg

Chrysene 7.66 µg/kg 0.1 mg/kg 384 µg/kg

Benzo(b)fluoranthen

e 13.8 µg/kg 0.1 mg/kg

Benzo(k)fluoranthen

e 5.82 µg/kg 0.1 mg/kg

Benzo(a)pyrene 11.4 µg/kg 0.1 mg/kg 430 µg/kg

Indeno(123cd)pyren

e 8.41 µg/kg 0.1 mg/kg 240 µg/kg

Benzo(ghi)perylene 11.9 µg/kg 0.1 mg/kg 85 µg/kg

Dibenzo(ah)anthrac

ene 1.66 µg/kg 10 mg/kg

Total EPA16 Priority

PAHs 169 µg/kg

Dioctyltin <4 µg/kg

Dibutyltin 7.04 µg/kg

Tributyltin <4 µg/kg 0.1 mg/kg

Tetrabutyltin <3 µg/kg

Diphenyltin <3 µg/kg

Triphenyltin <3 µg/kg

Aluminium 7010 mg/kg

Arsenic 9.25 mg/kg 20 mg/kg 8.2 mg/kg

Cadmium 0.028 mg/kg 0.4 mg/kg 1.2 mg/kg

Chromium 18.6 mg/kg 50 mg/kg 81 mg/kg

Copper 3.48 mg/kg 30 mg/kg 34 mg/kg

Iron 12800 mg/kg

Lithium 9.66 mg/kg

Lead 13 mg/kg 50 mg/kg 47 mg/kg

Mercury 0.0199 mg/kg 0.25 mg/kg 0.15 mg/kg

Nickel 9.54 mg/kg 30 mg/kg 21 mg/kg

Zinc 32.6 mg/kg 130 mg/kg 150 mg/kg

Notes:

* Total hydrocarbons determined by methanol digest, pentane exchange and analysis by UV fluorescence spectrometry.

Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH) content determined by solvent extraction and analysis by GC-QQQ. - Organotin

content determined by ultrasonic extraction and derivatisation of extract for GC-MS analysis. - Mercury determined by aqua-

regia digest, addition of stannous chloride and analysis by CV-AFS. - Metals determined by aqua-regia digest with analysis


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 123

by ICP-MS and ICP-OES ** The data presented within this report relate only to the samples as received at the laboratory. All

results reported on a sediment dry weight basis.

Analysis of Fife Energy Park Sediment Sample Analytical Report

OSPAR ERL Client ID

Sample

Description Analysis* Value** Units

STN005 Marine Sediment

PCB 18 0.183 µg/kg

PCB 28 0.284 µg/kg 1.7 µg/kg

PCB 31 0.22 µg/kg

PCB 44 0.11 µg/kg

PCB 47 0.057 µg/kg

PCB 49 0.092 µg/kg

PCB 52 0.263 µg/kg 2.7 µg/kg

PCB 66 0.186 µg/kg

PCB 101 0.216 µg/kg 3 µg/kg

PCB 105 0.049 µg/kg

PCB 110 0.146 µg/kg

PCB 118 0.183 µg/kg 0.6 µg/kg

PCB 128 0.068 µg/kg

PCB 138 0.126 µg/kg 7.9 µg/kg

PCB 141 <0.010 µg/kg

PCB 149 0.045 µg/kg

PCB 151 0.024 µg/kg

PCB 153 0.132 µg/kg 40 µg/kg

PCB 156 0.021 µg/kg

PCB 158 0.059 µg/kg

PCB 170 0.042 µg/kg

PCB 180 0.054 µg/kg 12 µg/kg

PCB 183 0.042 µg/kg

PCB 187 0.036 µg/kg

PCB 194 0.035 µg/kg

Total ICES 7 1.26 µg/kg

Total CEN 25 2.68 µg/kg

Notes:

* Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) determined by ultrasonic extraction and clean-up of the extract for analysis by

GC-µECD. ** The data presented within this report relate only to the samples as received at the laboratory. All

results reported on a sediment dry weight basis.


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 124

K. APPENDIX K 2 BEAM TRAWL ANALYSIS DATA


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 125

Taxon MCS Code APHIA ID T1 T2 T4

Total Total Total

Suberites ficus (agg.) C0418 134285 0 P 0

Halichondria C0632 131807 P 0 0

Abietinaria abietina D0409 117870 P 0 0

Hydrallmania falcata D0424 117890 P P 0

Alcyonium digitatum D0596 125333 P P 0

ACTINIARIA D0662 1360 1 2 0

Aphrodita aculeata P0019 129840 2 12 7

Alentia gelatinosa P0034 130722 0 1 0

Gattyana cirrhosa P0049 130749 0 1 0

Lepidonotus squamatus P0082 130801 3 1 0

Chaetopterus variopedatus P0814 129914 0 1 0

Flabelligera affinis P0881 130103 1 0 1

Eupolymnia nesidensis P1190 131490 0 0 1

Balanus crenatus R0077 106215 0 7 0

Crangon allmanni S1384 107551 4 1 0

Crangon crangon S1385 107552 27 79 30

Pagurus bernhardus S1457 107232 2 0 0

Galathea dispersa S1471 107148 0 0 1

Pisidia longicornis S1482 107188 3 1 13

Macropodia parva/rostrata S15??/S1532 205077 1 0 3

Hyas araneus S1518 107322 3 2 0

Hyas coarctatus S1519 107323 5 0 3

Cancer pagurus (female) S1566 107276 0 0 1

Liocarcinus depurator S1580 107387 79 57 40

Liocarcinus holsatus S1581 107388 5 9 0

Leptochiton asellus W0053 140199 2 0 0

Gibbula tumida W0161 141799 1 0 0

Turritella communis W0270 141872 0 1 0

Lamellaria perspicua W0470 140173 3 0 4

Buccinum undatum W0708 138878 2 1 2

Philine aperta W1038 140744 81 25 75

Musculus subpicutus W1718 506128 4 0 21

Pecten maximus W1771 140712 0 1 0

Aequipecten opercularis W1773 140687 17 3 91

Sepiola atlantica W2329 141454 1 0 0


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 126

Taxon MCS Code APHIA ID T1 T2 T4

Total Total Total

Sepietta oweniana W2333 141452 2 1 0

Eledone cirrhosa W2398 140600 0 0 1

Alcyonidium parasiticum Y0081 111604 P P P

Eucratea loricata Y0165 111361 0 P 0

Astropecten irregularis ZB0026 123867 255 213 32

Crossaster papposus ZB0075 124154 1 0 0

Asterias rubens ZB0100 123776 89 70 70

Ophiothrix fragilis ZB0124 125131 66 3 98

Ophiocten affinis ZB0167 124850 0 0 1

Ophiura albida ZB0168 124913 3 0 0

Ophiura ophiura ZB0170 124929 2 36 0

Psammechinus miliaris ZB0193 124319 4 1 9

Echinus esculentus ZB0198 124287 0 0 1

Ascidiidae ZD0082 103443 1 0 0

Ascidiella ZD0083 103484 8 0 0

Ascidiella (juv.) ZD0083 103484 34 32 30

Ascidiella aspersa ZD0084 103718 132 176 201

Ascidiella scabra ZD0085 103719 19 2 0

Gadus morhua ZG0116 126436 6 0 0

Syngnathus acus ZG0245 127387 5 16 1

Myoxocephalus scorpius ZG0281 127203 1 2 1

Agonus cataphractus ZG0291 127190 2 11 2

Zoarces viviparus ZG0437 127123 0 0 1

Pholis gunnellus ZG0440 126996 1 0 1

Callionymus lyra ZG0452 126792 3 3 2

Gobiidae ZG0455 125537 0 0 1

Pomatoschistus ZG0476 125999 0 8 0

Pomatoschistus minutus ZG0479 126928 26 35 20

Limanda limanda ZG0572 127139 14 30 2

Microstomus kitt ZG0574 127140 2 0 0

Pleuronectes platessa ZG0578 127143 36 60 6


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 127

Trawl Fish Species Measurements Total Lengths (cm rounded down) Abundance

T1


Callionymus lyra 13 7 5 3

Limanda limanda 17 6 5 7 6 7 7 8 7 7 8 8 8 8 14

Microstomus kitt 16 11 2

Pholis gunnelis 13 1

Pleuronectes platessa 11 9 11 9 10 11 13 9 8 10 12 9 9 10 9 8 9 9 10 9

9 9 8 8 8 8 7 5 6 7 7 6 7 8 8 8 36

Myoxocephalus scorpius 8 1

Pomatoschistus minutus 7 8 6 7 8 6 6 6 7 6 6 6 4 5 3 4 5 5 3 6

4 3 3 5 3 3 26

Syngnathus acus 12 9 11 11 12 5

Gadus morhua 10 10 10 9 9 15 6

T2

Agonus cataphractus 12 6 6 6 8 6 6 5 5 6 4 11

Limanda limanda 12 8 7 7 8 8 7 7 8 7 6 6 6 7 6 6 6 6 7 5

7 5 5 7 6 6 5 7 6 6 30

Pleuronectes platessa 14 11 11 11 9 10 8 9 10 9 8 8 9 9 9 9 8 9 8 8

8 8 9 9 8 10 8 9 8 8 7 7 8 8 7 7 8 7 7 6

7 6 6 5 6 5 5 6 6 6 7 8 8 8 7 8 8 8 7 7 60

Myoxocephalus scorpius 13 16 2

Syngnathus acus 12 13 10 10 12 11 12 12 12 13 9 11 11 9 12 10 16

Callionymus lyra 5 5 7 3

Pomatoschistus minutus 8 6 7 8 7 6 6 6 6 7 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 4 5

6 3 4 3 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 35

Pomatoschistus 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 8

T4


Limanda limanda 14 5 2

Pholis gunnellus 17 1

Pleuronectes platessa 8 7 8 8 12 5 6

Pomatoschistus minutus 6 7 6 5 4 4 5 5 3 3 6 6 6 7 8 5 6 5 5 8 20

Syngnathus acus 11 1

Callionymus lyra 8 8 2

Myoxocephalus scorpius 14 1

Zoarces viviparus 18 1


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 128

Trawl Fish Species Measurements Total Lengths (cm rounded down) Abundance

Gobiidae 2 1

Trawl Shellfish Measurements Total Lengths (mm) Abundance

T1

Aequipecten opercularis 63 75 76 30 31 33 44 78 39 30 35 29 66 40 7 10 10 17

Buccinum undatum 95 25 2

Sepiola atlantica 17 1

Sepietta oweniana 29 30 2

T2

Buccinum undatum 108 1

Aequipecten opercularis 42 34 38 3

Pecten maximus 123 1

Sepietta oweniana 27 1

T4

Buccinum undatum 118 10 2

Cancer pagurus (female) 29 1


70 43 48 33 29 33 34 37 31 49 30 47 33 35 40 45 41 36 69 38

91 35 32 39 39 51 36 43 47 41 45 55 47 37 40 50 45 44 33 50 61

36 34 42 39 46 50 41 45 40 38 30 34 45 16 38 17 32 38 35 30

38 32 41 37 33 32 30 36 38 34 32 33 35 46 33 35 35 37 35 35

40 36 35 31 42 31 14 15 37 15 17

Eledone cirrhosa 13 1


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 129

L. APPENDIX L PSD CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS

FUGRO EMU LIMITEDCERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS

Further information on methods of analysis may be obtained from the above address

Opinions and interpretations expressed herein are outside the scope of UKAS accreditation

*Indicates determinand not included in UKAS accreditation

Test results reported relate only to those items tested

Subindicates subcontracted test

A UKASTESTING

LABORATORY

Fugro EMU Limited. Incorporated in England No. 3469947. Reg. Office: Fugro House, Hithercroft Road, Wallingford, Oxfordshire, OX10 9RB

EP/14/4610 T01_Issue 3 Page 1 of 5

Certificate Number: EP/14/4610 Fugro EMU Job Number: J/3/08/2590

Job Reference: Methil Benthic Survey

Prepared For Prepared By

2B-Energy James Hutchinson

Fugro EMU Limited

Trafalgar Wharf (Unit 16)

Hamilton Road

Portchester

Portsmouth

PO6 4PX

United Kingdom

Phone: +44 (0) 2392 205500

Email: [email protected]

Web: www.fugroemu.com

Sampling Undertaken By: Fugro EMU Sampling Date: 11/10/2014 – 12/10/2014

Date of Receipt: 15/10/2014 Date of Analysis: 05/12/2014 – 18/12/2014

Sample Matrix: Marine Sediments

Method Reference:

Particle Size Distribution by Dry Sieving – Fugro EMU MET/01 based on BS1377: 1990:

Parts 1 – 2.

*Particle Size Distribution by Laser Diffraction – Fugro EMU MET/50 based on BS ISO

13320: 2009.

*Organic Content by Loss on Ignition @ 440°C for 4 hours – Fugro EMU MET/01 based on

clause 4 of BS1377: Part 3: 1990.

Test Results: Refer to pages 2-5 of 5

Laboratory Comments:Deviating Codes:

None

Authorised Signature:

Name: James Hutchinson

Position: Sediment Laboratory Manager

Issue Date: 18/12/2014

FUGRO EMU LIMITED

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS

Test Results: Particle Size Distribution by Dry Sieving (63000 - < 63 µm) @ 1 Phi Intervals

Fugro EMU Job Number: J/3/08/2590


SAMPLE ID: 5 6 12 18 19

LAB ID: 13210 13211 13217 13223 13224

Sieve Aperture [µm] Fractional [%] Fractional [%] Fractional [%] Fractional [%] Fractional [%]

63000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

31500 0.00 31.66 31.20 0.00 0.00

16000 0.00 35.76 25.21 0.00 14.38

8000 0.88 10.17 2.09 0.00 12.30

4000 3.88 3.38 2.80 0.27 6.93

2000 2.20 1.10 2.60 0.34 3.12

1000 1.99 0.96 2.47 0.24 2.72

500 2.86 1.42 3.09 0.59 4.57

250 18.42 3.44 13.21 2.61 15.14

125 53.98 8.91 13.56 68.03 28.82

63 11.08 1.29 1.92 24.07 9.51

< 63 4.72 1.90 1.85 3.85 2.51

TOTAL: 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

EP/14/4610 S34_Issue 7 Page 2 of 5

FUGRO EMU LIMITED


Test Results: Particle Size Distribution by Dry Sieving (63000 - 63 µm) and Laser Diffraction (< 63 - < 0.49 µm) @ 1 Phi Intervals



SAMPLE ID: 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 13 14

LAB ID: 13206 13209 13212 13213 13214 13215 13216 13218 13219

Aperture [µm] Fractional [%] Fractional [%] Fractional [%] Fractional [%] Fractional [%] Fractional [%] Fractional [%] Fractional [%] Fractional [%]

63000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

31500 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

16000 0.00 9.98 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

8000 1.29 0.00 1.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4000 0.42 0.19 1.45 0.40 1.36 0.43 0.00 0.57 0.98

2000 0.42 0.53 1.68 0.46 0.21 0.44 0.22 0.83 0.19

1000 0.55 0.78 0.99 0.32 0.17 0.53 0.35 0.88 0.51

500 1.42 1.47 2.38 0.35 0.10 1.29 0.85 2.16 1.34

250 5.38 8.33 7.63 1.41 0.44 11.84 15.99 7.77 3.19

125 18.08 50.18 21.60 3.57 2.33 59.38 56.91 48.63 23.30

63 42.93 19.73 37.19 47.00 27.85 20.57 16.06 25.54 39.83

31.25 8.15 1.52 6.07 10.79 25.86 1.05 1.59 2.78 8.98

15.63 7.60 2.11 6.73 11.32 16.57 1.27 2.46 3.42 7.87

7.81 5.86 2.10 5.59 10.11 10.25 1.29 2.43 3.18 6.00

3.91 4.19 1.65 3.99 7.58 7.55 1.02 1.75 2.31 4.18

1.95 2.20 0.89 2.10 4.02 4.16 0.54 0.86 1.17 2.16

0.98 0.91 0.35 0.86 1.63 1.89 0.22 0.32 0.46 0.89

0.49 0.55 0.20 0.50 0.95 1.16 0.13 0.19 0.27 0.54

< 0.49 0.05 0.01 0.04 0.08 0.10 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.04

TOTAL: 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00


FUGRO EMU LIMITED


Test Results:

Fugro EMU Job Number:

Job Reference:

SAMPLE ID:

LAB ID:

Aperture [µm]

63000

31500

16000

8000

4000

2000

1000

500

250

125

63

31.25

15.63

7.81

3.91

1.95

0.98

0.49

< 0.49

TOTAL:

Particle Size Distribution by Dry Sieving (63000 - 63 µm) and Laser Diffraction (< 63 - < 0.49 µm) @ 1 Phi Intervals

J/3/08/2590

Methil Benthic Survey

15 16 17

13220 13221 13222

Fractional [%] Fractional [%] Fractional [%]

0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.75 0.00

0.00 1.27 0.24

3.79 3.31 0.13

15.12 4.57 0.42

20.95 2.75 0.46

14.98 2.57 1.20

19.07 10.46 9.80

7.85 47.07 67.83

2.58 18.01 14.74

3.00 2.26 0.98

3.90 2.39 1.13

3.48 1.95 1.21

2.61 1.41 0.97

1.55 0.74 0.53

0.71 0.30 0.23

0.39 0.18 0.13

0.03 0.01 0.01

100.00 100.00 100.00


FUGRO EMU LIMITED


Test Results: Organic Content by Loss on Ignition @ 440°C for 4 hours



Sample ID Lab ID% Organic Content

[<2mm]

5 13210 2.52



SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 131

M. APPENDIX M ASSESSMENT OF RESEMBLANCE OF OBSERVED REEF

FEATURES TO ANNEX I REEF CRITERIA


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 132

Site Number

Geogenic Classification

Substrate Description and Associated Species

Biotope and Representative Images % cobbles and /

or boulders / bedrock

Elevation %

Epibiota Cover

Overall Reef Classification

2

<25°m2 cobbles

and/or

boulders/bedrock

64 mm-

5 m

Boulders

not more

than 1.5 to

2 m high at

the most.

