Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance · 1.7 The bulk of aquaculture development and activity is situated on the west coast of Highland (see Maps 2 & 3 in the Spatial Strategy). These

Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance Stiùireadh Leasachail a thaobh

Tuathanachas Uisge

May 2015An Cèitean

Consultation Draft

The Highland Council

www.highland.gov.uk

Foreword

The purpose of this document is to provide supplementary guidance for the aquaculture industry,statutory consultees and third parties to support environmentally, economically and sociallysustainable aquaculture development in Highland.

The aim of this Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance is to guide development to thoselocations that are considered to have fewer constraints to development; or to where thoseconstraints can be mitigated through sensitive equipment design or working practices. Theguidance will also assist in the streamlining of the process of preparing, submitting anddetermining aquaculture planning applications. The guidance is also designed to help improve the quality of planning applications submittedfor aquaculture development by ensuring that all relevant information is provided bydevelopers at the outset and that the Council can have a clear policy framework for planningdecisions.

Status

This is draft supplementary guidance for aquaculture which is published for public consultation. It sets out the proposed spatial strategy and development criteria against which future fish farmingdevelopment proposals in Highland would be assessed. It reflects policy advice provided in theHighland-wide Local Development Plan and Scottish Planning Policy. The supplementary guidancedoes not form part of the development plan until it is finalised and statutorily adopted followingthis consultation period.

How to Make Comment

The public consultation runs from 25 May – 19 July 2015. During this time the Council is invitingcomments on the draft aquaculture supplementary guidance. Questions to guide your responsescan be found at the end of each section.

All comments should be made by the 19 July and submitted in one of the following ways:

By email to [email protected]; orIn writing to Coastal Planning, Development Plans Team, Development and InfrastructureService, The Highland Council, Glenurquhart Road, Inverness, IV3 5NX.

Please note that the consultation is limited to the content of this draft aquaculture supplementaryguidance only.

What Happens Next

All comments received during the consultation on this draft aquaculture supplementary guidancewill be considered when the Council prepares the final consultation version later this year. Therewill then be a final consultation on the document, with an accompanying Environmental Report. The final version will be adopted as statutory supplementary guidance and will form part of thedevelopment plan. It will therefore be used to assess all planning applications with the Highlandarea.

Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance The Highland Council

Foreword

Supplementary Guidance

41 Introduction

142 Spatial Strategy

243 Development Criteria

444 Additional Sources of Information

Annex

491 Diagram of aquaculture planning process

SEA

501 Non Technical Summary

552 Introduction

583 Context

944 Assessment of environmental effects

1085 Monitoring

1096 Next steps

11Table 1 Role of key organisations involved in the aquaculture planning process.14Table 2 Background to maps 1-724Table 3 Development Criteria

39Table 4 Examples of other marine users and potential interactions with aquaculturedevelopment*.

52Table 5 Summary of mitigation measures included in Aquaculture SupplementaryGuidance

55Table 6 Key facts relating to Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance56Table 7 SEA activities to date63Table 8 Relationship to other Plans, Policies or Strategies (PPS)75Table 9 Data which was collated in order to establish an Environmental Baseline86Table 10 Environmental problems relevant to Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance91Table 11 SEA Objectives95Table 12 Assessment of Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance and alternatives97

100Table 13 Matrix used to assess the likely cumulative environmental effects of the policiesof Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance

The Highland Council Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance

Contents

104Table 14 Assessment of cumulative and synergistic effects

106Table 15 Measures envisaged for the prevention, reduction and offsetting of any significantadverse effects

109Table 16 Anticipated plan-making and SEA milestones

Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance The Highland Council

Contents

Purpose

1.1 This Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance provides guidance to support Policy 50 of theHighland wide Local Development Plan (HwLDP). Its preparation will also inform the early stagesof any replacement policies in the revised HwLDP. It aims to support sustainable of marine andfreshwater aquaculture development within appropriate sites around Highland (see Map 1 in theSpatial Strategy). It provides a spatial strategy and a suite of development criteria against whichaquaculture planning applications will be assessed, in agreement with national and local policyguidance and legislation. It is accompanied by a Strategic Environmental Assessment and HabitatsRegulation Assessment at the various consultation stages. This Aquaculture SupplementaryGuidance must be read in conjunction with the Highland wide Local Development Plan and anyrelated policy guidance.

1.2 The Highland–wide Local Development Plan supports the sustainable development of finfishand shellfish farming subject to there being no significant adverse effect, directly, indirectly orcumulatively on the natural, built and cultural heritage and existing activity (see Box 1). The Councilhas also produced a range of other supplementary guidance, which are relevant to the considerationof aquaculture development. In particular but not limited to, Supplementary Guidance on ‘HighlandStatutorily Protected Species’, ‘Physical Constraints’, ‘Special Landscape Areas’ and the ‘HighlandHistoric Environment Strategy’ and the Aquaculture Framework Plans are relevant.

The Highland wide Local Development Plan (HwLDP) remains the key planning policy documentfor Highland. The Council is beginning a review of relevant policies in the HwLDP alongside thissupplementary guidance. This process will take approximately two years to complete and willinclude an evaluation of all supporting supplementary guidance. This review includes the associatedAquaculture Framework Plans, integrated coastal plans and the Highland Coastal DevelopmentStrategy, which remain in force during this period. However it is recognised that some of thesesupporting documents, or elements within them, may be somewhat outdated. Whilst the reviewprocess is underway, the Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance will ensure it takes the latestavailable information from the review process into account. The policies that emerge through thereview will include reference to and be compatible with this supplementary guidance. This isconsidered to be the most appropriate approach to ensure that developers have clear policyguidance to support the sustainable growth of the aquaculture industry.

1.3 Section 2 of this document sets out the spatial strategy that guides developers to areas ofpotential growth and highlights area of sensitivity. Section 3 details the development criteria thatwill be used to assist the assessment of fish farming development planning proposals. Backgroundinformation and links to key supporting documents are provided in Section 4. Information boxesare provided throughout the document to clarify key points.

The Highland Council Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance4

1 Introduction

Box 1

Policy 50 of the Highland wide Local Development Plan*

The Council supports the sustainable development of finfish and shellfish farming subject tothere being no significant adverse effect, directly, indirectly or cumulatively on:

the natural, built and cultural heritage, taking into consideration:

landscape character, scenic and visual amenity with reference to SNH commissionedreport: landscape/seascape carrying capacity for aquaculture;the classification and objectives set out in the river basin management plan for theScotland river basin district and supplementary area management plans;wild fish populations;biological carrying capacity;and cumulative benthic and water column impacts - for finfish proposals support isconditional on proposals being consistent with Marine Scotland’s LocationalGuidelines for the authorisation of Marine Fish Farms in Scottish Waters;habitats and species, including designated sites and protected species;

existing activity, taking into consideration:

commercial inshore fishing grounds;existing and consented aquaculture sites;established harbours and natural anchorages and navigation (including recreational);the location of existing/proposed pipelines/outfalls and discharge points for treatedwaste water and storm water.

The core principles of the Highland Council’s aquaculture framework plans and coastaldevelopment plans are similar. However, coastal development plans cover all sectors and arerelevant to proposals for all types of installations in coastal waters. The aquaculture frameworkplans will:

guide the location and scale of aquaculture development;ensure that development is environmentally sustainable;identify both opportunities and constraints so that developers have a realistic idea of thedevelopment potential and other interests which should be taken into account;provide an overview for the use of the coastal waters and promote a balanced approachwhich can safeguard the area’s core natural assets and sustain or enhance its productivityover the longer term;aim to guide investment, help in the evaluation of development proposals, and help tominimise conflicts of interest.

* see paras 1.2-1.3

5Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance The Highland Council

Introduction 1

Background

1.4 Aquaculture in Scotland is an important industry, creating and supporting employment,particularly in remote areas. Figures prepared by the Scottish Government indicate that outputof the sector in 2012 was around 170,000 tonnes, worth £560 million at the farm gate. Of this,salmon accounted for 96% of the output. In Highland the industry makes an important contributionto the local economy, particularly within areas on the north and west coasts where employmentopportunities may otherwise be limited. This economic investment in turn generates social benefits.

1.5 In terms of value and production volume, fin fish farming is the main aquaculture activitytaking place in Highland, contributing to food security. Production is focused on Atlantic Salmonin the marine environment, which leads to the need for salmon smolt production in freshwatercages and land based farms. There is a small volume of trout farmed in sea cages and some rainbowtrout and brown trout in the freshwater environment. Historically there has been interest indiversifying production into species such as Cod, Haddock and Halibut. There is recent, renewedinterest in rearing wrasse and other species to assist in the biological control of sea lice on farmedsalmon.

1.6 Shellfish farming is also important to the Highland economy. This is dominated by the ropegrown culture of mussels but there are a number of sites farming scallops and an increasing interestin farming both native and pacific oysters. Other novel species such as sea urchins have beenconsidered by developers from time to time.

1.7 The bulk of aquaculture development and activity is situated on the west coast of Highland(see Maps 2 & 3 in the Spatial Strategy). These marine developments are supported by a numberof fresh water farms, both loch based and land based which produce the smolts for transfer to seacages.

Legislation and policy guidance

1.8 When making or determining planning applications for fish farming, there are a number oflegislative considerations and policy guidance documents to aid developers and planners, asdiscussed below. Aquaculture for the purposes of this document covers “fish farming” which islegally defined in the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as ‘the breeding, rearing orkeeping of fish or shellfish (which includes any kind of crustacean or mollusc). This was amendedby the The Town and Country Planning (Marine Fish Farming) (Scotland) Regulations 2013 toinclude any kind of sea urchin. Seaweed cultivation is not covered by this Act (see Box 2). In itssubmission to the consultation on the draft seaweed policy statement, The Highland Council statedit had recommended on several occasions that seaweed farming be included in the meaning ofdevelopment under the planning acts. It also noted that the only reasonable and feasible optionwould therefore be for the main consent to be provided through the terrestrial planning regime.


1 Introduction

Box 2

Seaweed Harvesting and Culture

The Scottish Government recently consulted on a policy statement regarding commercialseaweed cultivation as well as options for managing the sustainable growth of the seaweedwild harvesting industry. The consultation analysis is now available (see further informationSection 4) and the final policy statement will be published in 2015. Once more details areavailable, subsequent supplementary guidance can be updated.

1.9 Aquaculture development in Highland is governed by various planning regulations thatconsider both planning permissions and any related environmental issues (see Annex 1). In additionto terrestrial jurisdiction, the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 and the Planning etc(Scotland) Act 2006 bring fish farming within three nautical miles of the mean low water springtide (MLWS) within planning control. As such, planning permission is required for fish farming onland and at sea up to 3 nautical miles. The Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 extends to the mean highwater spring tides (MHWS). The two ‘consenting’ processes therefore overlap in the intertidal area(see Figure 1).