>80% of

species

present

composed

of

epifaunal

species

Not a reef

Substrate: Large boulders covered with

encrusting and mobile epifauna overlaying

slightly shelly gravelly, pebbly, cobbly fine

sand. Typical species:

Echinus esculentus Asterias rubens

Ophiothrix fragilis? Alcyonium digitatum

Spirobranchus

Corallinaceae

CR.MCR.EcCr Echinoderms and crustose communities

3

40-95%

50% cobbles

and/or

boulders/bedrock

suggested

64 mm-

5 m

Boulders

not more

than 1.5 to

2 m high at

the most.

>80% of

species

present

composed

of

epifaunal

species

Medium

Substrate: Large boulders and bedrock

covered with encrusting and mobile epifauna and silt flocculation, interspersed

with pebbles, cobbles and occasional sand patches.

Typical species: Echinus esculentus Alcyonium digitatum

Asterias rubens Spirobranchus

Gobiidae LAMINARIALES Cancer pagurus Necora puber Liocarcinus

Callionymidae

CR.MCR.EcCr Echinoderms and crustose communities


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 133

Site Number





Elevation %

Epibiota Cover


6

40-95%

50% cobbles

and/or boulders

suggested

64 mm-

5 m

Boulders

not more

than 1.5 m

high at the

most.

>80% of

species

present

composed

of

epifaunal

species

Medium

Substrate: Most detail obscured by

Ophiothrix. Patches of slightly shelly rippled sand with patches of boulders and cobbles. Where there is a patch of clear

shelly sand burrows are visible.

Typical species: Echinus esculentus

Corallinaceae Asterias rubens

ACTINIARIA PISCES

DECAPODA Ophiothrix fragilis

Ophiura Ophiura albida

SS.SMx.CMx.OphMx

Ophiothrix fragilis and/or Ophiocomina nigra brittlestar beds on sublittoral mixed sediment


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 134

Site Number





Elevation %

Epibiota Cover


15

10-40%

30% bedrock

suggested

64 mm-

5 m

Boulders

not more

than 1 m

high at the

most.

>80% of

species

present

composed

of

epifaunal

species

Low

Substrate: Slightly shelly silty sand with

visible burrows. Bedrock of mixed composition emerging from the sediment and forming flat ledges in places. Other areas of dropped edges appearing to be sand/mudstone, with a thick covering of shelly silty sand in some places. Some coarser sediment within the recesses.

Typical species:

Ophiura Asterias rubens

Gobiidae Nemertesia

Alcyonium digitatum

Corallinaceae Cancer pagurus

Echinus esculentus HYDROZOA/BRYOZOA turf

PLEURONECTIFORMES

CR.HCR.XFa

Mixed faunal turf communities


SURVEY FINAL REPORT

Report No. 15/J/3/03/2590/1782 Page 135

Site Number





Elevation %

Epibiota Cover


17

10-40%

40% cobbles

and/or

boulders/bedrock

suggested

64 mm-

5 m

Boulders

not more

than 1 m

high at the

most.

>80% of

species

present

composed

of

epifaunal

species

Low

Substrate: Slightly pebbly gravelly shelly

sand with cobbles and boulders. Areas of mud/sand stone ledging, forming shallow dropped steps in some areas, and flat topped exposures in others. Relatively large holes bored in the surface. The compacted sediment areas form a mosaic with the bedrock and boulders. Patches of rippled sand fill the recesses between the various hard substrata. A thin sediment covering evident across much of the area. Large holes bored into the mud/sand stone, and small holes visible within the softer sediment. Length of rope or cable visible and possible tyre.

Typical species: Asterias rubens

Echinus esculentus Corallinaceae

Alcyonium digitatum Ophiura

Ophiothrix fragilis Spirobranchus

Liocarcinus

Gobiidae

CR.MCR.EcCr

And SS.SSA.CMuSa

Echinoderms and crustose communities

Project Code: MOWT10

Date of report: March 2010

Client: Arcus Renewable Energy Consulting Ltd, on behalf of 2-B Energy

METHIL WIND TURBINE

DEMONSTRATION PROJECT

Fife Energy Park, Methil, Fife

John McCarthy

BA(Hons) MPhil AIFA

Client

National Grid Reference

Address

Parish

Council

Planning Application Ref No

NMRS No

Oasis No

SMR No

HB/SAM No

Listing Category

Project Manager

Text

Illustrations

Typesetting

Fieldwork

Specialists

Schedule

Fieldwork

Report

RENEWABLE ENERGY CONSULTANTSING LTD, ON BEHALF OF ARUP SCOTLAND

LTD 2-B ENERGY

NT 368 984 (CENTRE)

FIFE ENERGY PARK, METHIL, FIFE

WEMYSS

FIFE

N/A

NT39NE 14

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

MARK ROBERTS

JOHN MCCARTHY, EIA SPECIALIST


THOMAS SMALL, SENIOR ILLUSTRATOR


N/A

09/02/2010

12/02/2010

PROJECT SUMMARY SHEET

Signed off by:

Mark Roberts BA(Hons) MIFA, Project Manager

Date:

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION 1

2 SITE DESCRIPTION 1

3 AIMS 1

4 METHODS 1

5 RESULTS 2

5.1 Limitations of data 2

5.2 Historic background and identifi ed cultural heritage assets 2

5.3 Potential for unrecorded archaeological features 8

6 CONCLUSIONS 9

7 REFERENCES 9

7.1 Bibliography 9

7.2 Unpublished Sources 10

7.3 Cartographic Sources 10

7.4 Aerial Photographs 10

7.5 Monuments Records 10

APPENDICES 11

Appendix 1 11

Appendix 2 12

1

Methil Wind Turbine Demonstration Project

MOWT10

METHIL WIND TURBINE

DEMONSTRATION PROJECT

Fife Energy Park, Methil, Fife

by John McCarthy

This report presents the results of an archaeological desk-based assessment of the site of the site of a proposed wind turbine demonstration

project. It has looked at both the on and off -shore areas that may be aff ected by the proposed development.

Within the onshore area six cultural heritage assets have been identifi ed. Two of these are 19th century sites which have been

completely removed. The remaining four sites are 20th century industrial sites of limited interest. As most of the onshore area was in

the intertidal zone until the early 20th century or has been disturbed by mining activity, there is negligible potential for previously

unrecorded archaeological features to be present. Within the onshore study area (i.e. within 500m of the proposed application boundary)

there are no scheduled monuments and 46 listed buildings.

Within the off shore part of the proposed application boundary (2km from the onshore area) there are a total of 34 recorded maritime

losses. Of these only four have approximate co-ordinates derived from SeaZone data, the locations of the remainder are uncertain.

1 INTRODUCTION

This report presents the results of an archaeological

desk-based assessment of land at Methil, Fife. It has been

prepared for Arcus Consulting Ltd, acting on behalf of

2-B Energy who are proposing to build a wind turbine

demonstration site within the Fife Energy Park. The

development will will initially consist of one turbine, an

operations building and an anemometry mast or wind

station. The intial turbine will be located adjacent to

the shore near the operations building (Turbine A). A

subsequent phase will see the erection of a second further

off shore (Turbine B). Within fi ve years of operation,

Turbine A will be relocated to a site further off shore

(Turbine C). Turbines B and C will be subject to a

separate planning application. This report specifi cally

considers the onshore and off shore components of the

initial, Phase 1 application.

2 SITE DESCRIPTION

The proposed development site is 54ha in area and

is situated on the coast of the Firth of Forth, on the

western shore of Largo Bay. This area of the Scottish

coast is characterised by sandy bays interrupted by rocky

headlands (Robertson 1996, 1). The application area is

fl at and low-lying and lies between the towns of Methil

and Buckhaven, in an area of partially reclaimed semi-

derelict industrial land. Most of the site is empty but there

are some large warehouses in the northeast part. The

underlying geology of the site belongs to the Scottish

coal measures with overlying sand and gravel deposits.

3 AIMS

The desk-based assessment has been undertaken in order

to inform the design of the proposed development by

identifying any cultural heritage assets present within the

application area and by providing an indication of the

archaeological potential.

4 METHODS

The following data sources have been used in the

preparation of this report:

Databases of designated cultural heritage features •

maintained by Historic Scotland;

Records held by the National Monuments Record of •

Scotland (NMRS) including aerial photographs;

Records held by the local Historic Environment •

Record;

Maps held by National Library of Scotland;•

UK Hydrographic Offi ce/SeaZone data;•

Other readily available published sources.•

Data has been collected from the above sources for an

area extending 500m from the onshore application area

and up to 2km into the Firth of Forth. These are referred

to as the onshore and off shore study areas respectively.

The potential for cultural heritage assets within the

proposed development area has been discussed below in

terms of the onshore and off shore areas of the existing

landscape. The onshore area is defi ned as the area currently

above the high water mark and the off shore as that area

2

HEADLAND ARCHAEOLOGY (UK) LTD

MOWT10

currently below it. A small number of sites from the

NMRS database within the intertidal zone have not been

included in the assessment as they will not be aff ected in

any way by construction in the off shore area. (these sites are

all modern apart from two fi sh traps at Scoonie, over 3km

from Turbine A)

The site was visited on the 9th February 2010 to verify

the fi ndings of the desk-based element of the study, gather

information regarding current land use and identify any

factors that might aff ect the archaeological potential of the

development site.

5 RESULTS

5.1 Limitations of data

The extension of the shoreline in this area during the

extension of the Wellesley colliery in 1905 has obliterated

the original topography of the site and rendered

identifi cation of previously unrecorded sites highly

unlikely. The identifi cation of cultural heritage assets

must therefore rely entirely on cartographic or other

documentary evidence at this stage. There have been no

previous archaeological excavations in Buckhaven, Methil

or Leven. However, it is considered that these limitations

have not aff ected the reliability of the assessment.

The ability of this study to identify previously

unknown wrecks within the off shore area is limited by

the unavailability of marine geophysical and geotechnical

survey data at this point. Such data should be reviewed as

and when it becomes available – its absence restricts the

reliability of the assessment.

5.2 Historic background and identifi ed

cultural heritage assets

Onshore (Illus 2)

Prehistoric and Roman

There are two sites of prehistoric/Roman date within the

onshore part of the study area. These both lie within the

onshore study area.

A Bronze Age cist cemetery (HA15) was discovered

about 400m east of the application boundary in 1906

(presumably during the clearance of the village at

Buckhaven Links). The cemetery was located on the

summit of a small prominence known as ‘the Sussan Brae’

and has been completely removed. However the location

of this site is uncertain as it is recorded a second time at a

diff erent location under the NMRS entry for the White

Swan Hotel (HA19) a C(S) listed building dating to the

early 20th century. In this entry it is suggested that the

construction of the hotel led to the discovery of the

cemetery. This would place the cemetery 600m to the east

and almost immediately adjacent to the boundary of the

Fife Energy Park. The original sources

referring to the discovery of the cemetery

from The Reliquary and the Proceedings

of the Society of Antiquaries (1948-9,

242-3 and 1949-50, 226) only give the

location of these fi nds as the ‘Sussan Brae’.

As none of the maps consulted appear to

use this name it is diffi cult to be certain

exactly where the cemetery was.

A Roman coin (HA 16 Licinius I –

308-324AD) minted in Alexandria was

discovered in a garden around 500m

west of the application boundary some

time before 1960. Outwith the study

area a similar Roman coin (NT39NE

9) was found in1951 in the playground

of Buckhaven Primary School. The coin

was of Maximian, of AD 305, also minted

at Alexandria. The school is about 160m

to the west of the application boundary. It

is quite possible that this coin is a modern

loss, especially as it was recovered from a

school.

Medieval and Post-Medieval

No medieval or post-medieval assets

have been recorded within the

application boundary. However, there

N

Illus 1 The 1st edition Ordnance Survey 6 map of 1855 shows the extent of land reclamation within

the application boundary since 1855. The proposed construction areas are shown in red. and the

boundary of the Fife Energy Park in black.

!!

!!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

�)

!A

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

D

D

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

EEEEEEEEEEEE

EEEEEEEEEEEE

EEEEEEEEEEE E

E

E

7

9

8

5

4

3

2

6

1

13

26

25

23 2221

20

19

1817

16 15

1413

12

1110

A

336000

6980

00

Illus 2: Cultural heritage assets within the onshore study area

±

0 300Metres

Sites and Monuments Record information derived from Fife Council data dated 04/02/2010

Scheduled monument area information derived from Historic Scotland data dated 27/01/2010© Crown Copyright Historic Scotland

Listed Building data provided by Historic Scotland dated 27/01/2010 © Crown Copyright Historic Scotland

Seazone data (derived from UK Hydrographic Office)provided by Arcus Renewable Energy Consulting 28/01/2010


Reproduced using digital 1:25,000 data supplied by 2-B Energy with the permission of the Controller of HMSO. © Crown copyright.

Key

E B-Listed Building

E C(S)-Listed Building

Undesignated cultural heritage asset (polygon)

!( Undesignated cultural heritage asset (point)

D Approximate location of ship loss

!A Proposed turbine location

�) Wind station location

Proposed construction areas

Proposed cable routes

Application boundary

!!!

! ! !

! Onshore study area

Firth of Forth

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!!!!!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

�)!A

!A

!A

D

D

DD

E

E

E

E

E

EE

E

EEEEEEEEEEEE

EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

EE 7

9

54

3

2

6

113

23 2221

20

19

1817

16 15

141312

11

10

2627

25

24

B

C

A

336000 338000 340000

6960

0069

8000

7000

00

Illus 3: Cultural heritage assets within the maritime study area

±

0 750Metres

Sites and Monuments Record information derived from Fife Council data dated 04/02/2010

Scheduled monument area information derived from Historic Scotland data dated 27/01/2010© Crown Copyright Historic Scotland

Listed Building data provided by Historic Scotland dated 27/01/2010 © Crown Copyright Historic Scotland

Seazone data (derived from UK Hydrographic Office)provided by Arcus Renewable Energy Consulting 28/01/2010


Reproduced using digital 1:25,000 data supplied by2-B Energy with the permission of the Controller of HMSO. © Crown copyright.

Key

E B-Listed Building

E C(S)-Listed Building

D Approximate location of ship loss

Areas of Regional Importance

!A Proposed turbine location

�) Wind station location

Proposed construction areas

Proposed cable routes

Application boundary

!!!

! ! !

! Onshore study area

!!!

! ! !

! Offshore study area

7


MOWT10

is extensive evidence of activity of these periods in the

study area.

The town of Methil (HA22) is known to have existed as

early as 1212, although it was originally further inland and

relocated to the coast sometime around the early eighteenth

century. Buckhaven (HA7) was later in date and was fi rst

mapped around 1600. From an early date the production of

salt, coal and fi sh were important to the two towns. These

industries grew and were supplemented in the eighteenth

and nineteenth centuries with net and rope manufacture

and baking. There are few records of medieval sites in the

immediate vicinity of the proposed development. Some

cropmark remains of rig and furrow cultivation (NT39NE

141) have been recorded outwith the onshore study area

670m west of the application boundary. These are likely to

represent medieval or post-medieval agricultural use of the

land in the area.

19th century (Illus 1)

There are three cultural heritage assets dating to the

19th century recorded within the application boundary.

These comprise a short-lived settlement (HA1), a colliery

(HA5) and a bathing house (HA 6). No surface trace of

these survives.

The proposed development lies within a stretch of

beach between the two settlements which was labelled as

Buckhaven Links on the 1st edition Ordnance Survey (1855).

Buckhaven Links (HA1) fi rst appears on Greenwood’s map

of 1828 but the only clear picture of the town is from the

1st edition of the Ordnance Survey of 1855, where a string

of approximately nine detached and semi-detached houses

appears in a row to the immediate west of the coast road. At

the southern end of this row a United Presbyterian church

occupies a large plot of land with an adjacent building

described as a manse to the south of this. Although there

are few cartographic or documentary references to the

settlement, its layout suggests a foundation not later than

the eighteenth or nineteenth century and it is likely that it

was laid out in a single event, possibly to serve as a fi shing

or mining settlement. A reference to a church and manse

built by the United Presbyterian Church in Buckhaven

in 1861 and 1868 respectively is likely to refer to these

buildings (Small 1904, 276).

The extent of development of Buckhaven (HA7),

Buckhaven Links (HA1) and Methil (HA22) at the time

of the 1st edition of the Ordnance Survey in 1855 is

shown on Figures 1 and 2. Also shown on the 1st edition

Ordnance Survey further north along the beach is a small

bathing house (HA6) to the immediate south of the coastal

path. By the time of the second edition of the Ordnance

Survey in 1895 Buckhaven Links had nearly twice as many

buildings as it had in 1855 although new construction

was largely confi ned within the existing footprint of

the town due to the subdivision and redevelopment of

garden plots. By this stage the manse building is labelled

as ‘Old Manse’, suggesting that it was no longer used for

its original purpose of providing accommodation to a

minister.

In the latter half of the 19th century the coal mining

industry in the wider area expanded enormously, with the

establishment of the Pirnie pit (c.1860), the Muiredge pit

(fi rst productive in 1864), the Rosie pit

(1872-75), and the Leven pits (1877-8).

This period also saw the establishment of

railways which served the collieries and

much of the population of Buckhaven

and Methil left the fi sheries to work in

the mines. Denbeath Colliery (HA5) was

built in 1872 to the immediate northeast

of Buckhaven Links and within the site

boundary. Around the same time railway

sidings were put in place to the colliery

and an adjacent creosote works.

20th century

There are three cultural heritage assets

dating to the 20th century within the

application boundary. These comprise a

bing (HA2), a 1970s oil rig construction

yard (HA3) and a brickworks (HA4).

No surface traces of either the bing or

the brickworks have been removed.

In 1905 the Wemyss Coal Company

bought the Denbeath colliery and cleared

away the entire settlement at Buckhaven

links and the creosote works. They

also closed the coastal road between

Buckhaven and Methil at the same time,

Illus 4 The 1948 Ordnance Survey map (1:25.000) shows railway sidings across the area now occupied by

the Fife Energy Park

8


MOWT10

to make way for a third shaft and a Baum washery (for

cleaning coal). The former site of Buckhaven Links and

Denbeath Colliery was renamed as the Wellesley Colliery

and a number of railway sidings were built to transport the

coal to the washery and on to the harbour at Methil were

added (Illus 4). Methil rapidly developed into Scotland’s

largest coal port by 1913, exporting three million tons of

coal in 1923 (Smith 2001, 131 and 653). The Ordnance

Survey map of 1914 shows Buckhaven Links and the

creosote works entirely cleared with a massive expansion

of the colliery and a new planned town of Denbeath to the

immediate NW of the application boundary.

From some time shortly before this, coal spoil was being

dumped to the east of the application area. This began to

extend the shoreline in this area though initially the change

was slight. At the same time a large bing (HA2) began to

be created which would later be used to actively accelerate

this process of expansion.

The coast of Fife in this area preserves a large number

of cultural heritage assets relating to WWI and WWII

(Robertson 1996, 2). Within the immediate vicinity of the

onshore part of the application boundary there are several

such sites. The Buckhaven and Methil WWI monument

(HA20) unveiled in 1922 stands about 70m west of the

application boundary. A WW2 concrete built Extended

Defence Offi cers Post or XDO post (HA18) is situated

about 30m to the west of the application boundary, by a

road junction on the coast side of the road. The XDO post

has been buried with only the top visible above ground

and trees have been planted round it with the intention of

concealing the structure. The XDO post was the control

position for a submarine mine fi eld which was laid in the

approaches to Methil Docks.

Wellesley Colliery closed in 1964, as did most of the

other collieries in the area during the 1960s. For a period

around the 1960s the eastern edge of the application area

was used as a refuse tip expanding the shoreline further. At

some point between 1967 and 1984 most of the colliery

infrastructure was removed. The site of the colliery was then

developed as an industrial yard (HA3) for the construction

of oil rig structural elements beginning in 1972 (Smith

2001, 653) and has passed through various owners until its

closure in 2001. After its acquisition by Scottish Enterprise

some 300m of repairs to coastal defences at the site have been

completed. A comprehensive programme of earthworks

and site platforming have also been undertaken with the

addition of a series of embankments between the Park and

neighbouring residential properties and an extension of the

reclaimed area of approximately 28 hectares. Burntisland

Fabrications currently operates in buildings in the north-

eastern part of the site producing major fabrications for use

in off shore gas and oil installations.

Off shore (Illus 3)

All known maritime cultural heritage assets within

the off shore study area are wrecks. Of these only four

have had their sites of loss recorded with any accuracy.

These are summarised in Table 1 below and shown on

Illustration 3. These sites are recorded in the SeaZone

data which is derived from UK Hydrographic data.

Although these sites can be mapped their locations are

not precise and it is unknown whether there are any

surviving remains at these locations.

HA No Name Type Date of

build

Date of

loss

24 Cosmo Cabin Cruiser Unknown 1994

25 Number Four Steam Sand

Dredger

Unknown 1898

26 Karen Schooner 1920 1940

27 SS Ashgrove Twin-screw Vessel 1882 1912

Table 1Maritime losses recorded by the UK Hydrographic Offi ce

There are thirty-three further maritime losses recorded

in the NMRS database. However these have been poorly

located and are not mapped on the illustrations in this

report. Table 3 in the appendix summarises all known

maritime losses from the NMRS database.

5.3 Potential for unrecorded archaeological

features

Onshore

Although there are a number of prehistoric, Roman and

medieval sites in the vicinity of the proposed development

the potential for pre-modern sites to be present is

considered to be negligible. The greater part of the

onshore application area is depicted as a predominantly

rocky beach on the First Edition Ordnance Survey

map. In this context there is no potential for traces of

pre-19th century activity to survive. The northwest

part of the site, marked Buckhaven Links on the First

Edition map, may, from its name, be assumed to be part

of a dune system. Based on the heights marked on the

First Edition and sea-change curves (Shennan & Horton

2002) the dunes covered an area that is likely to have

been submerged or in the intertidal zone during the

prehistoric period. Land in the intertidal zone is likely to

see a limited range of human activity and consequently

the potential for prehistoric sites is limited; fi sh-traps

being the most common site type. The dunes could

potentially have masked substantial remains of later date.

However, there is no indication, such as place name

evidence, that this may be the case and the potential for

any such site to survive is negated by development of the

site in the early 20th century. It may be assumed that

the links area saw considerable ground preparation before

the construction of the railway sidings serving Wellesley

Colliery. Geotechnical reports for the application area

have shown thick deposits of made ground within parts

of the application area. These are up to 24m thick eastern

side of the application boundary and around 10-15m

9


MOWT10

thick towards the west of the application area (Scottish

Enterprise Fife 2005 and 2007). Sites created since the

process of land reclamation began, such as sites relating

to WWII in particular, are more likely to have survived

as they may have been built on top of this overburden

but extensive landscaping within the Fife Energy Park as

well as reinforcement of coastal defences is likely to have

destroyed any such sites. Those parts of the application

area not aff ected by the sidings have for the most part

been disturbed by later buildings, some of which still

stand. Again it is highly unlikely that substantial remains

survive undisturbed.

It is considered to be highly unlikely that there will be

any surviving cultural heritage assets within the onshore

part of the proposed development boundary.

Off shore

The potential for off shore cultural heritage assets can

be divided into two broad categories, those shoreline

elements related to sites originally created at inland or

coastal locations, mines and wrecking events.

Submerged archaeology and relict landscapes

The most signifi cant factor which must be taken into

consideration is the relative change in sea level which

has occurred during the period of human occupation of

Scotland. Changes in relative sea level since the end of the

Pleistocene appear to have been complex, with changes

in absolute sea level interacting with changes in land

level due to isostatic rebound. Sea level from around the

beginning of the period of human occupation has fallen

since the fi rst human colonisation of Scotland (Flemming

2004, 12) and in this area of Scotland the relative sea

level was up to 5m higher (Shennan and Horton 2002). It

is therefore probable that the old shoreline prior to land

reclamation was further west for most of the prehistoric

period and it is unlikely that prehistoric remains exist

even within the westernmost part of the site.

Minefi eld

The XDO post to the immediate west of the onshore

part of the Fife Energy Park was used as a control post

for the submarine mine fi eld laid in the approaches to

Methil Docks during WWII. Although this minefi eld

was removed after the war the recovery of an unexploded

mine by a fi shing vessel in 2006 (news.bbc.co.uk

Monday, 25 September 2006) shows that there may

still be remnants of this fi eld. It has not been possible to

establish the extents of the minefi eld in the course of the

current study.

Maritime losses

The topography and location of the Firth of Forth means

that it has been an important transport corridor since

the arrival of humans in Scotland. The coast in this area

would have been extensively used during human history

and the shelter provided by Largo Bay would have been

particularly attractive. A good example of this can be seen

Wemyss caves (Illus 3). This area includes a number of

archaeological sites from several periods of human history

in a dense concentration. A large variety of maritime

activities have taken place along this coast including

military operations, trading, mining and fi shing. Since

medieval times and possibly earlier the port of Methil has

been an important centre for trading and fi shing. The

fi nal resting places of most of the known maritime losses

in the off shore study areas have never been identifi ed.

Detailed records of maritime losses only began during

the 19th century and even this record is incomplete.

As stated above there is a low potential for remains

of off shore sites near the current shore line due to land

reclamation during the 20th century but this will have had

little impact on the potential for preservation of remains

further off shore. As the depth of the Firth increases with

distance from the shore, the action of the waves and

weather upon cultural heritage sites at the bottom of the

Firth decreases and the potential for preservation increases.

In some areas, submerged remains can often be buried in

sediments as part of localised coastal and fl uvial processes.

The construction of off shore turbine bases, wet storage

areas and the laying of submerged cables as well as the

anchoring of vessels involved in construction all have the

potential to directly impact upon unknown sites within the

off shore study area. In addition the disturbance of sediment

has the potential to indirectly damage such sites, either by

covering sites or uncovering those which were previously

covered, although under certain circumstances this can be

a positive eff ect.

It is considered that there is a low potential for unknown

cultural heritage assets within the vicinity of Turbine A.

Any cultural heritage assets would most likely comprise of

ship wrecks and related remains, within the off shore part

of the study area.

6 CONCLUSIONS

Although a number of sites of cultural heritage interest

have been identifi ed within the onshore part of the

application boundary, it is likely that subsequent

industrial operations have removed them entirely. Within

the off shore study area a large number of maritime losses

have been reported, and there are likely to have been

numerous unrecorded losses. Few of these sites have been

identifi ed on the bed of the Firth and there is a moderate

potential for sites within this area. It is recommended

that as and when marine geotechnical and geophysical

survey data becomes available these should be reviewed

in order to allow previously unrecorded maritime losses

to be identifi ed.

10


MOWT10

7 REFERENCES

7.1 Bibliography

Fife Council 1989 Fife’s Early Archaeological heritage: A Guide

Glenrothes.

Flemming, NC 2004 The Scope of Strategic Environmental Assessment

of North Sea Area SEA5 in regard to prehistoric archaeological remains.

www.off shore-sea.org.uk

Groome, FH (ed.) 1885 ‘Methil’ Ordnance gazetteer of Scotland: a

survey of Scottish topography, statistical, biographical and historical.

Edinburgh 29

Groome, FH (ed.) 1885 ‘Buckhaven.’ Ordnance gazetteer of Scotland:

a survey of Scottish topography, statistical, biographical and historical.

Edinburgh pp. 197-8

NSA 1834-45 ‘Wemyss, County of Fife’ The New Statistical

Account of Scotland, Vol. 9, 390-403

Patrick, J 1907 ‘Long-Hidden Treasures on the East Coast of Fife’

The Reliquary and Illustrated Archaeologist Vol. XIII pp. 189-

193

Robertson, P 1996 Coastal Assessment Survey for Historic Scotland:

Fife - Kincardine to Fife Ness.

http://www.scapetrust.org/html/fi fe2_download.html

Accessed 29/01/2010

Shennan, I & Horton, B 2002 ‘Holocene land- and sea-level

changes in Great Britain’ Journal of Quaternary Science. Vol. 17

(5-6), 511-526.

Sinclair, J 1791-99 ‘Wemyss, County of Fife’ The Statistical Account

of Scotland. Vol. 16, 513-533

Small, R 1904 History of the congregations of the United Presbyterian

Church, from 1733 to 1900. Edinburgh

Smith, R 2001 The Making of Scotland. Edinburgh

Soc Antiq Scot 1948-9 ‘Donations to and Purchases for the

Museum’ Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland. Vol.

LXXXIII pp.242-3

Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 1949-50 ‘Corrigendum’ in

Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland. Vol. LXXXIII

p.226

7.2 Unpublished Sources

Scottish Enterprise Fife 2005 Kvaerner Fabrication Yard, Methil

Geo-Environmental Report.

Scottish Enterprise Fife 2007 Fife Energy park Phase 3 Geo-

Environmental Report.

7.3 Cartographic Sources

The following cartographic sources (listed in

chronological order) held by the National Library of

Scotland were consulted:Gordon, J 1642 Fyfe Shire

Blaeu, J 1654 Fifae Pars Orientalis, [vulgo] Amsterdam

Adair, J 1684 The East Part of Fife

Moll H, 1745 The Shires of Fife and Kinros London

Roy, W 1747-55 Military Survey of Scotland

Ainslie, J 1775 County of Fife London

Greenwood, C 1828 Map of the counties of Fife and Kinross London

Thomson, J 1827 Fife with Kinross Shire Edinburgh

Ordnance Survey 1855 1st Edition Fife Sheet 25 6.” (Surveyed

1854)

Ordnance Survey 1855 1st Edition Fife Sheet 33 6.” (Surveyed

1854)

Ordnance Survey 1895 2nd Edition Sheet XXVII.8 25.” (Surveyed

1893)

Ordnance Survey 1895 2nd Edition Sheet XXVII.12 25.” (Surveyed

1893)

Ordnance Survey 1914 Sheet XXVII.8 25.” (Surveyed 1913)



Ordnance Survey 1938 Sheet XXVII NE 6.” (Surveyed 1938)

Ordnance Survey 1952 NT3698 1:25,000. (Surveyed 1948)



7.4 Aerial Photographs

The vertical aerial photographs held by the NMRS and

examined in the course of the assessment are summarised

below.

Sortie Frames Date

106G/DY/009 60067 1944

58/6511 0061 1964

ASS/518/88 094 1988

Table 2Aerial Photos

7.5 Monuments Records

Data regarding designated assets was downloaded from

Historic Scotland’s website on 27/01/2010. © Historic

Scotland

NMRS data has been gathered by examination of

the following quarter sheets held in the NMRS Library,

Edinburgh, in conjunction with Pastmap. These were

examined on 5/02/2010.

11


MOWT10

APPENDICES

Appendix 1

Maritime losses recorded in the NMRS in the vicinity of the application boundary

NMRS No Name Type Period NGRE NGRN

NT39NE 8009 Unknown: Methil, Firth of Forth Craft 20th Century 337700 699400

NT39NE 8001 Unknown: Methil Breakwater, Firth of Forth Dredger 20th Century 337410 699100

NT39NE 8003 Thorgny: Buckhaven, Firth of Forth Barque 19th Century 336300 697900

NT39NE 8004 Antelope: Methil Harbour, Firth of Forth Steamship 19th Century 337500 699500

NT39NE 8005 Scio: Methil, Firth of Forth Brig 19th Century 337000 699000

NO30SE 8001 Surprise: Leven, Firth of Forth Paddle steamship 19th Century 338000 700000

NT39NE 8010 Jantje: Buckhaven, Firth of Forth Craft 19th Century 336000 697000

NT39NE 8011 Gripen: Methil, Firth of Forth Craft 19th Century 337500 699500

NT39NE 8012 Industry: Buckhaven, Firth of Forth Craft 19th Century 336000 697000

NT39NE 8013 Euphemia: Buckhaven, Firth of Forth Craft 19th Century 336000 697000

NT39NE 8015 Robert Anderson: Methil, Firth of Forth Schooner 19th Century 337000 699000

NT39NE 8016 Veritas: Methil, Firth of Forth Barque 19th Century 337000 699000

NT39NE 8017 Raleigh: Methil Pier, Firth of Forth Steamship 19th Century 337500 699100

NT39NE 8018 Anna: Buckhaven, Firth of Forth Brigantine 19th Century 336000 697000

NT39NE 8020 Myrtle: Buckhaven, Firth of Forth Lugger 19th Century 336000 697000

NT39NE 8021 Pilot Boat No 2: Buckhaven, Firth of Forth Cutter 19th Century 336000 697000

NT39NE 8022 Onward: Buckhaven, Firth of Forth Lugger 19th Century 336000 697000

NT39NE 8023 Pilot Boat No 2: Buckhaven, Firth of Forth Cutter 19th Century 336000 697000

NT39NE 8024 Thetis: Methil Roads, Firth of Forth Brig 19th Century 336000 698000

NT39NE 8025 Nornen: Methil, Firth of Forth Barque 20th Century 337000 699000

NT39NE 8026 Isafold: Methil Harbour, Firth of Forth Schooner 20th Century 337500 699500

NT39NE 8027 Kitty: Buckhaven, Firth of Forth Sloop 19th Century 336000 697000

NT39NE 8028 Alert: Methil Pier, Largo Bay, Firth of Forth Sloop 19th Century 337000 699000

NT39NE 8031 Dart: Methil, Firth of Forth Ketch 19th Century 337000 699000

NT39NE 8032 Achilles: Methil Harbour, Firth of Forth Galliot 19th Century 337500 699500

NO30SE 8003 Unknown: Leven, Firth of Forth Craft 19th Century 338000 700000

NT39NE 8033 Admiral: Methil, Firth of Forth Schooner 19th Century 337000 699000

NO30SE 8005 Sisters: Leven, Firth of Forth Craft 19th Century 338000 700000

NO30SE 8007 Catharina: Leven, Firth of Forth Schooner 19th Century 338000 700000

NT39NE 8034 Venskabet: Methil Harbour, Firth of Forth Sloop 19th Century 337500 699500

12


MOWT10

Appendix 2

Concordance of cultural heritage assets

HA

No.

Name Type Description Status LB No NMRS

No

1 Buckhaven Links Village (19th

century)

Buckhaven Links fi rst appears on Greenwood’s map

of 1828 but the only clear picture of the town is from

the 1st edition of the Ordnance Survey of 1855, where

a string of approximately nine detached and semi-

detached houses appears in a row to the immediate

west of the coast road. At the southern end of this row

a United Presbyterian church occupies a larger plot

of land and there is a building described as a manse to

the south of this. Although there are few cartographic

or documentary references to the settlement, its layout

suggests a foundation not later than the eighteenth or

nineteenth century and it is likely that it was laid out in

a single event, possibly to serve as a fi shing or mining

settlement. A reference to a church and manse built by

the United Presbyterian Church in Buckhaven in 1861

and 1868 respectively is likely to refer to these buildings

(Small 1904, 276).

– – –

2 Coal Bing Coal Bing A coal bing derived from 20th century mining at

Dunbeath/Wellesley Colliery.