Figure 1 Schematic of where the Highland Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance fits with

other key plans, policies and legislation.


Introduction 1

1.10 At national level, Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) notes that ‘aquaculture makes a significantcontribution to the Scottish economy, particularly for coastal and island communities…’ and‘Planning can help facilitate sustainable aquaculture whilst protecting and maintaining theecosystem upon which it depends.’ Scottish Government targets are to increase sustainableproduction of marine finfish by 32% and shellfish by 99% by 2020, based on a 2011/2012 baseline;the National Marine Plan reiterates these ambitious targets.

1.11 To help underpin the growth targets, the government produced ‘A Fresh Start – the RenewedFramework for Scottish Aquaculture (2009). One of the key themes in the Framework was to address‘planning, consents and sites’ so that development occurred within the ‘right’ sites and in the ‘right’location. It states that this should be done through transparent, streamlined and proportionateregulation to minimise adverse impacts on other users of the marine and freshwater environment.

1.12 Circular 1/2007 Planning Controls for Marine Fish Farming provides guidance on the Acts,Regulations and Orders relevant to planning controls over marine fish farming. It is understoodthat this circular is being updated at the time of writing. The Aquaculture and Fisheries (Scotland)Act 2013 provides further regulatory and technical guidance.

1.13 To ensure the integration of land use and marine planning, the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010makes provision for the production of marine plans, which must integrate with land use planning. All public authorities making decisions that affect or might affect the UK marine area must thereforedo so in accordance with the UK Marine Policy Statement, the Scottish National Marine Plan andany subsequent Regional Marine Plan, unless relevant considerations indicate otherwise. Thisapplies, but is not limited to, decisions on marine licensing, consents under Section 36 of theElectricity Act 1989 (as amended) and terrestrial planning applications and enforcement.

1.14 Public bodies must have regard to the UK Marine Policy Statement and relevant MarinePlans when making decisions that are capable of affecting the UK marine area but are notenforcement or authorisation decisions. This applies to the preparation and adoption of localdevelopment plans and to other terrestrial planning functions.

Decision making processes and application procedures

1.15 Applications for most finfish farms will require assessment under the Town and CountryPlanning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2011. This involves screening,scoping and Environmental Statement stages, where appropriate. There is currently no requirementfor shellfish sites to undergo EIA assessment but the planning authority has the right to requestenvironmental information it requires in order to determine an application.

1.16 Regulation (EC) 853/2004 specifies the health conditions for the production and placingon the market of live bivalve molluscs, tunicates, echinoderms and marine gastropods, such asmussels, oysters, scallops and razor fish. Under Regulation (EC) 854/2004 the Food StandardsAgency Scotland, as competent authority, must establish the location and fish the boundaries ofshellfish harvesting areas. The local authority health department also has a role in the regulationof the shellfish industry.


1 Introduction

1.17 Any proposal in a designated Natura 2000 site (see Box 3; Map 4 in the Spatial Strategy)may also have to undertake an Appropriate Assessment under the Habitats Regulations Appraisalprocess. The assessment is based on the conservation objectives and qualifying interests of thedesignated site. The Council must not authorise a development unless, by means of an AppropriateAssessment, it can ascertain that it will not adversely affect the integrity of a Natura site.

Box 3

Natura & Ramsar Sites & Marine Protected Areas

Natura is the term given to Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) and Special ProtectionAreas (SPAs). These internationally important sites are designated under the EU Habitats andBirds Directives.

Ramsar sites are designated as internationally important wetlands. All Ramsar sites in Scotlandare also either SPAs or SACs.

Of the 30 Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) designed in July 2014, 17 fall under the Marine(Scotland) Act 2010 in Scottish territorial waters and 13 in offshore waters under the Marineand Coastal Access Act 2009.

1.18 In addition to the Natura sites, helping to build an ecologically coherent network of sites,Nature Conservation Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) have been identified. These are for theprotection of nationally important marine biodiversity and geodiversity features (see DevelopmentCriterion 3 for further information).

1.19 The Town and County Planning (General Permitted Development) (Fish Farming) (Scotland)Amendment Order 2012 allows for some minor alterations to aquaculture developments withoutthe need for planning permission. However, developers must notify the local Planning Authorityprior to undertaking any site alterations or extensions; this process is known as ‘prior notification’.

1.20 The draft Planning Circular ‘Planning Scotland’s Seas: The relationship between the statutoryland use planning system and marine planning and licensing’ requires public bodies to have regardto the relationship between the marine and terrestrial planning systems. This requirement isreflected in the National Marine Plan. This integration will be considered in more detail in therevised Local Plans as they are updated. As most aquaculture developments have some on-shorerequirements e.g. shore base, storage, depuration/grading facilities, these should be consideredwithin the planning application submissions.

1.21 Prior to the requirement in the National Marine Plan, The Highland Council established apre-application advice service to provide clear, detailed guidance on development proposals. Thishelps ensure developers are aware of the key issues that need to be considered when planning anew site or modification to an existing one. This process can help avoid costly delays at a laterstage and ensure developers are aware of the key material planning considerations likely to affecttheir proposals (see Section 4).


Introduction 1

1.22 Planning applications will be assessed for compliance with the policies of the Highlandwide Local Development Plan or any subsequent local authority development plan, any relevantsupporting guidance and other material considerations, including this supplementary guidance. Development proposals must therefore comply with all policies within the HWLDP and thesupporting guidance. Where compliance cannot be assured in the first instance, the attachmentof planning conditions may allow proposals to proceed. The application process is outlined inAnnex 1.

1.23 When assessing a planning application, the Planning Authority will consult with variousstatutory consultees, depending on the type of application to be assessed, in accordance with theTown and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013. Depending on the type of application being assessed, these may include:

Scottish Ministers (done via Marine Scotland Science)Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA)Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH)Historic Scotland andthe relevant District Salmon Fishery Board (see Table 1).

In addition, the following may also be consulted, dependant on the type of application: ScottishMinisters via other Scottish Government departments, Ministry of Defence, Scottish Water, localharbour authority or any other organisations as may be applicable.

1.24 In accordance with legislation, applications for fish farms are also advertised, both on TheHighland Council e-planning portal and in a newspaper circulating in the location of thedevelopment. This gives the local community and any other interested parties the opportunityto comment on proposals. Depending on the location, some freshwater sites may also have‘neighbour notification’ requirements whereby residents within 20 meters of a proposeddevelopment should be notified.

1.25 The development hierarchy sets scale thresholds at which development become ‘Major’development. For marine fish farms, major developments are those with an equipment surfacearea exceeding 2.0 hectares and therefore require additional consultation (see Section 4 for furtherinformation). All applications involving major development are expected to be accompanied bya Processing Agreement. The purpose of these agreements is to set realistic and achievabletimescales on when an application will be determined, providing key milestones and targets thatallow the process to be progressed in more formal project managed manner. In some instances,it may also be appropriate to have a processing agreement for local (i.e. non-major) planningapplications.

1.26 Any planning permission granted will be for the benefit of the particular installationequipment within the specific location and for the culture of the species applied for. Planningpermission is generally granted subject to a number of conditions. When a development is notoperated within the confines of this permission it may be unauthorised development and,enforcement action may be taken. This is a formal process undertaken in accordance with theTown and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended).


1 Introduction

The role of other organisations

1.27 In addition to planning permission, aquaculture sites require a number of other consentsand licences and advice depending on the type of aquaculture development proposed. Table 1below outlines the main roles of each organisation. The Planning Authority will aim to ensure thatplanning controls exercised do not duplicate the controls and licensing requirements of otheragencies. Further information on the role of the main statutory bodies is provided in the ‘WorkingArrangement Requirements for Statutory Consultees’ document (see Section 4). Scottish Water islisted as one of statutory consultees in the planning legislation, but it in not listed in theaforementioned document or in the planning circular on controls for marine fish farming. Consultation with Scottish Water should therefore be assessed on a case by case basis.

Table 1 Role of key organisations involved in the aquaculture planning process.

Applies to

Shellfish:

Y/N

Applies to

Finfish: Y/NOrganisation

Statutory Consultees

Marine Scotland (MS)

NYMarine Scotland enforces provisions under the Aquaculture andFisheries (Scotland) Act 2007 in relation to containment and parasitecontrol.

NYIt also implements measures that regulate the movement of live fishwith a view to preventing the spread of fish/shellfish diseases.

YYIt issues a marine licence covering navigation issues and deposits inthe marine environment, including discharges from well boats whenused for treating fish.

YYWhen a commercial activity could cause disturbance to a EuropeanProtected Species, MS may issue a licence for the activity.

YYMS is the licensing authority for seals under the Marine (Scotland)Act 2010. It can issue licenses for the killing of seals to protect thewelfare of farmed fish.

YYIt issues consents for an Aquaculture Production BusinessAuthorisation.

Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA)

NY

Under the Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland)Regulations 2011, SEPA regulates activities which may pose a riskto the water environment. For finfish farming, SEPA sets limits onthe types and amount of fish that be held in a cage configuration(fish biomass) and the amount of medicines (chemotheraputants)that can be administered and thus discharged into the environmentfrom the fish cages. Known as a CAR licence, sites are assessed on


Introduction 1

Applies to

Shellfish:

Y/N

Applies to


the likely effects of discharges from a development on both thewater column and the benthic environment. CAR licences are notgenerally required for shellfish farms.

Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH)

NY

Scottish Natural Heritage is the statutory advisor in relation toScotland’s natural heritage. It advises on the Conservation (NaturalHabitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 with regard to Natura sites (SpecialAreas of Conservation and Special Protection Areas), MarineProtected Areas and for European Protected Species. It also adviseson other biodiversity, such as bird licensing, and landscape issues.

It has produced two key documents to aid development:

The Siting and Design of Aquaculture in the Landscape: Visual andLandscape Considerations 2011 and ‘

Guidance on Landscape/Seascape capacity for Aquaculture 2008’.

District Salmon Fisheries Boards (DSFBs)

NY

Where an aquaculture development falls within the boundary of anarea covered by a DSFB, that DSFB becomes a statutory consultee.Where developments are proposed outwith such an area ScottishMinisters fulfil the role of the DSFB through Marine Scotland. Areview of the Boards’ work published by Scottish Government inOctober 2014, recommends changes to their governance structure,among other things (see Section 4).

Ministry of Defence (MOD)

YYThe MOD is only consulted when there is a possibility that a marinewar grave has the potential to be disturbed by a development.

Scottish Water

YY

Scottish Water requests that aquaculture development does notimpact on its assets that provide clean, safe drinking water. Development should therefore ensure it is located where it will notlead to Scottish Water being required to upgrade infrastructure tocomply with a shellfish designation.

Statutory Consultees: EIA applications only

Historic Scotland


1 Introduction

Applies to

Shellfish:

Y/N

Applies to


NY

Advise on aspects of cultural heritage of national significance. HistoricScotland has responsibility for management of the Historic MarineProtected Areas designated in 2013 to protect historically importantshipwreck sites.

Transport Scotland

NYOn behalf of Scottish Ministers, Transport Scotland provide adviseon transport related issues.

Other organisations with a role in aquaculture planning and consenting

Crown Estate Commissioners

YY

The Crown Estate manages approximately 50% of the foreshore, thebeds of most tidal rivers and almost all of the territorial seabed outto 12 nautical miles. Most aquaculture developments will thereforerequire the necessary permissions from them to implement any planning consent, generally in the form of a seabed lease.

Naturally occurring oysters and mussels in Scottish territorial watersform part of the ancient rights currently administered by the CrownEstate Commissioners. Preparations have been made for the transferof existing rights and titles to Marine Scotland, on behalf of theScottish Ministers.

Harbour Authority

YYWhere a development lies within or adjacent to a harbour authorityarea, it may provide advice on navigational or operational issues.


Introduction 1

Background

2.1 The Spatial Strategy guides aquaculture developers to locations of least sensitivity forsustainable development and highlights areas of constraint. It aligns with the Scottish Governmentand The Highland Council’s objectives to support sustainable development of the aquacultureindustry. It identifies potential areas for growth and areas sensitive to new or further fish farmingdevelopment (see Maps 1-7 below).

2.2 The areas have been identified through the consideration of a range of material planningissues that have the potential to be affected by aquaculture development. These areas take intoconsideration the physical character of the area. The strategy also takes into account elements ofthe physical dynamics of the water bodies that are assessed by Marine Scotland.

2.3 Table 2 provides rationale for the spatial strategy and a brief overview of each map. Due tothe large geographic area of Highland, it is recognised that the level of detail that can be shownis limited. However, more detailed mapping, including fine scale aspects, can be found on theNational Marine Plan interactive (NMPi) website, hosted by Marine Scotland (see Section 4). Inaddition to the maps discussed, there are a number of other key spatial considerations that mustbe taken into account when considering aquaculture developments, as considered below.

Table 2 Background to maps 1-7

CommentMap No./Title

This map shows areas of least constraint in relation to designatedareas. These areas represent areas for greatest growthopportunity.

1: Areas for Potential Growth

This map shows sites that have been granted planning permissionor have been registered as “active” with the Fish Health

2: Existing Aquaculture SitesInspectorate. Some sites granted planning permission under theScottish Government Audit/Review/Order process (2008-2015)do not have defined planning boundaries therefore the Councilwill refer to the previous Crown Estate lease whereappropriate/available.

These areas are designated by SEPA to ensure the continuedprotection and improvement of Scotland’s shellfish growingwaters.

3: Shellfish Water ProtectedAreas

Sites designated for environmental reasons are covered by a rangeof legislation to ensure these assets and resources are maintained.

4:Environmental DesignatedAreas

SNH guidance states that Wild Land Areas “are identifiedas nationally important in Scottish Planning Policy, but are not astatutory designation."

5: Wild Land Areas andNational Scenic Areas

These are areas designated under The Protection of Seals(Designation of Seal Haul-Out Sites) (Scotland) Order 2014 toprotect seals from harassment at their haul-out sites.

6: Seal Hault-Out Sites


2 Spatial Strategy

CommentMap No./Title

Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) (2014) retains a presumption againstfurther marine finfish farm developments on the north and eastcoasts to safeguard migratory fish species.

7: Presumption AgainstFurther Marine FinfishDevelopments

2.4 To support developers, Marine Scotland produces locational guidelines maps. These mapsclassify sea lochs into category 1, 2 or 3 areas based on predictive modelling to estimate the nutrientenhancement and benthic impacts. As these maps are updated quarterly, developers should checkthe Marine Scotland website for the most up to date classifications. The modelling does not takeother factors such as biodiversity, landscape or amenity impacts into account and does not coverlarge areas of the coast.

2.5 Shellfish Harvesting Classifications are determined and reported on by the Food StandardsAgency (FSA). As these are regularly updated, developers should consult the FSA website for thelatest information.

2.6 Whilst the HwLDP (2012) and any supporting guidance remains in force, the spatial guidanceprovided in these documents will be a material consideration (see para 1.3).


Spatial Strategy 2

Spatial Strategy

Spatial Policy 1

Spatial Policy 1: Areas for Potential Growth

The Broad Areas of Search have potential capacity to accommodate sustainable growth ofaquaculture.

Broad areas of potential growth are shown in Map 1.

Spatial Policy 2

Areas of Potential Sensitivity

The following areas have the potential to be affected by aquaculture development and maytherefore be considered as constraints to development:

Special Protection AreasSpecial Areas of ConservationRamsar sitesMarine Protected AreasNational Scenic AreasSites of Special Scientific InterestSpecial Landscape AreasShellfish Water Protected AreasScheduled MonumentsConservation areasDesignated war gravesFerry and shipping routesAdmiralty Charted AnchoragesHarboursMarine cables, outfalls and pipelines

The maps at the start of this document show detailed spatial information for some of thesensitivities listed above. Aquaculture proposals will be required to demonstrate these potentialsensitivities have been satisfactorily addressed in accordance with the Development Criteria.


2 Spatial Strategy


Spatial Strategy 2


2 Spatial Strategy


Spatial Strategy 2


2 Spatial Strategy


Spatial Strategy 2


2 Spatial Strategy


Spatial Strategy 2

Development Plan Considerations

3.1 All proposals for aquaculture development in Highland marine and freshwater environmentswill be assessed against the spatial strategy and the Development Criteria provided in this section,as listed in Table 3. Each development criterion below has supporting text that outlines the varioustopics covered, followed by the criteria boxes.

Table 3 Development Criteria

CriterionNumber

Landscape/SeascapeDC1

Historic EnvironmentDC2

BiodiversityDC3

Water QualityDC4

Other Marine UsersDC5

Construction, Operation and DecommissioningDC6



Development Criterion 1: Landscape/Seascape, Siting and Design

Topics covered:

Landscape

Seascape

Siting and Design

Wild Land/Unspoiled Coast

Amenity

Separation Distances

3.2 Aquaculture installations are established features of the Highland coastline. Most of theactive sites are located within sheltered sea lochs or in the lee of small islands. In some instances,mussel sites have a much lower impact on the landscape and/or seascape compared to finfishfarming due to the low-profile equipment used. However, in some instances a relatively highconcentration of developments can have a significant impact, particularly in constrained lochs andbays. Oyster sites currently tend to be located in the intertidal zone where large areas of trestlesare visible for less than half of the tidal cycle. Finfish development has moved from relativelycompact sites made up of rafts of square cages towards plastic circular cages which are in trendingtowards significantly larger sizes. With increasing farm size and cage infrastructure comes the needfor the larger feed barges which have appeared in recent years. Such installations can dominatesome landscapes, impacting the amenity value of an area.

3.3 New aquaculture development should not dominate the landscape setting or become themain feature in views. Proposals should not materially impact on the overall quality of the landscape. Material impact includes a change to the established landscape or seascape pattern that significantlyaffects its general understanding or enjoyment.

3.4 The Highland Council area has 15 National Scenic Areas that are designed for their outstandingscenery, representing some of Scotland's finest landscapes. All but two have a coastal and/ormarine element, where seascape is also a consideration. There are 27 Special Landscape Areas,which are features of local or regional importance identified by the Council as being large scaleareas of regional importance for scenic quality or as small scale areas of local scenic and recreationalvalue (see Appendix 2 of the HwLDP). Freshwater aquaculture proposals may also have designatedlandscape site considerations. Out with these designed sites (see Maps 4-5), there may be greaterscope for the environment to accommodate development. However, there may still be localsensitivity arising from the characteristics and visibility of a particular site, which has to be addressedin landscape terms.

3.5 The siting, layout and design of aquaculture proposals should reflect the character of thesurrounding landscape. Developments should take into account the effects on visual amenity. Asper the SNH guidance (Table 1 & Section 4), they should follow the dominant line of the coast andshould avoid filling up a bay or its entrance. Where the siting is appropriate, the scale and designof the equipment configuration, including the materials and colour schemes used, should ensurethat the proposed development will be absorbed into the landscape/seascape with minimalintrusion.

3.6 Some applications may require a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, either as a standalone document or as part of an Environmental Statement (see para 1.16). The assessment shouldconsider the likely impact from significant receptor points, including popular public viewpoints,


Development Criteria 3

transport routes, the core path network, visitor locations and historic sites. Guidance from thePlanning Authority, including viewpoints for photomontages, on key sites and aspects to beconsidered, will be given at the pre-application advice stage and at the scoping stage, if relevant. The cumulative impacts with existing aquaculture and other maritime developments and activitiesshould also be considered.

DC 1.1

Landscape, Seascape, Siting and Design

Aquaculture development that is likely to have a significant adverse impact, includingcumulative impact, on the Highland landscape, seascape or visual amenity that cannot bemitigated to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority will not be permitted.

Proposals for aquaculture developments with the potential to have adverse effect on landscape,seascape or visual amenity should be accompanied by a Landscape and Visual ImpactAssessment (LVIA). This should be produced in accordance with current best practice andguidance e.g. the Landscape Institute ‘Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment’.

Developers should seek pre-application advice from the Council and Scottish Natural Heritageto inform decisions relating to siting and design and the scope and content of any LVIA. Thismay be done as part of an Environmental Statement for finfish sites where appropriate orindependently for shellfish sites. Visualisations should be done in accordance with HighlandCouncil ‘Visualisation Standards for Wind Energy Developments’.

3.7 The coasts around Highland are famous world-wide for their quality landscapes, tranquilglens and intimate lochs. To help further protect the most important of these areas, a number of‘Wild Land Areas’ have been identified (see Map 5). The National Planning Frameworkrecognises wild land as a nationally important asset, and indicates Scotland's wildest landscapesmerit strong protection. Wild land is also identified as nationally important in Scottish PlanningPolicy, but is not a statutory designation. In addition, Highland has many areas of largely unspoiltcoast that are generally unsuitable for development. Aquaculture development must thereforebe able to demonstrate that any significant effects on the qualities and amenity value of theseareas can be avoided by appropriate location or substantially overcome by sensitive siting, designor other mitigation.

3.8 Highland currently has eleven prime beaches with excellent water quality, as recommendedby the Marine Conservation Society. These beaches meet higher standards that those requiredunder the revised Bathing Water Directive (2006/7/EC), which was enacted in Scotland by theBathing Waters (Scotland) Regulations 2008, as monitored by SEPA. Most of these high qualitybeaches are located on the north and east coasts, with only one on the west coast, namelyAchmelvich beach. In addition, there are many other beaches that are of significant tourism andrecreational value in Highland. Potential impacts on any beach should therefore be consideredby aquaculture development proposals, where appropriate.