– – NT39NE 140

3 RGC Construction

Yard

Construction Yard A late 20th century construction yard. – – NT39NE 14

4 Wemyss Brickworks Brickworks A brickworks dating to the late 19th/early 20th century – – NT39NE 54

5 Denbeath/

Wellesley Colliery

Colliery Denbeath Colliery was built in 1872 to the immediate

NE of Buckhaven Links and within the site boundary.

In 1905 the Wemyss Coal Company bought the colliery

and expanded it over the cleared sites of Buckhaven

Links and the creosote works. They also closed the

coastal road between Buckhaven and Methil at the

same time, to make way for a third shaft and a Baum

washery (for cleaning coal). The site of Buckhaven Links

and Denbeath Colliery was renamed as the Wellesley

Colliery and a number of railway sidings were built to

transport the coal to the washery and on to the harbour

at Methil were added. Wellesley Colliery closed in 1964,

as did most of the other collieries in the area during the

1960’s.

– – NT39NE 59

6 Bathing House Bathing House A small bathing house or changing hut which appears

on the 1st edition of the Ordnance Survey.

– – –

7 Buckhaven Town For the purposes of this study all development within

the village of Buckhaven up to 1855 is considered as

one site with the exception of listed buildings which

are listed separately. Buckhaven was still a small fi shing

village by the time of the 1st edition Ordnance Survey

in 1855. The town was laid out in a linear strip along

the coast and ran up to the edge of what is now the Fife

Energy Park.

– – NT39NE 44, 52,

137, 138

8 Buckhaven

Community Centre

Community

Centre

A two-storey former Miners’ Welfare Institute built in

1925.

C (S)

Listed

Building

46070 NT39NE 80

9 St. Andrew’s

Theatre/Church

Church/Theatre Ecclesiastical building no longer in use as such.

Formerly St Andrew’s Church, home of the Buckhaven

Free Church congregation which formed in 1866. In

1870 the Episcopal Church at North Street, St Andrews

was purchased for the sum of £130, it was transported

to Buckhaven in Thomas Walker’s boat ‘The Sea King’,

and re-erected in 1872. In 1972 the congregation united

with nearby St David’s Parish Church (listed separately)

and St Michael’s, and the building closed until 1987

when it was converted and extended to a theatre.

B-Listed

Building

22711 NT39NE 40

13


MOWT10

HA

No.


No

10 Buckhaven Parish

Church

Church Ecclesiastical building in use as such. Formerly St

David’s Church. In 1972 the congregations of St

Andrews and St Michael’s Churches united with

St David’s to form the Buckhaven Parish Church.

Church interior “upgraded” during the 1980s under a

Community Programme scheme.

C (S)

Listed

Building

46068 NT39NE 77

11 Royal Bank

buildings

Bank A late 19th century two-storey building in use as a bank. C (S)

Listed

Building

46069 NT39NE 79

12 Denbeath Miner’s

Welfare Institute

Welfare Institute A two-storey building dating to 1924. In spite of

unsympathetic extensions, this building retains its

integrity and historic interest, now as a bowling pavilion

with green.

C (S)

Listed

Building

46072 NT39NE 96

13 Denbeath Parish

Church

Church and Hall The former Denbeath Parish Church is prominently

situated on a corner site in an area of Denbeath

developed by the Wemyss Coal Company.

C (S)

Listed

Building

50126 –

14 Randolph Wemyss

Memorial Hospital

Hospital Commissioned by Lady Eva Wemyss as a memorial to

her husband, the Randolph Wemyss Memorial Hospital

was opened on 28 August, 1909. Single storey and attic,

7-bay hospital in Scots Renaissance style.

C (S)

Listed

Building

22716 –

15 Denbeath Cist, Urns, Beaker A Bronze Age cist cemetery was found in 1906, on the

eastern top of a height known locally as ‘the Sussan

Brae’ now named Denbeath. The location of this site is

uncertain. See the entry for the White Swan Hotel and

the text above. Over a dozen cists were found, some

containing urns. Four urns, including portions of a

Beaker, are now in the National Museum of Antiquities

of Scotland. The site of the cemetery, located at NT

3613 9900 from the descripton above, is now part of a

new housing development area. No further fi nds have

been reported.

– – NT39NE 1

16 Denbeath Roman Coin A fairly worn bronze coin of Licinius I, minted at

Alexandria, which was found, perhaps before 1960, in a

Methil garden, was presented to Kirkcaldy Museum by

Inspector D T Donaldson, Fife Constabulary, Kirkcaldy.

The location shown is very approximate and it is likely

that the fi ndspot was actually outwith the study area.

– – NT39NE 2

17 1-51 Cowley Street Cottages A row of cottages erected for workers of Bowman &

Company owners of Denbeath Colliery. The cottages

were leased to the Wemyss Coal Company in 1905, after

which they provided accommodation for employees of

the Wemyss Private Railway.

C (S)

Listed

Building

46071 NT39NE 97-

120

18 Methil XDO Post XDO Post A WW2 concrete built Extended Defence Offi cers

Post (XDO post) is situated on the S side of Methil, by

a road junction on the coast (S) side of the road. The

XDO post has been buried with only the top visible

above ground and trees have been planted round it with

the intention of concealing the structure. The XDO

post was the control position for a submarine mine fi eld

which was laid in the approaches to Methil Docks.

– – NT39NE 15

19 The White Swan

Hotel

Hotel/Bronze Age

Cemetery

An early 20th century 2-storey 9-bay hotel. According

to the listed building report a Bronze Age cemetery was

discovered during the construction of the hotel in 1906.

However this would appear to be the same site recorded

separately as NT39NE 1. It is diffi cult to be certain

exactly where the cemetery was (see text above).

C (S)

Listed

Building

22713 NT39NE 7

20 Buckhaven and

Methil War

Memorial

War Memorial A World War I war memorial with a soldier on a plinth,

with World War II role-of-honour added. The statue was

unveiled in 1922.

C (S)

Listed

Building

46077 NT39NE 56

14


MOWT10

HA

No.


No

21 Methil parish

Church

Church Ecclesiastical building in use as such. This Cruciform-

plan, aisless Romanesque Church was built for the Baird

Trust in 1925. The previous Methil Parish Church was

situated in Lower Methil, and the foundation stone

of that building (dated 1837) is now located in the

Narthex of the present church.

B-Listed

Building

22712 NT39NE 50

22 Methil Town For the purposes of this study all development within

the village of Methil up to 1855 is considered as one site

with the exception of listed buildings which are listed

separately. Methil was still a small fi shing village by the

time of the 1st edition Ordnance Survey in 1855. It had

a small harbour, a church, tavern, school and ropewalk.

However many of its buildings were in ruin at this time.

The extent of its development at this stage is largely

within the onshore outer study area but not within Fife

Energy Park.

– – NT39 NE 11,

53, 66, 68, 69,

75, 131, 132, 133

23 313-338 High

Street, Lower Methil

Terrace An early 20th century terraced crescent of two-storey

local authority houses (25) with crowstepped gables and

Scottish 17th century details.

C (S)

Listed

Building

46074 NT 39NE

84-95

24 Cosmo Cabin Cruiser The Cosmo was a cabin cruiser which ran aground off

Buckhaven in 1994. It is not considered to be of cultural

heritage interest.

– – –

25 Number Four Steam Sand

Dredger

The Number Four was a steam sand dredger which ran

aground on rocks near Methil Breakwater on the 8th

December 1898 and which later broke up and became

a total loss.

– – NT39NE 8001

26 Ashgrove Vessel The SS Ashgrove was an iron hulled twin-screw vessel

of 1,702 tonnes, 286.94 metres long and 10.51 metres

wide, built in Hull in 1882. She ran aground in a storm

against the unfi nished new harbour wall of Methil on

January the 16th, 1912. Two of the crew and a stowaway

perished but the rest of the crew were saved in a

dramatic rescue.

– – NT39NE 8009

27 Karen Schooner The Karen was a wooden schooner built in 1920 by

Kragh Christensen and owned by an M Pederson. The

ship caught fi re after an explosion in the hold and sank

on the 5th of February 1940.

NT39NE 8002

Forthwind Test Site Appendix A14.1 Environmental Statement Airborne Noise

A14.1 SURVEY RECORD SHEETS AND CALIBRATION CERTIFICATES

NOISE - Page 1 Noise Survey Record Sheet

Project No: 1547 Project Name: Methil Offshore Client: 2B Installed By: MCAB

Location No (x/y): 01 Location Name: 3 Cave Cottages Monitoring Location (GPS Grid Reference): NT 34211, 96883

Monitoring Location Description:

Front garden (gravel area).

Distance From Façade: >3.5m Noise Sources Identified During Survey Visit:

Sea, vehicles, birds, wind

Notes:

Photograph Files: 20150211_131504.jpg, 20150211_131517.jpg, 20150211_131529.jpg, 20150211_131551.jpg

Start Date & Time: 11/02/2015 at 13.10 GMT

Equipment Item Make Model Serial No. Sound Level Meter Rion NL-31 0510114 Calibrator Rion NC-74 34372738 Source of Equipment: Noise Meter Clock set to GMT

Photo(s) of Monitoring Location:

NOISE - Page 2 Noise Survey Record Sheet – Visit Record

Initial Name: MCAB Date & Time: 11/02/2015 at 13.10 GMT Noise Filename: 0101 Calibration Level (dB(A)): 94.0 Range: 20 - 100 Notes: Rain Gauge Installed

Final Check Name: MCAB Date & Time: 04/03/2015 at 12.10 GMT Calibration Level (dB(A)): 94.0 Level Before Calibration (dB(A)): 93.9 Notes: Rain Gauge Installed

NOISE - Page 1 Noise Survey Record Sheet

Project No: 1547 Project Name: Methil Offshore Client: 2B Installed By: MCAB

Location No (x/y): 02 Location Name: 51-57 West High St. Monitoring Location (GPS Grid Reference): NT 35801, 97732

Monitoring Location Description:

Backgarden (communal garden).

Distance From Façade: >3.5m Noise Sources Identified During Survey Visit:

Sea, cars, dogs, birds

Notes:

Photograph Files: 20150211_124337.jpg, 20150211_124351.jpg, 20150211_124402.jpg, 20150211_124423(0).jpg

Start Date & Time: 11/02/2015 at 12.20 GMT

Equipment Item Make Model Serial No. Sound Level Meter Rion NL-31 0510131 Calibrator Rion NC-74 34372738 Source of Equipment: Noise Meter Clock set to GMT

Photo(s) of Monitoring Location:

NOISE - Page 2 Noise Survey Record Sheet – Visit Record

Initial Name: MCAB Date & Time: 11/02/2015 at 12.20 GMT Noise Filename: 0201 Calibration Level (dB(A)): 94.0 Range: 20 - 100 Notes: Rain Gauge Installed

Final Check Name: MCAB Date & Time: 04/03/2015 at 12.30 GMT Calibration Level (dB(A)): 94.0 Level Before Calibration (dB(A)): 94.1 Notes: Rain Gauge Removed

Forthwind Ltd Appendix A14.2 Environmental Statement Airborne Noise

A14.2 CHART DETAILING WIND SPEEDS AND DIRECTIONS DURING SURVEY PERIOD

0123456789

1011121314151617181920

0 45 90 135 180 225 270 315 360

Stan

dard

ised

10

m W

ind

Spee

d, m

s-1

Wind Direction at 72 m, Degrees Relative to North

Chart 14.5: Wind Speeds and Directions During Survey Period

Wind Data

Methil Offshore Wind Turbines Navigational Safety Risk Assessment 2-B Energy February 2015, Commercial in Confidence

© TÜV SÜD PMSS 2015

Methil Offshore Wind Turbines Navigational Safety Risk Assessment 2-B Energy February 2015, Commercial in Confidence

Document Control

Responsible for Job Title Name Date Signature

Content Marine Safety Consultant D CANTELLO 17-02-2015

Checked Director, QHSE Nick Chivers 18-02-2015

Approval Associate Alan Chivers 25/02/2015 Alan Chivers (ELEC)

Copyright: TÜV SÜD PMSS © Document Reference: "Document Reference" 73430866-001

Signatures in this approval box have checked this document in line with the requirements of QP16

This report has been prepared by TÜV SÜD PMSS with all reasonable skill and care, within the terms of the contract with the Client. The report contains information from sources and data which we believe to be reliable but we have not confirmed that reliability and make no representation as to their accuracy or completeness.

The report is confidential to the Client and TÜV SÜD PMSS accepts no responsibility to any third party to whom information in this report may be disclosed. No part of this document may be reproduced without the prior written approval of TÜV SÜD PMSS

Methil Offshore Wind Turbine Development 2-B Energy

1


Table of Contents

References 4

Abbreviations 5

1. Introduction 6

1.1. Background 6 1.2. Aim 6 1.3. Scope 6

2. Risk Claim 7

2.1. Safety Requirements 7 2.2. Navigational Risk Claim 7 2.3. Supporting Reasoned Argument and Evidence 7

3. Description of the Marine Environment 8

3.1. Current Marine Environment 8 3.1.1. General 8 3.1.2. Methil Port 8 3.1.3. Anchorages 8 3.1.4. Pilot Boarding Position 8 3.1.5. Spoil Ground 8 3.1.6. Energy Park Fife 8 3.1.7. Burntisland Fabrication Ltd (BiFab) 11 3.1.8. Search and Rescue 11 3.1.9. Wrecks 11 3.1.10. Submarine Cables and Pipelines 11 3.1.11. Tidal Stream 11 3.1.12. Tidal Heights 11 3.1.13. Bathymetry 11

4. Description of the Proposed Installation and the Impact on the Marine Environment 12

4.1. Project Description 12 4.2. Site 12 4.3. Device Description 14 4.3.1. Turbines 14 4.3.2. Sub-Structures 15 4.3.3. Foundations 15 4.3.4. Inter Array Cabling 15 4.3.5. Export Cabling 15 4.4. Lifecycle 15 4.5. Construction and Installation Methodology 15 4.5.1. Mobilisation Port 15 4.5.2. Pre-Installation Activity 16 4.5.3. Sub-sea Cable Installation 16 4.5.4. Foundations 16 4.5.5. Sub-Structure - Scenario 2 Only 17 4.5.6. Turbine Installation 17


2


4.5.7. Operations and Maintenance 17 4.5.8. Decommissioning 17

5. Marine Traffic Data 18

5.1. Sources of Data 18 5.1.1. Commercial Traffic 18 5.1.2. Recreational Traffic 18 5.1.3. Commercial Fishing Activity 18 5.2. Accident Data 18

6. Vessel Traffic Analysis 22

6.1. Current Traffic Patterns, Densities and Types 22 6.1.1. Traffic Density 22 6.1.2. Vessel Types 22 6.1.3. Traffic Using BiFab Quay 23 6.1.4. Anchorages 23 6.2. Effect on Future Traffic Patterns and Densities 24 6.2.1. Traffic Increase due to Development Activities 24 6.2.2. Effect of Development on Traffic Patterns 24

7. Risk Assessment 26

7.1. Hazard Identification, Risk Assessment and Controls 26 7.2. Hazard Identification Methodology 26 7.3. Construction and Installation Phases 26 7.3.1. Pre-Installation Activities 26 7.3.2. Collision with Installation Spread 26 7.3.3. Subsea Cable Installation 27 7.3.4. Use of Safety Zones 27 7.3.5. Safety/Guard Vessels 30 7.3.6. Emergency Response Cooperation Plan 30 7.3.7. Risk Assessment and Controls 30 7.4. Operational Phase 31 7.4.1. Collision with Turbine 31 7.4.2. WFSV Collision with other Vessels 31 7.4.3. Collision with Sub-Surface Gravity Base Structure 31 7.4.4. Grounding on Sub-Sea Cable Protection 32 7.4.5. Electromagnetic Interference 32 7.4.6. Effects on Communication, Radar and Positioning Systems 32 7.4.7. Emergency Response Cooperation Plan 32 7.5. Charting, Marking and Lighting 33 7.5.1. Charting 33 7.5.2. Safety Zone - Operational Phase 33 7.5.3. Marking and Lighting 34 7.5.4. AIS 34 7.6. Risk Assessment and Controls 34

8. Conclusions 36

9. Recommendations 36


3


10. Statement of Limitations 37

Appendix 1. Hazard and Control Log 38

Appendix 2. – Stakeholder Responses 41

1. Scottish RYA 41

Record of Changes 42

Distribution List 42


4


References 1 DECC (DTI) Guidance on the Assessment of the Impact of Offshore

Wind Farms Methodology for Assessing the Marine Navigational Safety Risks of Offshore Wind Farms

2 Maritime and Coastguard Agency’s (MCA) Marine General Notice MGN 371 (M+F)

Offshore Renewable Energy Installations (OREIs) – Guidance on UK Navigational Practice, Safety and Emergency Response Issues

3 Admiralty Sailing Directions NP 54 9th Edition 2013 North Sea(West) Pilot 4 The Admiralty Tidal Stream Atlas NP 252 North Sea, North Western Part 5 IHO Special Publication No 44 - 5th Edition 2008 IHO Standards for Hydrographic Surveys 6 RYA UK Atlas of Recreational Boating Recreational Cruising Routes, Sailing and Racing Areas around the UK

Coast; 2005 7 International Maritime Organisation (IMO) IRPC 1972 International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea 1972 as

amended. The “ColRegs” 8 SI 2007 No 1948 Electricity (Offshore Generating Stations) (Safety Zones) (Application

Procedures and Control of Access) Regulations 2007 9

Report MCA MNA 53/10/366 QinetiQ/03/00297/1.12004 Results of the electromagnetic investigations and assessments of marine radar, communications and positioning systems undertaken at the North Hoyle wind farm by QinetiQ and the Maritime and Coastguard: 15/11/2004

10 BWEA /MCA/DTI/PLA Report Dated April 2007 Investigation of Technical and Operational Effects on Marine Radar Close to Kentish Flats Offshore Wind Farm : April 2007