DC 1.2

Wild Land & Unspoiled Coast

Development proposals should ensure that:

the character of areas of wild land is safeguarded;the character of unspoiled sections of coast is safeguarded.

3.9 As the west coast of Highland contains a number of relatively constrained lochs, this limitsthe carrying capacity for the number of sustainable aquaculture developments it can reasonablycontain. Proposals for new aquaculture sites will therefore have to consider the proximity to existingaquaculture sites.

3.10 Historically, the Crown Estate set out indicative separation distances setting minimumdistances between finfish and finfish, finfish and shell-fish and shell-fish and shell-fish. Theseseparation distances were removed from Scottish government locational guidelines in 1999 onthe basis that the hydrography and tidal excursions between individual sites presented a clearindication of the risk of disease transmission between sites. The Council has reached the view thatminimum separation distances between sites remain of value in planning terms in order to avoidadditional visual impacts resulting from the cumulative development of sites in close proximity toeach other. In this regard the Council considers that the separation distances previously used bythe Crown Estate represent a reasonable spatial safeguard to prevent the over development ofcoastal water-bodies. Adequate separation between individual developments will be required tominimise the potential for disease and infection transmission.

DC 1.3

Separation Distances

Proposals for new finfish sites will not be granted planning permission for developmentssituated within 1,000m of the extent of any other approved finfish farm boundary or any waterintakes/outfalls associated with shore based finfish rearing facilities, or within 500m of theextent of any approved shellfish farm boundary.

Proposals for new shellfish sites will not be granted planning permission for developmentssituated within 500m (measured as the water flows) of the extent of any other approvedaquaculture developments or any water intakes/outfalls associated with shore based finfishrearing facilities, or shellfish washing and/or depuration facilities.

Where developers seek to address issues of sustainability, biosecurity or environmental benefitthrough site relocation, amalgamation or revocations, the Planning Authority may be mindedto seek greater separation distances as it deems appropriate.

Guidance on separation distances for proximity to rivers supporting wild salmonids will beconsidered once guidance due from MSS in June 2015 is available.



The impact on ‘Views over open Water’ will be considered where developments are close toresidential properties, roads and heritage and amenity features.



Development Criterion 2: Historic Environment

Topics covered:

Historic Environment

Historic Marine Protected Areas

3.11 Highland’s historic environment makes a valuable contribution to the distinctive characterof the area, the sense of place, identity and quality of life. As well as fulfilling a vital role inshowcasing the vibrancy of Highland culture, the historic environment is a key economic driver.Historic environment assets currently include designations such as Conservation Areas, Battlefields,Gardens and Designed Landscapes, over 3,000 listed buildings, 1,236 scheduled monuments anda further 52,000 historic buildings, structures and archaeological sites.

3.12 To help preserve these valuable and irreplaceable assets, the Highland Historic EnvironmentStrategy Supplementary Guidance defines the Council’s approach to the protection of the historicenvironment through the planning process. The guidance is supported by the Historic EnvironmentRecord (HER) that provides details and maps of all recorded historic environment assets. The HERis not, however, a definitive or comprehensive record; it is continually updated as new sites andinformation comes to the attention of the Council.

3.13 The Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 established a new power to designate Historic MarineProtected Areas. Under these powers, seven MPAs are currently designated, four of which are inHighland. The Highland MPAs currently covers vessels that were wrecked around 1590 to 1690. The wrecks are a key link to understanding historic ship design and use, and may additionallycontain artefacts that do not survive on land and that can offer valuable insights to ourunderstanding of the past.

3.14 The terrestrial, coastal and marine historic environment should be a consideration in anyLandscape and Visual Impact Assessment and/or Environmental Impact Assessment. The assessmentshould include the impacts of a development on all historic environment assets, whether designatedor undesignated. It should include wrecks, sites, deposits, buildings and both submerged andterrestrial archaeological landscapes, as well as their setting. Some sites, such as designatedfeatures and protected war graves, may require additional assessments on potential sedimentaryor biological changes that the developments may have.

DC 2.1

Historic Environment

All aquaculture planning applications shall consider potential direct, indirect and cumulativeimpacts on the historic environment.

Applicants will be required to identify and undertake any mitigation measures required toavoid, reduce or minimize any adverse impacts on the historic environment to the satisfactionof the Planning Authority.

The special characteristics and qualities of Historic Marine Protected Areas shall be safeguarded.



Aquaculture development will not be permitted in locations where it would have a significantadverse effect on historic environment resources.



Development Criterion 3: Biodiversity

Topics covered:

Environmental Designated Areas

Protected Species

Appropriate Assessment

Seals

Wild Salmonids

Sea Lice

3.15 The term ‘biodiversity’ covers all plants and animals and their habitat, along with theirgenetic variation. The Highland area is rich in marine habitats and species that collectively makeup diverse biological communities. The east coast is dominated by sea cliffs in the far north-eastand low-lying firths over much of the rest. The north and north-west coasts are mainly sea cliffswith some narrow sea lochs. The west coast is a mix of relatively narrow sea lochs and shelteredbays. Each coast offers varying opportunities for aquaculture development.

3.16 Along with all other public bodies, the Planning Authority has a duty to further theconservation of biodiversity under the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004 when exercisingits functions. The Wildlife and Natural Environment (Scotland) Act 2011 requires public bodies toprepare and publish a biodiversity report on their compliance with the biodiversity duty. Whilstsome marine species, such as many seabirds, have varying levels of protection under the Wildlife& Countryside Act 1981, some are so endangered they require special protection.

3.17 A key mechanism for protecting biodiversity (see Maps 4-6) is the use of designated habitatsand species under the Habitats and Birds Directives (see para 1.18 & Box 3). These are protectedNatura 2000 areas and the associated flora and fauna represent the most valuable and vulnerablehabitats and species in an international and/or national context (see Map 4). In addition, the firstqualitative descriptor in the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (see Box 4) requires that biologicaldiversity in maintained. Marine Protected Areas (see Box 5) will also play an important role inhelping to safeguard marine biodiversity.

Box 4

Marine Strategy Framework Directive

Fundamental aims of the MSFD are to:

ensure that priority should be given to achieving or maintaining Good EnvironmentalStatus (GES) in the EU Community’s marine environment;to continuing its protection and preservation and;to preventing subsequent deterioration.

This will be done through adherence to targets, for which ‘descriptors’ of GES have beenestablished.



Box 5

Highland Nature Conservation Marine Protected Areas (MPAs)

The Scottish Marine Nature Conservation Strategy (2011) explains the approach that was takento develop a coherent network of nature conservation Marine Protected Areas. Thesedesignated sites will protect biodiversity and geodiversity but may still allow multiple uses oflow impact activities that do no damage the ecological integrity of the sites. The MPAs inHighland are shown on Map 4.

The Planning Authority must notify Scottish Ministers if it believes that there may be a significantrisk of hindering the stated conservation objectives of the Nature Conservation MPA.

3.18 Species protected under the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 (asamended) legislation are generally known as European Protected Species. All cetacean species,along with seals (both grey and harbour) are given protection under this legislation. As these aremobile species, particular care is required when any aquaculture development may impact on theirmigratory routes or key feeding or calving areas, as the animals are unlikely to be present all yearround. A license is required from Marine Scotland if the animals are likely to be injured or disturbedby aquaculture activities.

3.19 Other species, such as otters, eagles and some diving birds are also European ProtectedSpecies, therefore have the highest level of species protection (see Box 3 for information on Naturasites). Some protected species of diving birds such as eider ducks may pose a threat to musselsites by stripping the mussels off longlines. Detailed information on the deterrent measures orother types of mitigation proposed should be supplied with an application where such predationis likely to be an issue. The Planning Authority will be advised by Scottish Natural Heritage andMarine Scotland in relation to potential effects on protected species. SEPA will also provideinformation on the potential impacts on the seabed communities, also known as the benthichabitat, some of which require protection or mitigation measures.

3.20 The Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 makes specific provision for the conservation of seals. However, to protect the health and welfare of farmed fish, the Scottish Ministers may grant a licenceauthorising the killing or taking of seals. Should a development be likely to require a licence, thisaspect should be covered as part of the predator control section of an Environmental Statement.

3.21 The degree of impact that an aquaculture development will have on biodiversity will dependon the scale and type of development. Mussel sites generally have a much lower impact onbiodiversity compared to finfish farming due to the limited operational input required. Pacificoyster (Crassostrea gigas), a non-native species, forms the bulk of oyster species cultivated. It maycomplete for habitat and have the potential to harbour disease affecting other shellfish speciese.g. native oyster (Ostrea edulis). Finfish developments have the greatest potential to have negativeimpacts on biodiversity due to the volumes, methods of farming and inputs required. Someelements of these aspects are governed by other agencies, as discussed in para 1.28, but are takeninto account during the planning process.



DC 3.1

Designated Habitats and Species

Development or activities will not be permitted that would likely have significant adverseeffects, either individually or cumulatively, on the qualifying interests and integrity of Natura2000 or Ramsar sites.

Development or activities likely to have a significant effect on a Natura 2000 or Ramsar siteand not directly connected with, or necessary to the conservation management of the site,would be subject to an Appropriate Assessment in order to assess the implications for thesite’s conservation objectives.

Aquaculture development will only be permitted where there is no significant adverse impacton the qualifying interests and integrity of a:

Marine Protected Area;European Protected Species;Priority Marine Feature;Site of Special Scientific Interest.

Development and activities should consider the impacts on wider biodiversity and ensurethese are minimised and mitigated.

To the satisfaction of the Planning Authority, planning applications must be supported by anassessment of the likely impact and the potential mitigation measures.

Where the significant effects on a designated habitat or species remain uncertain but thereare scientific grounds for believing that severe damage could occur, the Precautionary Principlewill apply.

3.22 Salmon and trout are key species of our Highland rivers and coastal waters. An objectiveof the National Marine Plan is to maintain healthy salmon (and diadromous fish) stocks. Thistherefore requires effective management of both marine and freshwaters i.e. an integrated approach. In the freshwater environment, some rivers are designated as a Special Area of Conservation (SAC)to protect salmon in the freshwater part of its life cycle. To complement this, both salmon and troutare now designated are Priority Marine Features for the marine part of their life cycle.

Box 6

Trout (Salmo trutta)

The sea trout is a brown trout that migrates to the sea for a part of its life cycle, returning tofreshwater burns to spawn. During its sea phase, it tends to transit close to the shore.

Sea trout is a Priority Species in the UK Biodiversity Action Plan list, the Scottish BiodiversityList and is a Priority Marine Feature.



Box 7

Priority Marine Features

Priority Marine Features are listed as habitats and species considered to be of conservationimportance in Scotland's seas. Although many PMFs are in Natura sites, not all covered bythis designation.

They include many features which are characteristic of the Scottish marine environment,ranging from flame shell beds in coastal waters, to cold-water coral reefs of the deeper seas,and mobile species such as minke whale and basking shark.

The list of PMFs will be used to help focus future conservation action and marine planning,direct research and education and promote a consistent approach to marine natureconservation advice.

To produce the list, species and habitats on existing conservation schedules were assessedagainst criteria that considered whether a significant proportion of their population occur inScotland's seas, whether they are under threat or in decline and the functional role they play.

3.23 During their migrations from freshwater to the sea and their return, salmon and trout tendto stay relatively close to shore. In constrained sea lochs along the west Highland coast, their routecan take them very close to finfish farms. This can result in:

Higher than background levels of sea lice and potential disease impacts on wild fish from fishfarms;Genetic dilution of wild stock from interbreeding of escaped salmon from the fish farms;Introduction of non-native farmed species.

3.24 Sea lice occur naturally in wild salmonid populations. Where they encounter a fish farm,the population of lice can increase dramatically due to the intensive nature of finfish farming. These inflated lice numbers in turn can re-infect wild populations, compromising individual infectedfish and potentially have wider population-level impacts.

3.25 Whilst Marine Scotland and SEPA have various control measures for sea lice, these mainlyrelate to the farmed fish. In the apparent absence of any other source of regulation, the use of theplanning development regime to seek to safeguard wild salmonids from sea lice infestation froma fish farm would not duplicate a more specific control available under other legislation. Consideration therefore of impacts of aquaculture development on wild salmonids is undertakenby the Local Authority at the planning stage. This is done, in consultation with statutory consultees,to ensure the Planning Authorities’ biodiversity duty is upheld.



3.26 Sea lice infestation appears to be a dynamic issue, where new information, research resultsand management practices are in a state of ongoing development and improvement. For example,Marine Scotland is undertaking a project on aquaculture that includes consideration of the spatialconstraints of aquaculture in relation to wild salmonids, which was due to report in March 2015. This information will be considered once it becomes available.

3.27 Where the Planning Authority is of the view there may be a likely significant effect on wildsalmonids due to elevated levels of sea lice emanating from a fish farm development, it may requirean environmental management scheme as a planning condition. Where appropriate it may benecessary for the Planning Authority to provide an opportunity for alternative forms of sea licecontrol and culture techniques to be introduced or to time-limit planning applications in order todetermine likely impacts on wild salmonids, taking account of improved knowledge and bestpractice.

3.28 In some regions, Area Management Agreement areas have been established with fishfarming companies, owners of significant rivers and other relevant wild salmonid interests.

DC 3.2

Wild Salmonids and Sea Lice

Aquaculture development will only be permitted where:

there is no significant adverse impact on wild salmonid populations; cumulative impacts on wild salmonids have been assessed and mitigatedwhere appropriate.

Where appropriate, mitigation measures to be followed in relation to the management of sealice and their potential impacts on biodiversity must be contained within an environmentalmanagement plan to be submitted in support of the planning application.



Development Criterion 4: Water Quality

Topics covered:

Water Quality

Benthic impacts

3.29 Aquaculture development and activities rely on high water quality. Finfish cages have thepotential in impact the water column and seabed (benthic impact) from the discharge of treatmentchemicals, waste feed, feed treated with anti-sealice chemicals and fish faeces. Aquaculturedevelopment therefore requires a degree of tidal flushing to disperse waste materials and provideplankton for shellfish developments. Under the River Basin Management Planning (RBMP) Process,the status of freshwater, transitional and coastal water-bodies is assessed and monitored againsta range of criteria. The aim is for all water-bodies to reach good ecological status within a specifiedtimeframe.

Box 8

Good Ecological Status

The Water Framework Directive (WFD) aims to achieve ‘Good Ecological Status’ for all watersfrom Mean High Water Springs out to three nautical miles by 2015. The Directive wastransposed into Scottish law by the Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Act2003.

3.30 The RBMP process is managed by SEPA, which provides datasheets for all water bodies. These set out the status and identified pressures within that water-body that will adversely impacton water quality. Measures are suggested that can help mitigate, remove or reduce those pressures. In determining planning applications for aquaculture developments in both the Marine andFreshwater Environment, the Council will have regard to the RBMP status of the receiving waterbody and whether or not proposed development will result in increased pressures on it.

3.31 When alterations or extensions to an existing fin fish farm would increase the biomass orextend the equipment used, additional information would be required by both the PlanningAuthority and SEPA to ensure benthic habitats and water quality are not adversely impacted.Evidence would be required to assure SEPA that additional impacts would be within acceptablelimits before it can recommend the Planning Authority to approve an application.

3.32 Many Highland fin fish farms make use of well boats for the treatment of fish for sealice ordisease. Where these activities require discharges from the boat, which may affect water quality,a Marine Scotland licence is required (see Table 1).

3.33 SEPA guidance suggests that new shellfish development should be located within whatare now known as ‘shellfish water protected areas’ (SWPA) (see Map 3). The boundaries of thesemay be updated by SEPA as required. Developers should consult with SEPA to ensure they havethe latest information. However, for applications which propose to develop outwith these areas,SEPA advise it will not object, but will provide advice as to the likely suitability of the waters andhighlight where there may be issues that would impeded a site being designated as SWPA. A



package of Scottish Government measures ensures the continued protection and improvementof these shellfish growing waters. These measures are integrated within the river basin managementplanning process and the water quality within the designated areas is regularly monitored by SEPA. These areas are ultimately protected to ensure good quality products that are safe for humanconsumption.

DC 4.1

Water Quality

Proposals for new marine finfish farming development and/or extensions to existing sites willnot be permitted in locations where they would have a significant adverse impact on waterquality.

Where appropriate, proposals will require to be accompanied with modelling and calculationsthat demonstrate that the benthic and water column impacts are localised and withinenvironmental limits.



Development Criterion 5: Other marine users

Topics covered:

Inshore fishing

Recreational users

Navigation

3.34 Development in the marine environment has increased significantly in the last few decades. This has driven the need to a more formalized approach to resource utilization in the form of marinespatial planning. Any proposal for aquaculture development in the coastal area therefore has toconsider a wide range of other marine activities and resource use and vice versa (see Table 4). These activities may have an economic, environmental and social impact both in the sea and onneighbouring land.

3.35 Many Highland marine activities make significant contributions to the local economy andsupport fragile, remote communities. These include fishing, ports and harbours, renewable energy,recreation and leisure.

3.36 Inshore fishing in particular has a long history around the Highland coast and can be oneof the main competitors for space with aquaculture. Whilst acknowledging the data limitations,information from the Scotmap projects suggests this pressure may be particularly found alongareas off the west coast and off north-west Skye. This project targeted all Scottish registeredcommercial fishing vessels under 15 meters. The data were collected during face-to-face interviewswith individual vessel owners and operators and relate to fishing activity for the period 2007 to2011.

3.37 Coastal tourism supports a variety of related business such as wildlife tour boats, sailing,accommodation, cafes and restaurants. Further detailed information about each of these sectorswill be available once the various Regional Marine Plans are developed by the Regional MarinePartnerships, as proposed by Scottish Government under the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010.



Table 4 Examples of other marine users and potential interactions with aquaculture

development*.

Potential InteractionsUser/Activity

ShellfishFinfish

May compete for space,leading to perceiveddisplacement andsocio-economic impacts.

May compete for space, leading to perceiveddisplacement and socio-economic impacts.

Detritus from fish farms may have localisedeffects.

Creel fishing

Use of shared infrastructuree.g. Piers.

Use of shared infrastructure e.g. piers

May compete for space. Adequate separationdistances between other finfish sites arerequired to reduce potential for disease andinfection transmission.

Existingaquaculture

May compete for space.

NegligibleNegligible at present but may change asoffshore wind, wave and tidal schemes

Marine renewableenergydevelopments develop. May be opportunities for synergistic

benefits.

NegligibleCable and pipeline routes may affect existingor new fin fish sites but effects likely to berestricted to installation stages.

Marine cableroutes andpipelines

Poorly sited developmentsmay encroach on or take

Poorly sited developments may encroach onor take over natural anchorage or impedenavigation.

Yachting/Pleasurecraft

over natural anchorage orimpede navigation.

Lines or trestles close toshore may impede access.

Opportunity for shared access to piers. Acoustic Deterrent Devices (ADDs) mayimpacts on divers’ enjoyment of a site.

Recognised divesites

*Note: A detailed assessment of interacting factors would be undertaken on a case-by-case basis:this list provides examples only.



DC 5.1

Other Marine Users**

Aquaculture development will only be permitted where, in the view of the Planning Authority:

there is no significant adverse impact on other marine users;existing fisheries have been considered and where appropriate, effects mitigated.

Developers should consult with the relevant harbour authority and Marine Scotland at anearly stage in the planning process to consider any potential navigation and shipping issues,where appropriate. Details of such considerations should be provided in any subsequentplanning application.

Developers should consult with local fisheries interests at an early stage where there is evidenceof fishing activity in the area of the proposed development.

Development will not be permitted where there would be adverse effects on the amenityvalue of anchorages and harbours, including their approaches, would be compromised.

Where appropriate, opportunities for shared use of jetties, piers and harbours should beconsidered.

Access to the foreshore for recreational activities, recognised yacht anchorages and dive sitesshould not be impeded.

**Note: given the large geographic size of Highland, it is impracticable to map the variety of existingusers. However, where local information is available, the Planning Authority will aim to providethis information at the pre-application stage. The Planning Authority would expect developers totake a common sense approach to identifying other key marine users likely to be affected, or affecttheir development proposals and discuss appropriate mitigation in submitted applications.



Development Criterion 6: Construction, Operational & Decommissioning Impacts

Topics covered:

Equipment

Amenity

Access

Waste

Light

Noise

Predator Control

Decommissioning

3.38 Aquaculture developments have the potential to impact on neighbouring users, wildlifeand the landscape. The trend for finfish developments to use increasingly larger cages and feedbarges and for more extensive mussel and oyster farms has led to increased visual and amenitypressures. Additional or extended aquaculture sites increases the amount of boat traffic and otheroperational issues.

3.39 To help reduce such impacts, mitigation measures may be required. Developers maytherefore be required to provide information on issues such as visual impact, light, noise and odourmitigation measures in support of their applications. The main considerations are:

1. Equipment

Poor choice of colour or design of equipment can have a significant impact on the surroundinglandscape or seascape. The height of some equipment can make it more difficult to assimilatein the landscape and seascape therefore low-profile designs are generally preferable. Withthe growing trend for the finfish farming equipment used to be larger, e.g. 400T feed-bargesand higher top-nets, additional mitigation may be required. Whilst there may be a drive withinthe industry for standardized equipment, a ‘one size fits all’ approach is not appropriate insome areas of Highland. All aquaculture equipment should fit with Sustainable Design policy(No. 28) in the HwLDP. Equipment, other than navigational markers, should be in muted, mattcolours that to blend into the surroundings. Where other colouration would be moreappropriate, written permission should be obtained in advance from the Planning Authority.