11 Admiralty Chart 5011 – (INT 1) Edition 3 Symbols and Abbreviations Used on Admiralty Charts 12 IALA Recommendation O-139 The Marking of Man-Made Structures Edition 1 December 2008 13 IALA Recommendation E-108 Edition 2 December 2009 On The Surface Colours used as Visual Signals on Aids to Navigation 14 IALA Recommendation A-126 On the Use of the AIS in Marine Aids to Navigation Edition 1, December

2003


5


Abbreviations AIS Automatic Identification System. ALARP As Low As Reasonably Practicable AtN Aid to Navigation AWB All Weather Lifeboat Cable (measure of distance)

1/10th of a nautical mile (approx 185 metres) and a standard measure of distance at sea

CGOC Coast Guard Operations Centre CHA Competent Harbour Authority. A statutory authority responsible for a defined area of water in and around a port or harbour Chart Datum By international agreement, Chart Datum is a level so low that the tide will not frequently fall below it. In the UK, this is normally approximately

the level of LAT ColRegs Collision Regulations DfT Department for Trade DTI Department of Trade and Industry dwt Deadweight tonnage EIA Environmental Impact Assessment ES Environmental Statement FMEA Failure Modes and Effects Analysis FPA Forth Ports Authority GT Gross Tonnage. The total volume of a vessel, expressed in units of 100 cubic feet (gross ton), with certain open structures, deckhouses, tanks,

etc., exempted. Also called Gross Registered Tonnage HAT Highest Astronomical Tide. HAT is the highest level which can be predicted to occur in average meteorological conditions and under any

combination of astronomical conditions. This level will not occur every year. HAT is not the extreme level as storm surges may cause higher levels to occur. Determined by inspection over a period of years

IALA International Association of Lighthouse Authorities IFG Inshore Fisheries Group ILB Inshore Lifeboat IMM International Maritime Mobile IMO International Maritime Organisation kn Knot kW Kilowatt LAT Lowest Astronomical Tide. LAT is the lowest level which can be predicted to occur in average meteorological conditions and under any

combination of astronomical conditions. This level will not occur every year. LAT is not the extreme level as storm surges may cause lower levels to occur. Determined by inspection over a period of years

LOA Length Overall (of a vessel) m Metre MBS Maritime Buoyage System MCA Maritime and Coastguard Agency MGN Marine General Notice MHWN Mean High Water Neaps. MHWS Mean High Water Springs. MLWN Mean Low Water Neaps. MRCC Maritime Rescue Coordination Centre MSL Mean Sea Level. The average level of the sea surface over a period (normally 18.6 years) MV Motor Vessel MW Megawatt NLB Northern Lighthouse Board NM Notice to mariners n mile (International) Nautical Mile (1,852 metres). NSRA Navigational Safety Risk Assessment NUC Not Under Command O&M Operations and Maintenance OREI Offshore Renewable Energy Installation PEXA Practice and Exercise Area PHA Preliminary Hazard Analysis PMSC Pot Marine Safety Code RNLI Royal National Lifeboat Institution RYA Royal Yachting Association ROV Remotely Operated Vehicle SCADA Supervisory, Control and Data Acquisition SFF Scottish Fishermen’s Federation SMS Safety Management System t Tonne (metric) TCE The Crown Estate Tidal Stream A distinction is drawn between tidal streams, which are astronomical in origin, and currents, which are independent of astronomical conditions

and which, in the waters around the British Isles, are mainly of meteorological origin TSS Traffic Separation Scheme VHF Very High Frequency VMS Vessel Monitoring System VTS Vessel Traffic Services WFSV Wind Farm Service Vessel


6


1. Introduction 1.1. Background

2-B Energy has been granted a seabed lease off the port of Methil in the Firth of Forth in order to develop a demonstration/proving site for wind turbines. In order to be granted a licence for the proposed development, 2-B Energy is required to make an application for consent for the specific number and types of turbines to be sited in the leased area. This submission is intended to support the consent application for a development consisting of two turbines. As part of the consents process there is a requirement to undertake an assessment of the navigational safety issues arising from the establishment of an Offshore Renewable Energy Installation (OREI). Normally, for a wind farm, this assessment would be considered by the statutory consultees with whom Marine Scotland, as the consenting authority, would normally consult i.e. the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) and the Northern Lighthouse Board (NLB). In this case, given that the site lies within the Forth Ports Ltd statutory port area for which the latter has responsibility for assessing and managing the risks to navigation and shipping in accordance with the Port Marine Safety Code (PMSC), as well as, to an extent, the lighting and marking of navigational hazards, this submission is required to be submitted for approval to Forth Ports as the primary responsible body for agreement on the tolerability of risks presented by the proposed development. Such assessments of the risks are required to be conducted in accordance with the DTI/DECC publication “Marine Navigational Safety Risks of Offshore Wind Farms - Guidance on the Assessment of the Impact of Offshore Wind Farms” (Reference 1) and the Maritime and Coastguard Agency’s (MCA) Marine General Notice MGN 371(M+F) - Proposed Offshore Renewable Energy Installations (OREI) – Guidance on Navigational Safety Issues (Reference 2). In this case, given both the size of the development as a trial site involving the erection of just two turbines and the methodology, is required, in accordance with the guidance, to be proportionate to the nature and scale of the development and, therefore, employ appropriate tools and techniques for the assessment of the risks involved. The assessment will be taken into account in the preparation of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) study report and the resulting Environmental Statement (ES).

1.2. Aim The aim of this report is to demonstrate that a suitable and sufficient assessment of the risks presented to mariners and the emergency services by the installation and operation of the proposed development has been undertaken. Where appropriate, this report proposes suitable control and risk mitigation measures to ensure that any remaining risks are either tolerable or can be made tolerable by the application of suitable, agreed controls. In support of the Navigational Safety Risk Assessment (NSRA), the following safety management activities were undertaken in compliance with DTi/BERR publication - Guidance on the Assessment of the Impact of Offshore Wind Farms and MGN 371 (M+F) Offshore Renewable Energy Installations (OREIs) – Guidance on UK Navigational Practice, Safety and Emergency Response Issues:

• Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment for device operations; • Development of a Hazard Log including a record of risk control measures.

1.3. Scope

The scope of the NSRA covers the risks to navigation presented by the siting of two wind turbines off the Port of Methil. This report presents the arguments and evidence which aim to demonstrate that, with the application of the controls and risk mitigation measures recommended in this report, the risks are tolerable and As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP).


7


2. Risk Claim 2.1. Safety Requirements

The principal Safety Requirements for the proposed development are as follows:

• All significant hazards associated with the installation, operation, maintenance and decommissioning of the turbines shall be identified and the risks assessed as tolerable and ALARP.

• The site will comply with MCA Marine Guidance Note MGN 371 (M+F): Offshore Renewable Energy

Installations (OREIs) - Guidance on UK Navigational Practice, Safety and Emergency Response Issues (Reference 2);

• The installation shall co-exist safely with other marine users with minimum increase to the baseline level

of navigational risk during construction, operation, maintenance and decommissioning. The devices should not cause or contribute to an unacceptable obstruction of, or danger to, navigation or marine emergency services;

• The risks presented by the array devices and their operation will be effectively managed by an

appropriate Safety Management System meeting the requirements of the MCA’s Guidance (Reference 2).

2.2. Navigational Risk Claim The navigational risks from the turbines to marine traffic transiting the area during the installation, operational and decommissioning phases are considered as “Tolerable with Monitoring”1

provided the risk mitigation measures recommended in this report are applied.

Risk controls necessary to achieve the acceptable level of risk for the array are identified in this report and are required to be implemented prior to installation and operation and will require to be checked periodically. The impact of the siting of the turbines will be monitored throughout their installation and operations.

2.3. Supporting Reasoned Argument and Evidence The supporting arguments for the assessment are made in the body of this report and were derived from qualitative analysis based on a number of sources of data including expert opinion (both written and oral) of the marine users of the area and quantitative data regarding vessel movements.

1 Risk Criticality expressions are those used in DTI DTi/BERR publication - Guidance on the Assessment of the Impact of Offshore Wind Farms (Reference 1) and are explained at Appendix 1.


8


3. Description of the Marine EnvironmentThe following sources have been consulted:

• Admiralty Charts 741 and 734;• Admiralty Sailing Directions NP 54 – The North Sea (West) Pilot (Reference 3 );• The Admiralty Tidal Stream Atlas NP 252– North Sea, North Western Part (Reference 4);• Admiralty Tide Tables NP 201 – Vol 1 UK and Ireland (Reference 5;• RYA Coastal Atlas of Recreational Boating (Reference 6).• Admiralty Charts 741 and 734.

3.1. Current Marine Environment 3.1.1. General

Forth Ports PLC exercises jurisdiction over all the waters of the Firth of Forth including the area leased to 2-B Energy for the proposed development. The Forth ports handle about 5000 ship movements and over 48 million tonnes of cargo annually with the principle commodities being oil, petro-chemicals and liquefied gases which pass through the port of Grangemouth and the two marine terminals at Hound Point and Braefoot. The port of Grangemouth also handles considerable volumes of container traffic.

A Vessel Traffic Service (VTS) scheme, the Forth and Tay Navigation Service, with full radar and AIS surveillance, covering the whole of the Firth of Forth, is operated from Grangemouth. Vessels of 300GT and over and all vessels carrying dangerous or polluting cargos regardless of size are required to give notice of their arrival at the Firth of Forth area and all vessels of 50GTand over are subject to reporting requirements when in the Firth. Forth Ports PLC is also the Local Lighthouse Authority.

3.1.2. Methil Port

Methil Port is a small commercial port handling wood pulp and timber, aggregate and general bulk cargo. The harbour is administered by Forth Ports PLC. The port has the facilities to accommodate the repair, maintenance and supply of offshore drilling rigs and tankers. These take advantage of the deep, sheltered water of Largo Bay and the specialist services in Methil and its locality. The port can accommodate vessels up to 102m LOA, 14.5m beam, 5.5m draught and 3,000 dwt.

3.1.3. Anchorages Five anchorage berths numbered M1 through M5 are situated south east of Methil whilst nine anchor berths (K1 to K9) are off Kirkcaldy but are directly adjacent to the proposed development area. All these anchorages are allocated by Forth and Tay Navigation Service. The swinging circle of 750 metres radius around the anchor position shows the maximum allowed extent of the vessel position when at the full scope of its anchor or mooring chain and is indicated on the chart. There is also an anchorage for small vessels closer inshore which is indicated by appropriate symbology. (See Figure 1)

3.1.4. Pilot Boarding Position When entering Methil Port, vessels will embark a pilot at the position indicated on the chart approximately 1500m south of the dock entrance and 600m north east of the northernmost proposed turbine position. (See Figure 1)

3.1.5. Spoil Ground A spoil ground with an extant licence is sited some 1200m due west of the development area.

3.1.6. Energy Park Fife An offshore Energy Park area has been established immediately adjacent to the shore based Energy Park and is indicated on the charts accordingly as well as being marked by buoys. The chart note states that “Mariners should avoid entering this area unless involved in operations”. The area does not encompass the proposed 2-B Energy development area. In addition, a wind turbine as been erected just outside and to the south west of the offshore Energy Park area within 20m of the shore (See Figure 1). It constitutes no significant hazard to navigation.


9



10


Figure 1 2-B Energy – Methil Development Site - Overview


11


3.1.7. Burntisland Fabrication Ltd (BiFab) BiFab are involved in construction of structures for offshore use with a large facility within the Energy Park Fife. Large structures of up to 1000 tonnes each are out-loaded from the quay side within their facility using barges and vessels. These vessels may take several such structures up to a total load of 8000te. Barges of up to 400m x 120m have - and will be – moored at the quay using offshore mooring spreads on a weekly basis during currently envisaged work. With a stated frequency of such operations being on a weekly basis there is the potential for conflicts of activities during the construction phase of the proposed development.

3.1.8. Search and Rescue The nearest Royal National Lifeboat Institution (RNLI) stations are at Anstruther (10 n miles), North Berwick (11.5 n miles) and Kinghorn (7.5n miles). Anstruther has a Mersey Class All Weather lifeboat (AWB) and an inshore craft whilst Kinghorn and North Berwick are both equipped with Inshore Lifeboats (ILB) only.

3.1.9. Wrecks There are no charted wrecks within 1 n mile of the development site. The closest wreck lies approximately 2 n miles to the south east where there are a group of four wrecks charted in the area of M2 anchorage.

3.1.10. Submarine Cables and Pipelines There is an outfall pipeline running from the shoreline at Buckhaven to an outlet (diffuser) approximately 750m to the northwest of the south westerly turbine (Turbine 1). The proposed export cable route lies approximately 1000m to the north east of this pipeline.

There is a subsea pipeline running across the Forth 3.5 n miles to the east of the proposed development. There is a corridor of approximately 1 n mile either side of the pipeline in which anchoring is prohibited.

3.1.11. Tidal Stream Tidal streams in the area are generally rectilinear and run parallel to the coast. Spring rates rarely exceed 1kn.

3.1.12. Tidal Heights Tidal height data extracted from the Admiralty Tide Tables (Reference 5). Chart Datum is 2.90m below Ordnance Datum (Newlyn) (i.e. – 2.90 ODN).

LAT MLWS MLWN MSL MHWN MHWS HAT Standard Port – (Leith) -0.1 +0.8 +2.0 +3.2 +4.4 +5.6 +6.3

Secondary Port Differences (Methil)

No Data -0.1 -0.1 No Data -0.1 -0.1 -0.1

Methil Port (Heights relative to Chart Datum)

-0.1 +0.7 +1.9 +4.3 +5.5 +6.2

Mean Range (Neaps) 2.4 metres

Mean Range (Springs) 4.8 metres

Table 1 Tidal Height Data - Methil

3.1.13. Bathymetry The chart source data for Admiralty Chart 741 Ed 4 Oct 2014 indicates that the proposed turbine site is situated in an area which was surveyed by Forth Ports PLC between 1979 and 1986 whilst the export cable route runs through waters surveyed in 1917 using lead-line. Hence, the development area is not currently surveyed to appropriate IHO standards (i.e. IHO Special Publication No 44 -5th Edition 2008 - IHO Standards for Hydrographic Surveys (Reference 5)) as required by MGN 371.


12


4. Description of the Proposed Installation and the Impact on the MarineEnvironment

4.1. Project DescriptionThe proposal is for the construction and operation of up to two offshore wind turbines with associated infrastructureincluding foundations, scour protection, transformers, inter-array cables between the turbines, and an export cableconnecting the turbines to the onshore substation. An onshore control building and substation is also part of thedevelopment. Due to the uncertainties associated with offshore construction, it is not possible to define a detailedproject design at this point in the development process. Aspects of the development that cannot be determined atthis stage include:

• Model, dimensions and precise location of turbines;• Turbine foundation and substructure types;• Lengths and layouts of the inter array and export cables.

Due to the uncertainties associated with the built elements of the development, it is not possible to provide detailed construction techniques and vessel numbers at this stage.

However, to ensure that the submissions for consent are sufficiently robust and have taken account of the worst credible case risks arising as a result of the development, design parameters have been developed where flexibility in the final design and implementation is required. These parameters are collectively referred to as a ‘Rochdale Envelope’, which can be defined as a range of parameters within which the final Development must fall. The design parameters which constitute the Rochdale Envelope are described in this Section and are set out in Table 3.

The Rochdale Envelope for the Development broadly comprises two alternate scenarios. These are summarised below:

• Scenario 1 – 2 two bladed turbines of up to 182.1 m above Chart Datum (CD) to blade tip with a latticestructure, connected to each other and to an onshore substation and control building by subsea cables;

• Scenario 2 – 2 three bladed turbines of up to 196.1m above Chart Datum (CD) to blade tip with a tubulartower and jacket substructure, connected to each other and to an onshore substation and control buildingby subsea cables.

Table 3 provides detail on each of the elements of the development within the two development scenarios. The purpose of the development is to generate electricity from a renewable source, the wind, whilst also acting as the first offshore deployment of the 2B turbine to demonstrate and test the technology in the offshore environment. Scenario 1 is, therefore, the preferred option for the development although the option of Scenario 2 has been included to future proof the consent should the situation change regarding the 2B turbine technology and deployment options.

4.2. Site The development site is located off the northern shore of the Firth of Forth at Methil, Scotland and is approximately 1500m from the shoreline as defined by Mean High Water Springs (MHWS).

The development consists of the following:

• Two turbine envelope areas in which the turbines and sub-structures (if required) will be located. Turbinepositions are at Table 2. A 100 m micro-siting allowance from these centre points is required for the finalselection of turbine locations;

Table 2 Turbine Positions Turbine Lat/Long (Deg, Dec Mins) Lat/Long (Dec degrees) OSGB 36 Turbine 1 56° 09’.52N; 3° 00’.90W 56.15866; -3.014994 336964, 696677 Turbine 2 56 09.88N; 3 00.09W 56.164667, -3.001495 337812, 697333


13


• Inter-array cable corridor of up to 902 m in length and 106 m wide, in which the cables which connect theturbines will be located;

• Export cable corridor of up to 1648 m in length and 147 m wide, which will contain the cable that transmitsthe electricity generated by the turbines to the onshore sub-station.

The Development Envelope is the area in which the Development may be located and does not reflect the actual footprint of the Development infrastructure. The physical footprint of the Development will be within the parameters detailed in Table 3.


14


Table 3 Design Parameters

4.3. Device Description 4.3.1. Turbines

The turbine will comprise the following three main elements:

• Rotor – including the turbine blades and nose cone;• Hub – houses the electrical generator, gearbox, control mechanism and attaches to both the tower and

the rotor;• Tower – attaches to the seabed (or substructure in the case of the Scenario 2 Turbine) and hub and forms

the primary vertical element of the turbine.

The rotational speed of the blades will vary according to the wind speed and the gearing of the turbine, although will be within the speed detailed in Table 3.