2. Amenity

The amenity value of an area can be impacted by aquaculture activities that introduce newstructures that are unsympathetic to the surroundings or existing pattern of use. Amenityvalue can be defined as natural or physical qualities and characteristics of an area thatcontribute to people’s appreciation of its pleasantness, aesthetic coherence, and cultural andrecreational attributes. An assessment of the amenity impacts may be particularly helpful inproposals for new developments or significant amendments to existing sites.

3. Access

Particularly where developments are proposed in remote areas and road access is required,developers may be required to undertake an access assessment. Wwhere operations requireaccess to the intertidal zone e.g. tractors and trailers used for oyster harvesting, an assessmentof the impact on pedestrian and leisure use access may be required. Harbours, piers, jettiesand pontoon are key access points for both aquaculture and many other marine activities,allowing opportunities for shared use.

4. Waste



Waste from aquaculture has the potential to harm wildlife, cause unsightly litter, particularlyin otherwise relatively pristine areas or become an obstruction or navigation hazard. Development proposals should include information on how waste will be dealt with and acommitment to minimize waste in all aspects of the site’s operation. Storm-damagedequipment that has broken free from its moorings or abandoned equipment can also be ahazard to navigation, people and wildlife. Recovery and proper disposal of such equipmentis therefore important.

5. Light

Above surface lighting on feed-barges and cage systems, along with underwater lighting, cancause light pollution and additional visual impact, particularly in remote sealochs where thesense of naturalness and isolation is a key tourist draw. It also has the potential to impact onthe faunal communities, other than the farmed fish, present in the water ecosystem by alteringa variety of biological processes.

6. Noise and Odour

Operational noise caused by equipment such as generators, feed-blowers and harvestingboats or other mechanised equipment working outwith normal working hours have thepotential to affect nearby people, particularly in closely confined loch systems or areas wherethere is normally little background noise. Noise assessment and potential mitigation measuresshould be provided where such equipment is to be used. Details of any odour mitigationmeasures should also be provided.

7. Predator Control

Some species may be attracted to the concentrations of fish or shellfish at an aquaculturesites, which can have a significant impact on the operation of the site. In order to enable thedetermination of site-specific risks, where appropriate, the developer will be required toprovide information on the proposed predator management system. This is likely to includethe presence and abundance of species that might be at risk from any proposed anti-predatormethods.

8. Decommissioning

Once a site is no longer required for aquaculture production it may be decommissioned. Inmost instances, appropriate conditions are attached to a planning consent to ensure timelyremoval of equipment and adequate restoration of a site.

3.40 To help mitigate some of the potential impacts discussed above, finfish and shellfishdevelopers have access to their respective Code of Good Practice. Whilst these provide standardsof practice and a framework for industry development, they do not replace or remove any of theplanning requirements outlined in this supplementary guidance.

DC 6.1

Construction, Operation & Decommissioning

All aquaculture development proposals should ensure that any potential significant adverseeffects, including cumulative impacts, due to equipment design, colour, amenity, access,lighting, noise, odour, predator control or site closure are appropriately mitigated to thesatisfaction of the Planning Authority.

Where appropriate, planning applications should be supported by a predator managementstrategy.



With regard to all planning permissions granted pursuant to this policy, if any site is notoperational for a continuous period exceeding three years, all equipment must be removedfrom the site to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.



The Highland Council

Application Form & Guidance

http://www.highland.gov.uk/info/1225/countryside_farming_and_wildlife/62/fisheries_and_aquaculture

Pre-application advice

http://www.highland.gov.uk/info/180/planning_-_applications_warrants_and_certificates/187/when_to_get_planning_permission/4

Major Application guidance (for site equipment > 2.0 ha)

http://www.highland.gov.uk/info/180/planning_-_applications_warrants_and_certificates/143/planning_permission

Highland wide Local Development Plan

http://www.highland.gov.uk/info/178/local_and_statutory_development_plans/199/highland-wide_local_development_plan

Supplementary Guidance

http://www.highland.gov.uk/info/178/local_and_statutory_development_plans/213/supplementary_guidance

Special Landscape Areas

http://www.highland.gov.uk/downloads/file/2937/assessment_of_highland_special_landscape_areas

Cultural heritage sites

http://her.highland.gov.uk/

Highland Historic Environment Strategy

http://www.highland.gov.uk/info/178/local_and_statutory_development_plans/213/supplementary_guidance/19

Aquaculture Framework Plans

http://www.highland.gov.uk/info/1225/countryside_farming_and_wildlife/62/fisheries_and_aquaculture/6

Highland Coastal Development Strategy

http://www.highland.gov.uk/downloads/file/1062/highland_coastal_development_strategy



Enforcement Charter

http://www.highland.gov.uk/downloads/download/203/planning_enforcement_charter

SNH

Natura sites

http://www.snh.gov.uk/protecting-scotlands-nature/protected-areas/international-designations/natura-sites/

Habitats Regulations Appraisal (Appropriate Assessments)

http://www.snh.gov.uk/protecting-scotlands-nature/protected-areas/international-designations/natura-sites/habitats-regulations/

MPA guidance

http://www.snh.gov.uk/protecting-scotlands-nature/protected-areas/national-designations/marine-protected-areas-(mpa)/

Site and Design guidance

http://www.snh.gov.uk/publications-data-and-research/publications/search-the-catalogue/publication-detail/?id=113

Landscape and Aquaculture guidance

http://www.snh.gov.uk/protecting-scotlands-nature/looking-after-landscapes/landscape-policy-and-guidance/landscape-planning-and-development/landscape-and-aquaculture/

Protected species

http://www.snh.gov.uk/protecting-scotlands-nature/protected-species/

SEPA

CAR Regulations

http://www.sepa.org.uk/water/water_regulation.aspx

Shellfish water protected areas

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Environment/Water/15561/shellfishwaters

Modelling data

http://www.sepa.org.uk/water/water_regulation/regimes/aquaculture/marine_aquaculture/modelling.aspx


Additional Sources of Information 4

SEPA fish farm manual

http://www.sepa.org.uk/water/water_regulation/regimes/aquaculture/marine_aquaculture/fish_farm_manual.aspx

Scottish Government

Permitted Development Rights

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/marine/Fish-Shellfish/18716/fish-farm

Aquaculture and Fisheries (Scotland) Act 2013

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2013/7/enacted

Scottish Planning Policy (SPP)

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2014/06/5823

A Fresh Start – the Renewed Framework for Scottish Aquaculture (2009)

http://www.google.co.uk/url?url=http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/272866/0081461.pdf&rct=j&frm=1&q=&esrc=s&sa=U&ei=xnyVU5_CJYu7PZj4gNgI&ved=0CCEQFjAB&usg=AFQjCNFR4uuFrQDUAVMbB_y0rPL6wfX_Cw

Circular 1/2007 Planning Controls for Marine Fish Farming

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2007/03/29102026/1

Locational Guidelines

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/marine/Publications/publicationslatest/farmedfish/locationalfishfarms

Running a fish farm

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/marine/Fish-Shellfish/18716

Marine Protected Areas

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/marine/marine-environment/mpanetwork

Historic Marine Protected Areas

http://www.historic-scotland.gov.uk/index/heritage/wrecksites/scotlands-historic-wrecks.htm

Marine (Scotland) Act 2010

http://www.oqps.gov.uk/legislation/acts/acts2010/pdf/asp_20100005_en.pdf

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/archive/National-Planning-Policy/themes/



enviro-assessment/eia

National Planning Framework

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Built-Environment/planning/NPF3-SPP-Review/NPF3

Working arrangement: Requirements of statutory consultees

www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/295194/0106302.pdf

Review of DSFBs

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/marine/Salmon-Trout-Coarse/fishreview

Draft Planning Circular ‘Planning Scotland’s Seas: The relationship between the statutory

land use planning system and marine planning and licensing’

www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0042/00428395.pdf

Scotmap

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/marine/science/MSInteractive/Themes/ScotMap

Seal haul-out sites

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/marine/marine-environment/species/19887/20814/maps

NMPi

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/marine/seamanagement/nmpihome/nmpi

Scotland’s aquaculture

http://aquaculture.scotland.gov.uk/

The Wildlife and Natural Environment (Scotland) Act 2011

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2011/6/contents/enacted

Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2004/6/contents

The Town and Country Planning (Marine Fish Farming) (Scotland) Order 2007


The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1997/8/contents


Additional Sources of Information 4

The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Fish Farming) (Scotland)

Amendment Order 2012

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ssi/2012/131/contents/made

The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations

2011


DSFB

Wild fisheries information

http://www.asfb.org.uk/

CEC

Seabed lease

http://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/coastal/aquaculture/working-with-us/aquaculture-leases/

SSPO

Code of Good Practice (including link to other relevant aquaculture legislation)

http://www.thecodeofgoodpractice.co.uk/cogp/preface-to-the-2010-edition

ASSG

Code of Good Practice

http://assg.org.uk/#/code-of-practice/4536619829

Miscellaneous

Minimising the impact of ducks on mussel farms.

www.gla.ac.uk/media/media_19794_en.pdf

Light pollution effects

http://goo.gl/Eajcwt

Marine Strategy Framework Directive

http://www.msfd.eu/

National Biodiversity Network

http://www.nbn.org.uk/



Figure 2


Diagram of aquaculture planning process 1

Purpose of this draft Environmental Report

1.1 This non-technical summary outlines the process, methods, outcomes and future stages ofthe Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) which has been undertaken for the documententitled ‘Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance’.

1.2 SEA is an environmental assessment of plans, programmes and strategies (PPS) and isundertaken in parallel with the preparation of the PPS to ensure that any environmental effectsare considered during its preparation and adoption. It is required under the EC SEA directive(2001/42/EC), which has been transposed into Scottish law via the Environmental Assessment(Scotland) Act 2005.

1.3 The aim of the non-technical summary is to assist the reader in understanding what thepotential environmental effects of implementation of Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance arelikely to be if it is adopted by Highland Council.

1.4 The Environmental Report is the main consultation document in the SEA and it provides adescription of the environment of Highland in terms of an environmental baseline and theassessment of potential significant environmental effects, alongside proposed measures to mitigateand monitor environmental effects during the lifetime of the Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance.

Key stages of Environmental Assessment

1.5 SEA is a systematic method for considering the likely environmental effects of the programmeand aims to integrate environmental factors into policy preparation and decision-making. It alsohas an important role to play in increasing public participation and enabling openness andtransparency in decision-making.

1.6 The key steps of the SEA that have been undertaken so far are:

A Scoping Report was prepared which set out sufficient information on the AquacultureSupplementary Guidance to enable the Consultation Authorities (Scottish Natural Heritage,Scottish Environment Protection Agency and Historic Scotland) to form a view on theappropriate scope, level of detail and consultation period;Environmental Assessment was undertaken of the introduction to the Supplementary Guidanceas well as the spatial strategy and the six Development Criteria. SEA objectives were used toassess the potential effects against the environmental baseline.

Context of Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance

1.7 The Supplementary Guidance provides further detail to the Council’s policy on aquaculturedevelopment that is provided in Policy 50 Aquaculture of the Highland wide Local DevelopmentPlan (HwLDP). Policy 50 was consulted on in 2011 as part of the Proposed Plan. To take accountof consultation responses received, changes were made to Policy 50 as well as a number of otherpolicies. The revised Policy 50 will go out for consultation on 2014/15 as part of the review of theHwLDP currently being undertaken. For information, a copy of Policy 50 is included in theAquaculture Supplementary Guidance.



Summary of the Proposed Plan Contents

1.8 Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance is a document that seeks to enable new and modifiedaquaculture development in appropriate areas of the Highland marine environment. It is alsoacknowledging and protecting the area’s natural and cultural heritage resources, as well as theneeds of existing users of the marine environment. It consists of an introductory section, a spatialstrategy and a set of six development criteria which provide further policy detail onLandscape/Seascape; Historic Environment; Biodiversity; Water Quality; Other marine users andConstruction, Operation & Decommissioning. The development criteria are supported by sevenindicative maps.

Current Environmental Conditions and SEA Objectives

1.9 To enable the environmental assessment of the environmental effects that could result fromimplementation of Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance, a baseline was prepared for the relevantSEA environmental receptors. It is considered that the environmental receptors that are mostsensitive to the effects of aquaculture development are Biodiversity, Water, Landscape, Cultural

heritage, Population and Material Assets. Assessment was carried out against the SEA objectives,focusing on those which are relevant to marine aquaculture development.

Environmental Assessment Findings

Biodiversity

1.10 Assessment found the SG to be broadly positive in terms of the policy protection it providesfor biodiversity, in areas such as the protection of designated sites, protected species and widerbiodiversity interests.

Water

1.11 The effects are broadly positive. DC4 explains how aquaculture development can impactupon water quality and the benthic environment. Further information is provided on the role ofSEPA and Marine Scotland in licensing aquaculture-related activities. The Locational Guidelinesand Shellfish Water Protected Areas are explained; the latter are shown in Map 3.

Landscape

1.12 The effects are broadly positive. DC1 provides a brief overview of the issues which developersshould address, whilst including links to other publications that provide relevant guidance. It setsout the issues which should be addressed in landscape and visual impact assessments.

Cultural heritage

1.13 The effects are broadly positive. DC2 lists the aspects of the historic environment whichcould be impacted by aquaculture development and provides information on the issues that shouldbe covered in an Environmental Impact Assessment.


Non Technical Summary 1

Population

1.14 The effects are broadly positive. Sources of nuisance such as noise and lighting are addressed,as well as the requirement to consider public safety and ensure that access to the foreshore is notimpeded.

Material assets

1.15 The effects are broadly positive. DC6 requires information on waste management andwhere appropriate requires planning applications to be supported by a decommissioning statement.This is likely to benefit all environmental receptors.

1.16 Overall it is predicted that the environmental effects of Aquaculture Supplementary Guidancewill be positive.

1.17 A number of existing environmental issues were identified during the SEA process. Mitigativemeasures identified to protect the environment are included in Table 10 of the EnvironmentalReport which is reproduced below.

Table 5 Summary of mitigation measures included in Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance

Proposed measures for the

reduction/prevention and offset of

significant adverse effects

Impact of

PPS

Existing Problem?SEA Issue

DC6 highlights the need for apredator management strategy,where appropriate

Broadlypositive

Incidental harm to nontarget species due toinappropriately designed or

Biodiversity

located anti-predatormeasures

SG highlights the requirement toprotect vulnerable benthic habitats

Broadlypositive

Damage to or loss of benthichabitats that are sensitive toaquaculture

DC3.2 states that development willon be permitted where there is no

Broadlypositive

Impact on wild salmonids,e.g. due to increased

significant adverse impact on wildexposure to sea lice andtheir larvae salmonid populations and where

cumulative impacts on wild salmonidshave been assessed and mitigatedwhere appropriate

DC4 identifies and Shellfish WaterGrowing Areas and signposts toCategory 3 areas

Positive orneutral

Potential for adverse effectson water quality

Water

DC1 provides an overview ofguidance on siting and design and

Broadlypositive

Potential for adverseimpacts on landscape due

Landscape

makes reference to more detailedto poorly sited or designedaquaculture development






Impact of

PPS

Existing Problem?SEA Issue

guidance, supported by a spatialstrategy

DC2 provides adequate guidance onthe need to avoid significant adverse

Broadlypositive

Potential for adverse effectson historic sites, includingtheir settings

Culturalheritage

impact on historic resources and theirsetting

DC6 provides policy guidance on theneed to mitigate, where necessary,

Broadlypositive

Potential nuisance in termsof noise, lighting and odour

Population

sources of nuisance such as noise,lighting and odour

DC6 highlights the requirement toprotect access to the foreshore

Broadlypositive

Potential for obstruction ofaccess to coastal routes orpopular amenity sites

DC8 requires appropriatemanagement of waste

Broadlypositive

Potential issues arising frominadequate wastemanagement

Materialassets

All six Development Criteria aim toenable sustainability in new ormodified aquaculture development

Broadlypositive

Tensions are possible inbalancing expansion withthe need for developmentto be sustainable

Crosssectoralissues

DC5 requires developers todemonstrate that any potential

Broadlyneutral

Increased demand for spacein the marine environment

impacts of proposals on other usersof the marine environment have beenidentified and, where conflicts ofinterest are likely, to provide detailsof impacts and the proposedmitigation measures

Monitoring Programme

1.18 The purpose of monitoring is to ensure that the proposed mitigation is effective and thatany unexpected effects can be detected at an early stage so that appropriate remedial action canbe put in place. Over time it is expected that environmental benefits will become apparent throughthe trends in the monitoring indicators. Monitoring will be used to provide essential informationon which to base future development. A monitoring programme may be developed with targetsrelating to the SEA objectives, within the wider LDP monitoring. Further changes to the AquacultureSupplementary Guidance are likely in order to take account of the responses to the consultation.


Non Technical Summary 1

Once the draft Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance and accompanying draft EnvironmentalReport have been consulted upon, the changes made will be summarised in the final EnvironmentalReport.

Next Steps

25 May 2015 Environmental Report and Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance go out for publicconsultation

19 July 2015 Deadline for consultation responses

Autumn/Winter 2015 Responses considered and taken into account in preparation of a finalAquaculture Supplementary Guidance



Purpose of this draft Environmental Report and key facts

2.1 As part of the preparation of Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance, Highland Council iscarrying out a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA). SEA is a systematic method for consideringthe likely environmental effects of certain PPS. SEA aims to:

integrate environmental factors into PPS preparation and decision-making;improve PPS and enhance environmental protection;increase public participation in decision making; andfacilitate openness and transparency of decision-making.

2.2 SEA is required by the Environmental Assessment (Scotland) Act 2005. The key SEA stagesare:

determining whether the PPS is likely to have significant environmentaleffects and whether an SEA is required

Screening

deciding on the scope and level of detail of the Environmental Report, andthe consultation period for the report – this is done in consultation with

Scoping

Scottish Natural Heritage, The Scottish Ministers (Historic Scotland) and theScottish Environment Protection Agency

publishing an Environmental Report on the PPS and its environmentaleffects, and consulting on that report

EnvironmentalReport

providing information on: the adopted PPS; how consultation commentshave been taken into account; and methods for monitoring the significantenvironmental effects of the implementation of the PPS

Adoption

monitoring significant environmental effects in such a manner so as to alsoenable the Responsible Authority to identify any unforeseen adverse effectsat an early stage and undertake appropriate remedial action

Monitoring

2.3 The purpose of this Environmental Report is to:

provide information on Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance;identify, describe and evaluate the likely significant effects of the PPS and its reasonablealternatives;provide an early and effective opportunity for the Consultation Authorities and the public tooffer views on any aspect of this Environmental Report.

2.4 The key facts relating to Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance are set out in Table 6 below.

Table 6 Key facts relating to Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance

Highland CouncilName of Responsible

AuthorityAquaculture Supplementary GuidanceTitle of plan/programme


Introduction 2

The Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006. The Council is required bylaw to prepare and keep under review a Development Plan which

What prompted the plan

sets out the Council’s planning policies on the use anddevelopment of land in the County. This Supplementary Guidancedocument provides the detail for Policy 50 Aquaculture of theHighland wide Local Development Plan (HwLDP).

AquaculturePlan subject

2015 – 2018, then to fall in line with any revised HwLDPPeriod covered by plan

Following adoption, the Supplementary Guidance will bemonitored and reviewed every five years and updated if required

Frequency of updates

Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance covers the marineenvironment of Highland from MHWS out to a limit of 3 nauticalmiles

Plan area

The document provides additional policy guidance on the rangeof considerations which must be considered for planning

Plan purpose and/or

objectives

applications for new aquaculture proposals, including changesto existing developments

Development & InfrastructureContact point

SEA activities to date

2.5 Table 7 summarises the SEA activities to date in relation to Aquaculture SupplementaryGuidance

Table 7 SEA activities to date

Notes (e.g. comment on

data availability,

particular issues or any

advice from the

Consultation Authorities

that has now been taken

into account)

When

carried out

SEA Action/Activity

Screening was consideredunnecessary as the

October 2014Screening to determine whether the PPS islikely to have significant environmentaleffects assessment of Aquaculture

Supplementary Guidancewas required under Section5(3) of the EnvironmentalAssessment (Scotland) Act2005.


2 Introduction

Notes (e.g. comment on

data availability,

particular issues or any

advice from the

Consultation Authorities

that has now been taken

into account)

When

carried out

SEA Action/Activity

November 2014Scoping the consultation periods and thelevel of detail to be included in theEnvironmental Report

August 2014Outline of the PPS

August 2014relationship with other PPS andenvironmental objectives

November 2014environmental baseline established

November 2014environmental problems identified

December 2014assessment of future of area without the PPS

December 2014alternatives considered

January 2015environmental assessment methodsestablished

January 2015selection of PPS alternatives to be includedin the environmental assessment

January 2015identification of environmental problemsthat may persist after implementation andmeasures envisaged to prevent, reduce andoffset any significant adverse effects

February 2015monitoring methods proposed

May- July 2015consultation timescalesTimescale for Consultation AuthoritiesTimescale for public

May-July 2015notification/publicity action


Introduction 2

Outline and objectives of Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance

3.1 Schedule 3 of the Environmental Assessment (Scotland) Act 2005 requires that theEnvironmental Report includes “an outline of the contents and main objectives of the plan orprogramme”. The purpose of this section is to explain the nature, contents, objectives and timescaleof the PPS.