A helipad will be located on the hub of each turbine to allow aerial access to the turbine, and a boat mooring and landing system will be located at sea level to allow access from the water.

The wind turbines in Scenario 1 will be the two bladed 2B Energy turbine, with an installed generating capacity of up to 6 MW per turbine. The turbine will consist of a tapering three legged tower, with the legs linked by a steel lattice structure. The legs of the turbine will attach directly to the seabed via the chosen foundation solution, with no requirement for a separate substructure on which the turbine would sit. One of the turbines may have an electrical transformer station incorporated into the tower to convert the electricity generated by the turbines into the correct voltage for export to the substation. This will be a box like structure up to 5 m tall and will result in the turbine in which it is located being 5 m taller than the turbine without this element. When operational, the hub will rotate to orientate the blades to face away from the direction of the prevailing wind, with the blades rotating in an anti-clockwise direction.

The wind turbines in Scenario 2 will be a three bladed wind turbine, with an installed generating capacity of up to 7 MW per turbine. The turbine will consist of a tapering steel tubular tower, which will attach to the substructure, with the hub being attached to the top of the tower. When operational, the hub will rotate to orientate the blades to face into the direction of the prevailing wind, with the blades rotating in a clockwise direction.


15


4.3.2. Sub-Structures Scenario 1 does not require a separate sub-structure, with turbines being secured to the seabed via the selected foundation solution. Therefore, only Scenario 2 turbines will require a sub-structure which connects the turbine to the foundations and the latter secure the sub-structure to the seabed. Should a turbine which requires a sub-structure be selected for the Development, further studies will be undertaken as part of the detailed design process to determine the final selection and design of the sub-structure. This is likely, however, to be a tubular jacket structure with up to four legs braced by smaller tubular steel sections to form a frame.

Tubular jackets can be used with a range of foundation types, although in the case of the Development, would be secured to the seabed using either pin piles or gravity based foundations.

4.3.3. Foundations The two options are gravity based structures or drilled pin pile foundations. The foundations will secure either the turbine (scenario 1) or the sub-structure (scenario 2) to the seabed. Gravity base foundations are structures cast from concrete or steel that rely on the weight of the structure to provide stability. These foundations can be used with either a tubular jacket or turbines. The size of the gravity base is directly proportional to both the water depth at the point of installation and the weight of the structure to be mounted on top. It is anticipated that the bases will be hollow and extra weight (or ballast) would need to be contained within the structure in the form of rock, sand or water.

The gravity base foundations will be between 30 m and 60 m in diameter based on a single foundation. Structures will be secured to the seabed by either a single gravity based foundation on which the structure will sit, or by individual gravity based foundations which will be located at the base of each leg of the turbine or sub-structure. However, the maximum footprint of the foundations will not exceed that of a single 60 m diameter foundation at each turbine.

An area of the seabed will be prepared prior to the installation of gravity based foundations. The total volume of material which may need to be removed to achieve a level base will not exceed 15,200 m3. This material will be removed during the sea bed preparation and disposed of at an existing off-site disposal facility under a Marine Licence, or re-used as ballast material within the foundation if suitable.

4.3.4. Inter Array Cabling The inter-array cable will transmit electricity at up to 132 kV and will either be buried or installed on the seabed and protected by a suitable method. If buried, the burial target depth will be 1.5 m. If surface laid they will be protected by mattresses or rock armour to a height of around 1m above the surrounding seabed. The method of installation will be determined when further information regarding ground conditions at the site are available.

4.3.5. Export Cabling A single 132 kV export cable will transmit electricity from both the turbines to the onshore connection point. The cable will originate from Turbine 2 to the sub-station and lead to the onshore control building at Fife Energy Park. The export cable will be a maximum of 1,500 m in length and will be either buried and/or surface laid and protected by appropriate means. Where buried, a target depth of burial will be 1.5m. If surface laid it will be protected by mattresses or rock armour to a height of around 1.5m above the surrounding seabed. The method of installation will be determined when further information regarding ground conditions at the site are available.

4.4. Lifecycle The development has a licence for operation for 20 years.

4.5. Construction and Installation Methodology Construction would take place over approximately a 3-6 month period after which time the turbines would undergo testing and commissioning before becoming operational.

4.5.1. Mobilisation Port A mobilisation port has yet to be decided for this project.


16


4.5.2. Pre-Installation Activity Pre-installation activities involve survey work such as geotechnical investigation and seabed preparation work. It may involve small survey vessels, drilling vessels or jack-ups.

4.5.3. Sub-sea Cable Installation Whilst the final installation method for the inter-array and export cables will not be determined until detailed ground investigations have been completed, the method of installation is unlikely to vary between scenarios. The preference will be for all cables to be buried, although where this is not feasible as a result of ground conditions, cables will be surface laid and protected by a suitable method. The cables may be laid by trenching using jetting or ploughing utilising Remotely Operated Vehicles (ROVs) or surface vessels with excavators.

The installation of sub-sea cables is anticipated to require the following vessel types:

• Cable laying vessel;• Trenching, jetting or ploughing vessel;• Service vessel; and• Workboat.

The cable laying vessel is likely to be a vessel in the region of 100 m by 20 m and will install the cables from spools located on the vessel. The trenching vessel is likely to operate or deploy the trenching equipment and will be similar in size to the cable laying vessel. The service vessel, which may be required to support the installation, will be similar in size and specification to the trenching vessel. If required, a workboat will be used to transfer crew from port to the installation vessels. It is anticipated that installation of the inter-array cables will take up to 15 days. The export cable may be laid in a period of 3 days. Should it not be possible to bury the cables, an alternative method of protection will be required, such as mattressing or rock placement on top of the cables. The extent of this protection is not yet known and will be defined once detailed cable specifications are known, although the anticipated maximum dimensions of any protection is anticipated to be up to 1.5m above seabed level and 5m in width. This would be undertaken by a suitable specialist vessel.

4.5.4. Foundations 4.5.4.1. Pin-Pile Foundation Installation

Piles will be transported to the wind farm site from their manufacturing location by vessel, and will either directly to the site for installation, or will be taken to a suitable port or harbour facility prior to transport to the site. The vessel which transports the piles from the manufacturing location may not necessarily be the vessel from which they are installed, and piles may be transferred to another vessel either at sea or via the port or harbour facility. Piles are likely to be transported by a cargo type barge, although final details of the vessel are not yet known. A typical vessel used for this purpose however, would be anticipated to be in the region of 100 m in length and 30 m in width, and would likely use a dynamic positioning system. The following outlines the likely process for installation of the foundations:

• If required, seabed preparation may be undertaken prior to piling operations commencing, and maytypically include clearance of debris or levelling of the piling area;

• Piles are loaded onto the installation vessel, either at the site or at a harbour facility and transported tosite;

• A piling template may be placed on the seabed to assist the piling operation;• Piling vessel drills a pile sleeve into the seabed at the required location for the insertion of the pin pile;• Steel pile is lifted into place by the lifting vessel, inserted into the pile sleeve and grouted in place; and• The process is repeated at each location required (three piles per turbine for Scenario 1 and four piles per

location for Scenario 2).

The process of installing the piled foundations described above is anticipated to take up to 40 days.


17


4.5.4.2. Gravity Base Installation The details of the gravity base foundation option are not known at this stage, and will depend on a range of factors including water depth and other characteristics at the final turbine locations. It is possible that gravity based foundations could be deployed as a single foundation on which the sub-structure or turbine sits, or smaller, individual foundations may be located at the leg of each turbine or sub-structure. In the case of a single, larger foundation then this would likely be towed into position by a number of tugs before being sunk in a controlled manner onto the seabed. Individual gravity structures may be lifted into position.

4.5.5. Sub-Structure - Scenario 2 Only Sub-structures are only required for scenario 2, and will likely be installed at the same time as the pin pile foundations, likely being transported to the site at the same time as the pin piles and lifted into place following the installation of the piles. The number of vessels required for this activity is likely to be the same as for the installation of the piles and is expected to take place over 2 days. The sub-structure will provide the base above the level of the water on which the turbines are placed. The size of the sub-structure will be determined by the specific conditions at the final turbine locations. Scenario 1 does not require separate sub-structures to be installed.

4.5.6. Turbine Installation The installation process for turbines is very similar for both scenarios 1 and 2, with the primary difference between the two being that in scenario 1, turbines will be installed directly onto the foundation, whilst in scenario 2, they will be installed onto the substructure. It is likely that a single jack-up vessel will be used to install the turbines. Vessels of this type are in the region of 150 m in length and 50 m wide, although the final vessel selection is not yet known and will be determined prior to construction.

The typical installation process for the turbines is detailed below:

• Loading of wind turbine onto vessel;• Transfer to site;• Positioning/jacking/preparation for lifting;• Installation of wind turbine tower;• Installation of wind turbine nacelle;• Installation of wind turbine blades;• Jack down and relocate;• Repeat at next turbine; and• Leave site.

The installation of turbines is likely to take up to 2 days per turbine, and is anticipated to be completed within 7 days for the Development accounting for de-rigging and moving between turbines.

4.5.7. Operations and Maintenance Operations and maintenance will consist of periodic visits to the turbines using Wind Farm Service Vessels (WFSV) up to 24m in length craft. O&M operations will potentially require daily/weekly visits from the operations base which is likely to be Methil to transport maintenance / inspection teams onto the turbines. Sub-sea inspections of the cable routes using ROVs may also be a requirement. Un-planned interventions to rectify defects may also, potentially include heavy lift vessels for nacelle/rotor removal and replacements.

4.5.8. Decommissioning Decommissioning of the offshore elements will be undertaken in accordance with an approved decommissioning plan. It is likely that the turbines will be removed and foundations removed to the surface of the seabed, with infrastructure beneath the seabed and cables being left in place. The process involved in decommissioning are likely to be similar, but of smaller environmental impact, to those during construction.


18


5. Marine Traffic Data5.1. Sources of Data 5.1.1. Commercial Traffic

Commercial marine traffic data has been provided by Forth Ports Authority (FPA). In agreement with the Port Authority, it was deemed that, for the nature and scale of the proposed development, the historical port and anchorage usage data collected by them between 2004 and 2014 would be suitable and sufficient for the purposes of assessing the impact on shipping and navigation. This data has been analysed to assess, amongst other things, the number of commercial vessels entering and leaving Methil Docks and their ports of origin or destination and the numbers of vessels using the Kirkcaldy and Methil anchorage. This data does not include recreational vessels. Discussions were held with Mr John Robertson, Managing Director of BiFab) with regard to present and future levels of activity at the BiFab yard and quay.

5.1.2. Recreational Traffic The RYA UK Coastal Atlas (Reference 6) shows the entire area of the Firth of Forth as a “General Sailing Area” with a “medium”2 use coastal; recreational sailing route passing offshore of Methil and south of the proposed development. The Atlas also highlights the small vessel anchorage for use by recreational craft (indicated on the Admiralty charts, just off Methil breakwater). There is no indication of racing activity shown in the area, neither is the port of Methil shown as having an affiliated RYA Club or marina. RYA Scotland was consulted3 for their opinion on the potential impacts of the development on recreational boating in the area. Their response is at Appendix 2. In summary, the Scottish RYA’s position is that the two turbines are unlikely to have an impact on recreational boating provided any exclusion zone is as small as possible and that recreational craft are permitted to pass between the turbines and the shore.

5.1.3. Commercial Fishing Activity Given the small scale and position close inshore, normal tools for assessing fishing activity levels in the vicinity of the development were not considered appropriate. The East Coast Inshore Fisheries Group (IFG) was therefore contacted in order to establish the nature of their activities in the area. It was stated4 that:

• The area is part of, or adjacent to, (depending on the time of year) fishing grounds for squid, nephrops,lobster and velvet crab.

• The main area of activity is inshore of the yellow (special mark) buoy marking the end of the pipeline &diffuser (Diageo’s) off Buckhaven.

• Squid is fished in the whole area including the development area August to October using trawls.• Creeling takes place in particular around the diffuser off Buckhaven for lobster and in the area of the

export cable route. (I.e. in the rocky/reef areas).• There is some scallop dredging (winter) beyond the buoy and around the area of development.• Nephrops trawling takes place throughout the year on a frequent basis on or close to the southern flank of

the development area.• Vessels involved in fishing this area range from 6m (18ft) creelers up to 15m (50ft) scallopers.• Recreational fishing occurs but mainly inshore of the yellow buoy.• In winter, lobster and velvets move out beyond the yellow buoy into the development area into deeper

water.• Fishing vessels in transit up and down the coast will tend to hug the coast but remain outside the yellow

buoy keeping clear of the known creeling areas i.e. passing through the development area.

5.2. Accident Data Casualty data for the Firth of Forth area has been obtained from the RNLI. Figure 2 shows call-outs (“shouts”) for the stations directly adjacent to the proposed development and Figure 3 shows the casualty types within 5n miles of the proposed development. The data shows that most incidents in the immediate vicinity involve people in distress within metres of the shoreline or in small craft such as dinghies, sailing boats or other recreational craft. Some

2 RYA Definition: Medium Route – Popular routes on which some recreational craft will be seen at most times during summer daylight hours 3 Dr D G Russell FRMetS MCIEEM – Planning and Environment Officer, RYS Scotland 4 John Davison, Chairman IFG East.


19


incidents have involved medium / large vessels within the anchorage areas but are relatively infrequent. It is noteworthy that the casualties are attended, in the main by Kinghorn ILB with, less frequently, the Anstruther AWB. The presence of the turbines is not considered to hamper the activities of the RNLI SAR services in either reaching or finding the casualties which have occurred over the survey period. Also, given the types of casualties that have occurred in the vicinity, the likelihood of vessels being not under command (NUC) and drifting into the area containing the turbines is considered low.


20


Figure 2 RNLI Casualty Data 2007-2011 – Firth of Forth


21


Figure 3 RNLI Casualty Data 2007-2011within 5 n miles of Proposed Development


22


6.

6.1. 6.1.1.

6.1.2.

Vessel Traffic AnalysisThe data used in this assessment was provided by FPA and covered the years 2004 to 2014. Over that period, there are some are records of some 660 vessels using the port. These include general cargo vessels, container vessels, barges, tankers, tugs and specialist vessels such as heavy lift vessels.

Current Traffic Patterns, Densities and TypesTraffic DensityThe concentration of commercial traffic in the near vicinity of the proposed development occurs, unsurprisingly, in the vicinity of the pilot boarding station off Methil Port. However, traffic density in this case should not be confused with contemporaneous interactions between vessels but rather the intersection of vessel traffic routes over a period of time where they pass through the same area i.e. the pilot station. The numbers of vessels entering/exiting Methil over the period 2004 to 2014 amounts to 597 vessels. This represents an average of 60 vessels per annum or just over one vessel per week.

Vessel TypesThe breakdown by percentage of the vessel types using the port is shown at Figure 4 whilst the breakdown by year is shown at Figure 5. As can be seen around 84% of traffic consists of general cargo which reflects the known activities of the Port. These vessels are generally less than 100m Length overall (LOA) and have draughts less than 5.5m to allow entry through the lock.

Figure 4 Vessel Types Using Methil for Years 2004 - 2104


23


Figure 5 Methil Vessel Traffic by Year and Vessel Type

6.1.3. Traffic Using BiFab Quay The traffic data shows that out of the total of 660 instances of vessels using Methil, 143 were for vessels using the Quay wall, external to the docks and adjacent to BiFab’s facility. This traffic consists mainly of barges and associated tugs involved in structure outloads from BiFab’s yard. Some of these barges and vessels are up to 140m LOA and with draughts up to 8m.

YEAR NUMBER OF VESSEL S

2004 2 2005 7 2006 17 2007 15 2008 3 2009 14 2010 19 2011 7 2012 12 2013 25 2014 22 TOTAL 143

Table 4 Vessel Using BiFab Quay

The trend, according to BiFab, is for a rise in such activity over the next few years to level where such movements may occur weekly. Such activities are not routine operations and would, in general, be subject to appropriate levels of planning and supervision, in addition to Pilotage.

6.1.4. Anchorages The number of times each anchorage has been used over the ten year period 2004 to 2014 is shown in Table 5.

0

20

40

60

80

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Tanker

Tug

Barge

Other

Container

Cargo


24


Anchorage 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 TOTAL E limit 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 JK1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 K1 98 119 97 80 119 9 14 9 10 2 5 562 K2 136 181 187 157 135 20 27 12 13 8 18 894 K3 62 83 65 70 97 39 55 25 34 19 30 579 K4 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 K5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 M1 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 6 6 6 4 30 M2 0 7 3 1 4 5 2 2 1 0 2 27 M3 0 0 1 0 1 6 3 0 3 1 2 17 M4 0 0 0 1 3 5 7 0 2 1 2 21 M5 2 0 4 1 6 5 14 5 4 6 4 51 TOTALS 298 392 358 310 366 93 126 59 73 43 67 2185

Table 5 Anchorage Usage – 2004 – 2014

As can be seen, the most used anchorages with over 94% of use are K1, K2 and K3 with K1 being the closest of the anchorages to the turbines as shown in Figure 4. Table 5 shows the distances from the turbines to the edge of the anchor berth swinging circle and the centre of the charted berth.

Turbine Anchor Berth Distance to Edge (m) Distance to Centre (m) Turbine 1 K1 530 1280 Turbine 1 M3 1380 2130 Turbine 1 K2 1930 2680 Turbine 1 K3 3750 4500 Turbine 2 M3 1440 2190 Turbine 2 M4 1250 2000

Table 6 Distances from Turbines to Anchor Berths

6.2. Effect on Future Traffic Patterns and Densities 6.2.1. Traffic Increase due to Development Activities

The establishment of the two turbine development off the Port would lead to an increase in traffic involved in servicing and inspection of the turbines. This would comprise, in the main, small service craft taking small maintenance and inspection teams to and from the turbine. The frequency of these activities may range from several times daily over, for instance, planned maintenance periods to less frequent e.g. weekly visits during a sustained operational period. In all, there could be in the order of 150 transits to/from the turbines per year. Other vessels which may be utilised over the lifecycle of the turbines are heavy lift/cable vessels for major component repair/replacement. Such requirements would generally be for unscheduled interventions but may be in the order of 2-4 times over the planned lifetime (20years) of the development.

6.2.2. Effect of Development on Traffic Patterns The siting of the development has been considered in consultation with FPA. It has been sited to be approximately 250m clear of the charted position of the Pilot station and over 200m clear of the Small Vessel Anchorage. It is also inshore of the charted swing circles associated with anchorages K1, M3 and M4. The turbine positions are, therefore, considered not to unduly interfere or constrain traffic using these facilities and, due to the low levels of traffic associated with the area, the likelihood of increasing the possibility of close quarter interactions between vessels is considered negligible. There is some traffic which takes passage between Methil and Kirkcaldy but this mainly transits outside of the proposed development area and the charted anchorages. Recreational craft may well transit between Kirkcaldy and Methil but will generally have sufficient sea-room to do so whilst remaining clear of the 10m contour and inshore of the development area.


25


Figure 6 Inshore Traffic Route between Methil and Kirkcaldy Pilot Stations


26


7. Risk Assessment7.1. Hazard Identification, Risk Assessment and Controls

In order to identify the potential impacts of the hazards that may be presented by the proposed development, marine users were contacted and asked to comment on the perceived impacts on their activities. These included:

• Forth Ports Ltd – (Methil)• Inshore Fisheries Group – East• RYA Scotland• BiFab

7.2. Hazard Identification Methodology The hazard identification process was conducted against the key issues identified in MGN 371 (Reference 2) and using the guidance contained in DTI/DECC publication - Guidance on the Assessment of the Impact of Offshore Wind Farms (Reference 1). These issues were used to generate keywords for assessing each activity phase (construction, operations & maintenance and de-commissioning) associated with the array or individual devices. The hazards associated with the array were then assessed for the risk that they presented to other mariners. The outcome of the assessment is tabulated in Appendix 1.

The following sections summarise the findings.

7.3. Construction and Installation Phases The navigational hazards and consequent risks arising from the construction/installation phase are considered below.

7.3.1. Pre-Installation Activities Pre-installation activity may present specific hazards arising from the activities such as geotechnical investigation or seabed levelling using drilling platforms, survey vessels or, possibly, a jack-up platform. Whilst none of these activities would present a novel or permanent hazard to shipping, there is a risk to shipping if such activities do not comply with standard practice for notification of marine activities using the Maritime Safety Information (MSI) system (e.g. Local Port Authority and National Notices to Mariners (NMs), and Radio Navigational Warnings (NavWarns/WZs), Kingfisher etc.). Vessels involved would comply with the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972 (COLREGS) (Reference 7) by showing appropriate lights and signals.

7.3.2. Collision with Installation Spread The operations associated with foundation installation (See Sections 4.5.4 & 4.5.5) will involve the presence on site of drilling and lifting platforms/vessels for a period of around 42 days. The turbine nacelle and rotor installation vessel would require to be on site for the duration of each tower and turbine/rotor installation activity with each taking place over a period of three to four days.

It is assumed that the installation spreads for both activities will be secured to the seabed and unable to comply with the ColRegs. During the total installation time it can be expected that around 6 vessels may use Methil port and, according to BiFab regarding, a similar number may be involved in load-out activities at the BiFab Quay for their future levels of operations. This would be a total of 24 movements during the installation period for the foundations. The entry to the port requires vessels to be on track and aligned with the lock entrance at sufficient distance. The nearest turbine site is some 1600m south of the end of the outer breakwater and a similar distance from the BiFab Quay. It is approximately 300m south west of the charted Pilot embarkation point.

When considering the likelihood of collision between vessels and the installation spread, it is considered that the main causes will be either human error or machinery failure. Vessels may be at risk of collision if they either violate, or incorrectly apply, the ColRegs when passing the installation spread. However, the conspicuous nature of the (stationary) vessels involved is considered as being unlikely to lead to any ambiguity about the construction vessels activities which could result in the violation or incorrect application of the manoeuvring rules.

Vessels could also be put at risk if they were to suffer propulsion failure such that they were set down onto the construction vessel. However, for vessels passing the spread, the dwell time in the “window” whereby failure of


27


propulsion would cause them to be set down (by wind or tide) onto the spread, is small due to the limited extent of the spread. The traffic density is such that the likelihood of such an occurrence can be considered as remote.

It should be noted that vessels entering or leaving the Port will normally be in a higher state of both machinery and manning preparedness with, in most circumstances, the Pilot embarked and, therefore, better able to cope with any emergency or human error. The vessel will also be provided with information by the VTS who, it would be expected would alert the vessel to the presence of the mooring spread.

As with the pre-installation activities, the presence of installation vessels does not present a novel or permanent hazard to shipping and the risk can be considered acceptable if similar risk mitigation actions are taken. However, the presence of obstructions such as unlit support structures, introduces a hazard which may be there for some period of time before the turbine towers are installed. In some cases, moorings may be required resulting in the introduction of a new hazard from the mooring lines, clump anchors and the any buoys (surface or sub-surface) used to mark or aid recovery of the mooring. Temporary/incomplete structures should be marked and lit appropriately as agreed with the Port Authority.

It would be necessary to ensure that all such hazards presented to marine users are notified through the Maritime Safety Information (MSI) system but, in particular the Kingfisher system for alerting fishermen to the hazard. It is recommended that the area should also be charted as an “Area under construction” before the commencement of any drilling or mooring installation activity.

The application of Safety Zones is considered in Section 7.3.4. The use of Safety/Guard boats is considered in Section 7.3.5.

Given the low traffic density in the area and the fact that the construction and installation operations would be planned to be undertaken in the most favourable conditions of tide and weather, it is considered that with the application of the control measures mentioned above, the risks from the installation activity would remain tolerable with monitoring.

7.3.3. Subsea Cable Installation Subsea cable installation between the site and the adjacent shoreline will be carried out by a suitably equipped cable laying vessel. The vessel would present a hazard to shipping when engaged in cable operations when its ability to manoeuvre would be compromised. However, the vessel would be required to comply with the ColRegs (Reference 7) and would show the appropriate signals and lights for such an activity. The marine contractor responsible for the cable lay activity would notify the Port Authority (Forth Ports) and the UK Hydrographic Office (UKHO) of the activity using the MSI system for promulgation to all vessels by local and national Notices to Mariners (NMs) and radio navigational warnings. This would also include the promulgation of the information regarding the installation activities over the marine VHF radio by the Maritime & Coastguard Agency and Port VTS.

The application of Safety Zones is considered in Section 7.3.4. The use of Safety/Guard boats is considered in Section 7.3.5

Given the low traffic density in the area and the fact that the cable laying operation would be planned to be undertaken in the most favourable conditions of tide and weather, it is considered that with the application of the control measures mentioned above, the risks from the cable installation activity would remain tolerable with monitoring.

7.3.4. Use of Safety Zones The establishment of Safety Zones, in accordance with the Energy Act 2004 and Electricity (Offshore Generating Stations) (Safety Zones) (Application Procedures and Control of Access) Regulations 2007 (Reference 8), has been considered as a potential control for the reduction of such risks as arise from both the construction and operational phases. The regulations allow the application of “standard safety zones” which means:

(a) in the case of the proposed or ongoing construction, extension or decommissioning of a wind turbine, or ofmajor maintenance works in respect of such an installation, a safety zone with a radius of 500 metresmeasured from the outer edge at sea level of the proposed or existing wind turbine tower; or


28


(b) In the case of the proposed or ongoing operation of a wind turbine, a safety zone with a radius of 50 metresmeasured from the outer edge at sea level of the proposed or existing wind turbine tower.

They prohibit access to such proscribed areas except and in so far as any provisions are made in the appropriate notices. Such Zones would require monitoring by appropriate means and the use of such means of doing so can include Safety/Guard vessels.

The application of such Zones and the use of Guard/Safety Vessels is considered in the following sections.

7.3.4.1. Safety Zone - Construction Phase A Safety Zone could be applied for the duration of construction and installation activities where it is deemed that the risks to both the construction vessels and the transiting vessels would be reduced by its application. The application of the “standard” zone for construction (500m) would impinge on the charted Pilot station position and overlap the south west corner of the Small Vessel Anchorage. However, given that the area is under VTS control and that vessels arriving at the Port entrance will, in the main, have a Pilot embarked, it is considered that the risks from the overlap can be managed by the construction Marine Coordinator and the Port Authorities/ Pilot on a case-by-case basis. Vessels wishing to use the Small Vessel Anchorage can be advised of the construction activities and recommendations made accordingly.

Small craft using the port may not always be aware of the extent of offshore activities so close to the Port entrance and may possibly be more likely to pass close to hazards than larger vessels. The application of a 500m Safety Zone supported by a Safety/Guard Vessel may reduce the risk to this class of vessels in particular.

It is therefore considered that, despite the relatively low traffic levels, given the duration of the construction and installation activities, a “Standard Safety Zone” of 500m is applied to the construction and installation phases of the development. The extent of such zones for each turbine is shown at Figure 7. Safety Zones during construction are not necessarily geographically fixed but can be applied to the installation spread and, therefore, move with activity e.g. during cable lay.


29


Figure 7 Application of Construction Phase Safety Zone (500m)


30


7.3.5. Safety/Guard Vessels The requirement for a dedicated safety vessel has also been considered for the installation operations. Such a vessel can, in certain circumstances and if properly manned and briefed, help reduce risk to other vessels by monitoring traffic and providing warning of the activities occurring in the area. The following factors need to be considered:

• The levels of traffic in the area;• The time on task of the installation vessel;• The size, bridge manning levels and capability of the vessel involved in the installation works which

enables it to conduct the duties of safety vessel;• The provision of adequate notice of such activity through the Maritime Safety Information services;• Appropriate compliance with the ColRegs by the installation vessel;• Application of appropriate environmental limits (sea state, visibility) such that installation activities will not

proceed during adverse weather.

Taking the above into account, it is recommended that the use of a Safety/Guard vessel is considered and agreed with FPA for each phase and activity of the construction phase when details of both the process and the vessels involved are fully known.

7.3.6. Emergency Response Cooperation Plan The Developer is required to have an Emergency Response Cooperation Plan (ERCoP) in place, covering the construction and decommissioning phases of the development. It requires to be agreed with the MCA, the Port Authority and the appropriate Maritime Rescue Coordination Centre (MRCC)/Coast Guard Operations Centre (CGOC). The plan is required to address (amongst other things) such issues as:

• Details of companies involved (i.e. marine contractors, client etc)• Details of vessels involved• Responsibilities• Points of contact (e.g. names, posts).• Communication plan (e.g. VHF IMM Channels, MF Radio, mobile phone)

7.3.7. Risk Assessment and Controls The risks from the pre-installation and device installation phases are, therefore, considered to be “tolerable with monitoring” provided the following risk control measures are put in place.

Risk Control Measures for Cable and Turbine Construction Phase:

• Submission of adequate information to the UKHO and other authorities in adequate time toenable promulgation of national and local NMs/Radio Navigational Warnings/Kingfisher alerts.

• Installation vessels shall be marked and lit in accordance with COLREGS.• The development construction area shall be charted as an Area under Construction.• A 500m Safety Zone in accordance with Reference 8 should be implemented for the construction

phase• The use a Safety/Guard boat should be considered in conjunction with FPA when the details of

the installation process and the vessels involved are known.• Temporary and incomplete structures are to be marked and lit as agreed with FPA.• That FPA VTS are notified of daily activity in order to provide information to vessels about the

construction activity.• Emergency Response Cooperation Plan (ERCoP) in place covering construction phase (including

cable laying).


31


7.4. Operational Phase The operational phase presents several potential hazards to other marine users. These are discussed in this section.

7.4.1. Allision with Turbine An annual average of around one vessel per week entries into Methil Port and a similar number forecast for the BiFab Quay means that an annual estimated average of 208 movements per year may occur adjacent to the turbines. As with the construction and installation phase, it is considered that the main causes of collision between vessels and the turbine will be either human error or machinery failure.

Vessels may be at risk of collision if they either violate, or incorrectly apply, the ColRegs when passing the turbine.

Vessels could also be put at risk if they were to suffer propulsion failure such that they were set down onto the turbine. However, for vessels passing the turbines, the dwell time in the “window” whereby failure of propulsion would cause them to be set down (by wind or tide) onto it, is small due to the limited physical extent of the turbine tower. The traffic density is such that the likelihood of such an occurrence can be considered as remote.

As stated earlier, vessels entering or leaving the Port will normally be in a higher state of both machinery and manning preparedness with, in most circumstances, the Pilot embarked and, therefore, better able to cope with any emergency or human error. It is considered that, given the numbers of vessels and the likelihood of a human error occurring at the time of entry or exit, the risk from such collision with the turbines is low.

Large vessels using the K and M anchorages would generally approach the anchor berths into wind and/or stemming the tide. Most, if not all would be have a pilot embarked who would be familiar with the area and the presence of the turbines. As shown in Section 6.1.4 the closest anchorage is K1 with the charted centre position approximately 1300m from Turbine 1. Given that an approach from seaward is not hindered by the proposed turbines, it is considered that the risks presented by the turbines to vessels using the anchorages are low. Further reduction in risk can, if considered necessary, be obtained by FPA allocating anchorages with greater distance from the turbines.

The use of risk mitigation measures such as charting, marking, lighting and safety zones are discussed at Section 7.5.

7.4.2. WFSV Collision with other Vessels The frequent use of WFSV will increase the levels of traffic in the area significantly. Given the occurrence of fishing activity adjacent to the development area, there is potential for an increased risk of collision between WFSV and other vessels. This may particularly be the case where such vessels are small creel boats operating with one or two personnel. As the area is under the control of the Forth and Tay VTS, WFSV should be required to report in to VTS when leaving Methil port outbound to the turbines and likewise when departing the immediate vicinity of the turbines. However, given the limits of port radar when small contacts are close to the land, VTS may not always have a clear picture of the presence of small creel boats in that area. Poor visibility would hamper visual lookout and make it difficult to see such small craft. WFSV would be required to exercise due caution and regard to the ColRegs with regard to speed and lookout when transiting the, albeit short distance (approximately 2,500m) between Methil port and the turbines.

7.4.2.1. Fishing Vessel Gear Entanglement The types of fishing activities that occur in the area involve both trawls and static gear. The use of such gear and, in particular, their deployment and recovery, when the vessel may be limited in its ability to manoeuvre, can put the vessels involved at risk of entanglement with seabed cable and structures e.g. foundations and gravity bases. Entanglement in those circumstances could lead to vessel capsize and loss of life. It is therefore recommended that consideration be given to prohibiting fishing within the area. This is discussed further in the context of charting and marking in Section 7.5.

7.4.3. Collision with Sub-Surface Gravity Base Structure If gravity base structures are to be used then the height of above the seabed will be, as stated in Table 3, in the order of 5 metres above the seabed. As the charted water depths in the deployment area are in the order of 15 metres this would mean an effective reduction to 10 metres charted depth within a radius of 30 metres of the


32


turbine. Given the vessel types and their draughts such a reduction would not present a significant hazard to shipping particularly when considering their proximity to the tower presents a great risk.

7.4.4. Grounding on Sub-Sea Cable Protection One of the options yet to be determined is whether it will be possible to bury fully the inter-turbine and export cables. If it is not the case then cable protection of up to 1m in height above seabed and 5m in width may be required. This would comprise either concrete mattresses or rock. A consequence of this would be a reduction in charted depth along the cable routes. Give that the inter-turbine cabling will be laid in approximately 15m charted depth it is considered that this will not present a hazard to shipping in the area. However, the export cable presents a different case in that it passes through the inshore area where recreational traffic will, potentially be transiting up and down the coast. Reductions to the charted depth in shallow water areas could present a hazard to recreational craft. It should be noted that the proposed cable route lies parallel to and within 700m of a submarine pipeline leading to a diffuser which, according to charted depth information already reduces the depths by between 1 and 2 metres. Therefore the proposed cable protections should not reduce the minimum depths in the area below that already established. Changes to depth caused by any cable protection measures should be established by survey and the results provided to UKHO in order that they can be promulgated and charted.

7.4.5. Electromagnetic Interference (EMI) The devices generate alternating current and with the nacelle and the cable sited below water or on the seabed, there is not expected to be any adverse EMI effects on navigational equipment (i.e. magnetic compasses from the devices or the cable.

7.4.6. Effects on Communication, Radar and Positioning Systems The potential effects on communication, radar and positioning systems of wind turbines and, in particular, large arrays have been addressed in two studies:

1. MCA/QinetiQ Report - Results of the electromagnetic investigations and assessments of marine radar,communications and positioning systems undertaken at the North Hoyle wind farm by QinetiQ and theMaritime and Coastguard Agency 2004 (Reference 9)

2. BWEA /MCA/DTI/PLA Report - Investigation of Technical and Operational Effects on Marine Radar Closeto Kentish Flats Offshore Wind Farm 2007 (Reference 10)

The general conclusions from the above studies are that there are no significant impacts on communication, radar and positioning systems from wind farms except with regard to radar where the issues associated with identifying small contacts within an array and side-lobe echoes can, when within 1-1.5 n miles of the towers, result in missing (or misidentifying) small contacts and cause significant interference on the radar screen.

Given the fact that this development is not a large array where the effects identified in the reports are at their most severe, it is considered that the impact of the two turbines on communication, radar and positioning systems will not be significant.

7.4.7. Emergency Response Cooperation Plan The Developer is required to have in place an Emergency Response Cooperation Plan (ERCoP), covering the operations & maintenance phase of the development. It requires to be agreed with the MCA, the Port Authority and the appropriate Maritime Rescue Coordination Centre (MRCC)/Coast Guard Operations Centre (CGOC). The plan is required to address (amongst other things) such issues as:

• Details of companies involved (i.e. marine contractors, client etc)• Details of vessels involved• Responsibilities• Points of contact (e.g. names, posts).• Communication plan (e.g. VHF IMM Channels, MF Radio, mobile phone)


33


7.5. Charting, Marking and Lighting 7.5.1. Charting

The generally accepted philosophy is that the chart should provide mariners with the appropriate information on the position and nature of the hazards and allow them to make the decision on the appropriate distances and clearances required to ensure the safety of their vessels. The following recommendations are based on that philosophy.

In the case of the two turbines proposed as part of the development which cannot be considered to form an array (or farm) they should be charted in accordance with Admiralty Chart 5011 Symbols and Abbreviations Used on Admiralty Charts (Reference 11) using Symbol L5.1 for individual turbines.

It is also recommended that the turbines and the inter-turbine cabling should be encompassed by a standard international symbol of a black pecked line (International Symbol N1.1) indicating a “Marine limit in general, usually implying physical obstructions”. It should be noted that such an area does not preclude navigation or access to the area but rather indicates that marine users may find surface of sub-surface obstructions e.g. buoys or cables. Given the fact that fishing (both trawling and creeling) does occur in the area, consideration should also be given to making the area prohibited to fishing. Given the fact that the area is within Port limits such a prohibition can be enacted under Harbour byelaws.

The export cable should be charted using standard symbology. (i.e. L30.1)

7.5.2. Safety Zone - Operational Phase The application of a “Standard” 50m Safety Zone Safety Zone during the Operational Phase has also been considered. A Safety Zone established in accordance with Reference 8 is not charted and, whilst its application may be included in the chart Notes section, its use in deterring Masters of medium size vessels from approaching within the proscribed distance of 50m is doubtful as the exercise of good seamanship in a medium size vessel would already preclude approaching such a hazard within a distance even greater than 50m.

The utility of such a Safety Zone may, to a certain extent, be more effective with regard to small craft where the ability to navigate safely within 50m of such a hazard to navigation does not put them at so much risk. In order to deter such craft approaching, accessing or making fast to the turbine (e.g. for fishing) then a 50m Safety Zone may present a deterrent. In this case the proposed clearance height of the rotor will be 25m above MHWS exceeds RYA guidance and ensures that the majority of sailing vessels using UK waters would not be at risk from rotor strike. Hence, a 50m Safety Zone becomes more a tool for controlling access and not so much one for reducing risk to shipping and navigation. In addition, the effectiveness of a Safety Zone depends on the ability to monitor and enforce such a proscribed area. Pro-active monitoring and enforcement would require both radar and AIS monitoring on a real-time basis.

Imposing a larger Safety Zone, e.g. 500m, (i.e. exceeding the “Standard Safety Zone” for operational phases) will, it is considered, present an unacceptable restriction on vessels and Port operations as it would overlap the current charted Pilot embarkation position and a small part of the Small Vessel Anchorage as well as severely restricting the inshore passage area between the development and the outfall Special Mark buoy marking the end of the outfall off Buckhaven unless such a provision is made in the notice allowing such vessels entry. In that case the reasons for such a Safety Zone will have been obviated in the first instance.

The fact that the turbines will be charted, lit and marked appropriately and that larger vessels will generally be piloted in this area, it is considered that the establishment of a Safety Zone in accordance with Reference 8 is not appropriate in that it provides little or no additional reduction in risk to navigation and shipping beyond the normal measures outlined in this Section that will be employed in the circumstances. Therefore, the application of a “Standard Safety Zone” of 50m (or even greater) is not considered appropriate in the operational phase.

It is for note that, due to the development site being within the statutory waters of the FPA, the Port Authority can enact restricted areas in accordance with the powers allocated under the appropriate Harbours Act if it deems that such a development presents a hazard, the risks from which can be mitigated further by the introduction of a such limits on navigation.


34


7.5.3. Marking and Lighting The guidance on marking and lighting of offshore wave and tidal energy devices is laid down in the International Association of Lighthouse Authorities Recommendation O-139 “The Marking of Man-Made Offshore Structures” (Reference 12). The IALA recommendation states in Section 2.3 on the marking of offshore Wind farms that, for marking of individual structures (wind turbines):

• The tower of every wind generator should be painted yellow all-round from the level of HighestAstronomical Tide (HAT) to 15 metres or the height of the Aid to Navigation (AtN), if fitted, whichever isgreater. (See IALA Recommendation E-108 Edition 2 December 2009 On The Surface Colours usedas Visual Signals on Aids to Navigation - Reference 13).

• Alternative marking may include horizontal yellow bands of not less than 2 metres in height andseparation.

• Consideration may be given to the use of additional retro reflective material.• Due to the increased danger posed by an isolated structure, it should be lighted with a white light flashing

Morse code “U”.

It further states that the Aids to Navigation (AtN) (e.g. lights):

• Should be mounted below the lowest point of the arc of the rotor blades.• Should be exhibited at a height of at least 6 metres above the level of the HAT.• Should comply with IALA Recommendations and have an availability of not less than 99.0% (IALA

Category 2).

The IALA recommendations regarding the marking of groups of structures (i.e. wind farms) in Section 2.3.3 of that document addresses the issues of arrays of turbines where the peripheral extent of the array is in the order of several miles and are not considered as applicable to the proposed development.

7.5.4. AIS IALA O-139 recommends that consideration is given to the use of AIS as an aid to navigation and IALA Recommendation A-126 - On the Use of the AIS in Marine Aids to Navigation (Reference 14) provides details of the use of AIS in such modes. Given the fact that the two turbines are in close proximity to both the Port entrance and the anchorages, it is considered that the use of AIS on both turbines may reduce confusion and provide clarity to marine users. The effects of “clutter” from other AIS sources as well as land should be taken into account but given the relatively low traffic density in the immediate area, it is recommended that AIS as an AtN is considered by the developer in consultation with the FPA for both turbines.

7.6. Risk Assessment and Controls The risks from the operational phase are, therefore, considered to be “tolerable with monitoring” provided the following risk control measures are put in place.


35


Risk Control Measures for the Operational Phase:

• The individual turbines shall be appropriately charted, using appropriate symbology for individual in turbines.

• The extent of the turbines and inter-turbine cabling shall be charted using symbology indicating that a “Marine limit in general, usually implying physical obstructions” exists.

• Consideration should be given to making the area prohibited for fishing. • The export cable should be charted appropriately. • Any changes to depth caused by the use of cable protection (mattresses, rock armour

etc) should be established by survey and the reductions in charted depths provided to the UKHO for promulgation and charting.

• A minimum rotor clearance above MHWS of 22m should be maintained in order to comply with RYA recommendations.

• The individual turbines should be marked and lit in accordance with the IALA Recommendation O-139 and as agreed with FPA as the local Lighthouse Authority.

• The use of AIS as an AtN should be considered for both turbines. • Appropriate information shall be submitted to the UKHO and other authorities such that

the turbines and individual devices would be included in publications e.g. Sailing Directions.

• A protocol/procedure between the development operator and Forth and Tay VTS should be established for WFSV and other vessels providing support to the operations and maintenance activities such that they report their intentions and activities.

• An ERCoP shall be implemented as part of an SMS.


36


8. ConclusionsThe following conclusions are drawn from the study:

1. That the risks to navigation from the construction phase are considered to be “Tolerable with monitoring”subject to the application of such risk controls as are identified and recommended in this report.;

2. The risk to navigation arising from the proposed development in its operational phase can be considered as“Tolerable with Monitoring” subject to the application of such risk controls as are identified in this report.

9. RecommendationsThe following recommendations are made:

1. That the risk controls as are identified in this report for both the construction and operation phases areimplemented in order to ensure that the risks from both phases are reduced to a level considered as “Tolerablewith Monitoring”.


37


10. Statement of LimitationsThe risks arising from the proposed 2-B Energy wind turbine development off Methil have been assessed as“Tolerable with Monitoring” and ALARP. However, this assessment is only valid under the followingassumptions/limitations:

• Any major deviation in the technologies or installation methodology which differs significantly from thosedescribed in this document must be assessed for risk and the NSRA and Hazard Log must be revisedaccordingly;

• All charts are updated with the proposed symbology and notation recommended within this document inorder to mark hazards adequately and appropriately;

• The position and type of lighting and marking (including buoyage) to be installed are as described in thisdocument. Any proposed deviation to this must be presented to the appropriate marine authorities andreassessed for adequacy of navigational safety.


38


Appendix 1. Hazard and Control Log Risk Tolerability and Criticality Matrices used in the Hazard and Control Log

Consequence Insignificant Minor Major Catastrophic

Frequency DefinitionNo significant harm to

people

Injury to vessel crew

Injury to OREI installation

crew

Injury on the shore

Loss of vessel crew

members (1-3)

Loss of OREI installation or

maintenance crew members

(1-3)

Fatalities on shore (1-3)

Total loss of vessel crew

Total loss of OREI

installation or

maintenance crew

Multiple fatalities

onshore

FrequentLikely to happen

annually or more

frequently

Tolerable with

Additional Controls

Tolerable with

ModificationsUnacceptable Unacceptable

Reasonably Probable

Likely to happen

duting the license

period of an OREI

(nominally 20 years)

Tolerable with

monitoring

Tolerable with

Additional Controls

Tolerable with

ModificationsUnacceptable

Remote

Unlikely (but not

exceptional) to happen

during the licence

period

Broadly AcceptableTolerable with

monitoring

Tolerable with

Additional Controls

Tolerable with

Modifications

Extremely RemoteOnly likely to happen

in exceptional

circumstances

Broadly Acceptable Broadly AcceptableTolerable with

monitoring

Tolerable with

Additional Controls

Hazard Identification Risk Assessment (HIRA)

HIRA Risk Matrix

Risk Criticality

Broadly Acceptable

Broadly Acceptable

Tolerable with

monitoring

Tolerable with

Additional Controls

Tolerable with

Modifications

Unacceptable

Unacceptable None

Risk must be mitigated with design modification and/or engineering

control to a Risk Class of 5 or lower before consent





Condition Explanation

With a commitment to further risk

reduction before construction

None

Technical review is required to confirm the risk assessment is

reasonable. No further action is required

Technical review is required to confirm the risk assessment is

reasonable. No further action is required

Risk must be mitigated with engineering and/or administrative

controls. Must verify that procedures and controls cited are in place

and periodically checked

Risk should be mitigated with design modification, engineering and/or

administrative control to a Risk Class of 4 or below before

construction

None

None

With a commitment to risk monitoring

and reduction during operation

With a commitment to further risk

reduction before operation


39


2 B Energy –Methil - Hazard & Control Log Element Phase Guide

word Hazard Consequence Initial Risk Controls / Mitigation Residual Risk

Frequency Consequence Risk Frequency Consequence Risk

Subsea Cables

Installation & Commissioning

Shipping routes Cable installation vessel Restricted in Ability to Manoeuvre (RAM).

Vessel approaching /departing Methil collides with cable installation vessel(s).

Remote Major Tolerable with Additional Controls

Installation vessel compliant with COLREGs. Issue NMs/Radio Navigation Warnings. ERCoP SMS – Emergency Response Procedures

Extremely Remote Major Tolerable with monitoring

Operation Vessel engaged in fishing

Cable Vessel capsize due to snagging


Cable to be charted. Cable position to be provided to “Kingfisher” System Cable to be buried 1.5m if possible. Mattress/rock armour protection if cannot be buried. ERCoP SMS – Emergency Response Procedures


Shipping routes Cable protection (1m above seabed)

Small craft passing inshore may ground on cable protection where it reduces depth in shallows

Reasonably Probable

Minor Tolerable with Additional Controls

Cable to be charted. Depth reductions to be established by survey and provided to UKHO for charting

Remote Minor Tolerable with monitoring

Anchorage Cable Vessel anchor snags on cable causing small vessel to be held fast or capsize. Damage to cable


Cable route to avoid anchorage areas Cable to be charted. VTS allocates/monitors vessels anchor position ERCoP SMS – Emergency Response Procedures


Turbines (Structures and Nacelle)

Installation and Commissioning

Shipping routes Jack-up vessel/barge and vessels (Construction spread) conducting installation

Vessel collision with installation spread


Installation vessels compliant with COLREGs. Issue NMs/Radio Navigation Warnings. VTS broadcasts radio navigation warnings Warn frequent users e.g. / fishermen. ERCoP SMS – Emergency Response Procedures


Shipping routes Vessel not under command (NUC)/ construction spread

Collision between NUC vessel and installation vessel(s) leading to damage to vessel damage/injury /loss of life


Notice to Mariners (NTM)/ Navigation Warning(NavWarns) Monitoring of traffic by installation vessel Emergency breakaway procedure Vessel Lighting and marking ERCoP – VTS provides warning of vessel NUC to installation vessel. SMS – Emergency Response Procedures

Extremely remote Major Tolerable with monitoring

Violation/ Mistakes/ Slips/ Lapses

Installation spread conducting installation

Vessel transiting area makes navigational error leading to collision with installation vessels and damage to vessel/injury /loss of life


Installation vessels marked and lit appropriately. Monitoring of traffic by installation vessel Emergency breakaway / evacuation procedure ERCoP SMS – Emergency Response Procedures


Radio Interference

Use of incorrect IMM VHF channels

Interference with IMM VHF ship/shore and ship/ship communications

Reasonably Probable


Installation vessel(s) to agree working channels with local operators/MCA


Turbines (Structures and Nacelle)

Operation Vessel NUC Vessel not under command (NUC)

Vessel collides with turbine


ERCoP - VTS warns operator of NUC vessel – systems shutdown. Devices/ array area appropriately charted



40


2 B Energy –Methil - Hazard & Control Log Element Phase Guide

word Hazard Consequence Initial Risk Controls / Mitigation Residual Risk

Frequency Consequence Risk Frequency Consequence Risk


Vessel enters array area

Vessel allision with turbine


Turbines marked and lit appropriately. Use of AIS as AtN recommended Turbines/ area appropriately charted



Small craft & Vessels fishing etc on transit route between Methil and turbines

WFSV collides with craft/vessel


WFSV call VTS before departing Methil/turbines Adherence to ColRegs with regard to lookout and speed


Electromagnetic Interference

EMI Interference with navigational equipment from cables/equipment

Potential for navigational error due to effects on navigation equipment e.g. .magnetic compass

Extremely remote

Insignificant Broadly Acceptable

No evidence of EMI effects seen from other similar sub-sea cables in area.

Extremely remote Insignificant Broadly Acceptable

Maintenance Maintenance vessels restricted in their ability to manoeuvre (RAM)

Collision between transiting vessels and vessel conducting maintenance.

Remote Major Tolerable with additional controls

Maintenance vessel marking and lighting. VTS informed of maintenance vessel activities and confliction with other traffic. Compliance with COLREGs ERCoP SMS – Emergency Response Procedures

Extremely remote Major Tolerable with Monitoring

Device Failure Loss of AtN (Lights etc)

Vessel enters area - allision with turbine

Remote Major Tolerable with additional controls

AtN comply with IALA Cat 2availability requirements (99%) Mix of AtN.

Extremely Remote Major Tolerable with Monitoring

Turbine Structures and Nacelle

Operation Anchorage Device moorings/subsea cables

Vessels anchors snagging on device

Reasonably Probable


Cables routes to avoid anchorages where possible. Cable to be charted

Extremely remote Insignificant Broadly Acceptable

Fishing Cables/ cable protection/subsea structure presents snagging hazard to fishing gear

Fishing vessel enters area by accident or design and fishing gear snags causing vessel to capsize


Devices / area charted. Device positions provided to Kingfisher system. Designation of the area as an area in which obstructions may be present.”


De- commissioning

Vessel NUC Vessel not under command

Collision between NUC vessel and de-commissioning vessel(s) leading to damage to vessel damage/injury /loss of life


Notice to Mariners (NTM)/ Navigation Warning(NavWarns) Vessel Lighting and marking ERCoP SMS – Emergency Response Procedures



Vessel collides with decommissioning vessel

Collision between vessel and de-commissioning vessel(s) leading to damage to vessel damage/injury /loss of life


Vessel marked and lit appropriately. Monitoring of traffic by decommissioning vessels ERCoP SMS – Emergency Response Procedures



41


Appendix 2. – Stakeholder Responses 1. Scottish RYA


42


Record of Changes

Rev # Date Description Approved A 2015-02-18 Draft for Internal Review DJC B 2015-02-18 Internal review NMC C D E F G 0 2015-02-19 Issue to Client NMC 1 2 3 4 5 6

Distribution List

# Function Title Company Name (optional) 1 Commercial Manager 2-B Energy Ltd Scott Harper 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Notes:


43


((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

G

>

337000

337000

0 50 100 m ¯

> Proposed Turbine LocationArtificial Access Track

G Lighting TowerSurvey Area

((((((((((((Artificial Boulders

Artificial Ephemeral/Short PerennialArtificial SpoilIndicative Sand Over SoftClay 'Natural' Habitat

Repro

duced

from

Ordn

ance

Surve

y digit

al ma

p data

© Cr

own c

opyri

ght 2

012.

All rig

hts re

serve

d. Lic

ense

numb

er 10

0048

606

Revision: ARef: 867/ES/027

Produced: LHuReviewed: SCApproved: JH

Date: 14/06/2012

1:2,500 Scale @ A3

C:\Files for remote working\867 Methill Test Site\MXDs\ES MXDs\Methil_Figure_7.2_Phase1.mxd

Phase 1 Survey ResultsFigure 7.2

Fife Energy ParkOffshore Demonstration Wind Turbine (FEPODWT)

S

Mean Low Water Springs

S

Documents

ForthWind Offshore Wind Demonstration Project, Methil, Fife