National policy context

3.2 In June 2014 the Scottish Government published its consolidated Scottish Planning Policy2 (SPP) which replaced SPP (2010). The new SPP2 requires local development plans to make positiveprovision for aquaculture developments and identify sensitive areas which are unlikely to beappropriate for such development. When assessing specific proposals the planning authority couldtake into account:

Impact on, and benefits for, local communities;Economic benefits of the sustainable development of the aquaculture industry;Landscape, seascape and visual impact;Biological carrying capacity;Effects on coastal and marine species (including wild salmonids) and habitats;Impacts on the historic environment and the sea or loch bed;Interaction with other users of the marine environment (including commercial fisheries,Ministry of Defence, navigational routes, ports and harbours, anchorages, tourism, recreationaland leisure activities); andCumulative effects on all of the above factors.

Highland Local Development Plan policy context

3.3 This Supplementary Guidance accompanies Policy 50 Aquaculture of the Highland wideLocal Development Plan (the Plan) which seeks to support the development of aquaculture inappropriate locations in Highland. Highland Council is aware of both the economic potential ofthe industry and the associated challenges. A particular challenge will be accommodating furtherdevelopment within a marine area where there are increasing demands for space, whilst protectingits environmental assets. This policy addresses these and other challenges by providing applicantsand the public with a robust framework to assess new development against which maximises thepotential for aquaculture development in Highland.

3.4 Highland Council’s policy on Aquaculture was set out in Policy 50 Aquaculture of its ProposedLocal Development Plan which underwent public consultation in 2009 & 2010. To take account ofconsultation responses received a number of changes where made to development plan policiesand the following revised Policy 50 Aquaculture is now included in the Highland wide LocalDevelopment Plan:

Policy 50 of the Highland-wide Local Development Plan

The Council supports the sustainable development of finfish and shellfish farming subject tothere being no significant adverse effect, directly, indirectly or cumulatively on:

the natural, built and cultural heritage, taking into consideration:


3 Context

landscape character, scenic and visual amenity with reference to SNH commissionedreport: landscape/seascape carrying capacity for aquaculture;the classification and objectives set out in the river basin management plan for theScotland river basin district and supplementary area management plans;wild fish populations;biological carrying capacity;and cumulative benthic and water column impacts - for finfish proposals support isconditional on proposals being consistent with Marine Scotland’s LocationalGuidelines for the authorisation of Marine Fish Farms in Scottish Waters;habitats and species, including designated sites and protected species;

existing activity, taking into consideration:

commercial inshore fishing grounds;existing and consented aquaculture sites;established harbours and natural anchorages and navigation (including recreational);the location of existing/proposed pipelines/outfalls and discharge points for treatedwaste water and storm water.

All proposals will be subject to detailed assessment in these terms. Where proposals arelocated on a suitable site they will also need to show:

appropriate operational and site restoration arrangements (including management ofnoise and lighting impacts, public health and safety, and the effective control of pollution,fish farm escapes, predator interaction and disease);good design of cages, lines and associated facilities (please refer to Marine aquacultureand the Landscape: The Siting and Design of Marine Aquaculture Developments in theLandscape SNH);that opportunities for shared use of jetties, piers and ancillary facilities are promotedwhere possible.

There is a national presumption against expansion of marine finfish farms on north and eastcoasts. This does not preclude shellfish farming in these areas. More detailed policy relatingto key pressure areas for aquaculture is given through the Council’s Aquaculture FrameworkPlans and Integrated Coastal Zone Management Plans, which the Council intends to adopt asSupplementary Guidance to this Plan.

Where new fish farm provision will result in existing fish farm infrastructure becomingredundant, we will seek the removal of the redundant infrastructure as a requirement of thedevelopment.

The core principles of the Highland Council’s aquaculture framework plans and coastaldevelopment plans are similar. However, coastal development plans cover all sectors and arerelevant to proposals for all types of installations in coastal waters. The aquaculture frameworkplans will:

guide the location and scale of aquaculture development;ensure that development is environmentally sustainable;


Context 3

identify both opportunities and constraints so that developers have a realistic idea of thedevelopment potential and other interests which should be taken into account;provide an overview for the use of the coastal waters and promote a balanced approachwhich can safeguard the area’s core natural assets and sustain or enhance its productivityover the longer term;aim to guide investment, help in the evaluation of development proposals, and help tominimise conflicts of interest.

Outline of the draft Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance

3.5 The draft Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance comprises four parts: an introductory sectionfollowed by a spatial strategy and maps, a set of six development criteria then additional sourcesof information. Parts one to three will be assessed in the SEA.

Section 1.0 Introduction

3.6 Paras 1.1-1.4 outline the purpose of the document and includes a copy of Policy 50Aquaculture from the HwLDP.

3.7 Paras 1.5-1.8 provide the background information and set the scene for aquaculture in termsof its importance as an industry in rural Scotland. Current Scottish Government targets for industrygrowth are also highlighted.

3.8 Paras 1.9-1.15 outlines the main legislation and policy guidance available.

3.9 Paras 1.16-1.27 provides background on the main decision making processes and applicationprocedures required for local planning authority aquaculture planning applications, including EIArequirements.

3.10 Para 1.28 and Table 1 outlines the role of other organisations involved aquacultureconsenting.

Section 2 Spatial Strategy

3.11 Paras 2.1-2.6 outline the background to the rationale for the information provided in thespatial strategy and the accompanying seven maps and provides information on where moredetailed guidance can be found.

Section 3 Development Criteria

3.12 This section contains the six development criteria against which all proposals for aquaculturedevelopment and/or associated infrastructure will be assessed. Each Development Criterion (DC)begins with a section of explanatory text providing further planning guidance and/or links toadditional sources of information or guidance, which is then followed by a relevant policy statement.

DC 1 Landscape/Seascape, Siting and Design

3.13 DC1.1 Landscape, Siting and Design & DC1.2 Wild Land and Unspoilt Coast addresses issuessurrounding initial site selection and layout and design of new developments and landscape settingissues for all development. It is highlighted that, as a general rule, aquaculture development should


3 Context

not dominate its landscape setting or become the main feature in views and proposals should notmaterially impact on the overall quality of the landscape. Summary guidance on the layout ofaquaculture equipment is provided but for more in-depth guidance the reader is directed torelevant publications. DC1 is supported by Map 5 Wild Land Areas, Special Landscape Areas andNational Scenic Areas.

3.14 DC1.3 Separation Distances outlines the distances that should be maintained betweenaquaculture developments.

DC2 Historic Environment

3.15 This criterion addresses the potential effects of aquaculture development on culturalheritage interests. It draws attention to the need to protect these assets, including the wrecksprotected by the historic Marine Protected Areas in Highland. Guidance is provided on factorswhich should be considered in any Environmental Impact Assessment and links are provided touseful sources of information.

DC3 Biodiversity

3.16 DC3.1 Designated Habitats and Species addresses the potential effects of aquaculturedevelopment on natural heritage interests, i.e. designated sites, protected species and habitats aswell as the wider biodiversity. It requires developers to demonstrate that proposals would notresult in a significant adverse impact, either individually or cumulatively, on the natural environmentwhich includes the qualifying interests and integrity of Natura 2000 sites; Ramsar Sites; Sites ofSpecial Scientific Interest; protected species, including European Protected Species; and widerbiodiversity interests. DC3 is supported by Maps 4, 6 and 7 Environmental Designated Areas, SealHaul-out Sites and Areas of Presumption Against Further Fin Fish Development respectively, whichillustrate the boundaries of the various designations.

3.17 DC 3.2 Wild Salmonids and Sea lice requires developers to consider the potential impactof aquaculture development on wild salmonids and other biodiversity from sea lice loadings.

DC4 Water Quality

3.18 All aquaculture development depends on good water quality. This criterion describes thepotential for aquaculture development to impact upon the water column and sea bed (benthicimpacts). It highlights the role of SEPA and Marine Scotland with regard to water quality issues inrelation to aquaculture activities. DC4 is supported by Map 3 which illustrates the boundaries ofShellfish Water Protected Areas, as at December 2014. Users are also directed to the LocationalGuideline Maps produced by Marine Scotland, which are updated regularly.

DC5 Other marine users

3.19 This criterion outlines some example interactions of aquaculture development with othermarine users; it does not provide a comprehensive list of all other marine interests. It addressesthe need to ensure that new aquaculture development does not adversely affect the interests ofother users of the marine environment.

DC6 Construction, Operational & decommissioning Impacts


Context 3

3.20 The potential for adverse effects of aquaculture during day to day operations are considered. The issues considered are equipment choice, amenity, access, waste, light, noise, predator controland decommissioning. Where appropriate, developers are required to provide details of mitigationmeasures identified to address these issues.

Section 4 Additional sources of information

3.21 This section includes web-links and information on the main documents consulted in thepreparation of the SG and key helpful information for users of the guidance.

Relationship with other Plans, Programmes and Strategies and environmental protection

objectives

3.22 Schedule 3 of the Environmental Assessment (Scotland) Act 2005 requires that theEnvironmental Report includes an outline of the PPS relationships with other relevant PPS, andhow environmental protection objectives have been taken into account in the PPS preparation. This section covers these issues and describes the policy context within which the PPS operates,and the constraints and targets that this context imposes on the PPS.


3 Context

Ta

ble

8 R

ela

tio

nsh

ip t

o o

the

r P

lan

s, P

oli

cie

s o

r S

tra

teg

ies

(PP

S)

Ho

w i

t a

ffe

cts

or

is a

ffe

cte

d b

y A

qu

ac

ult

ure

Su

pp

lem

en

tary

Gu

ida

nc

e (

the

SG

)E

nv

iro

nm

en

tal

req

uir

em

en

ts o

f P

PS

BIO

DIV

ER

SIT

Y

The

SG sh

ould

set o

ut th

e na

tura

l her

itage

fact

ors

whi

ch m

ust b

e ta

ken

into

acc

ount

in p

lann

ing

for

aqua

cult

ure.

The

se in

clud

e:

The

Co

nse

rva

tio

n o

f W

ild

Bir

ds

Dir

ec

tiv

e (

79

/40

9/E

EC

) pro

tect

s al

l wild

bird

s an

d th

eir

asso

ciat

ed h

abita

ts. T

he C

on

serv

ati

on

of

Na

tura

l H

ab

ita

ts a

nd

of

Wil

d F

au

na

an

d F

lora

Dir

ect

ive

(92

/43

/EE

C) p

rote

cts n

atur

al h

abita

ts a

nd c

erta

in sp

ecie

s of w

ild p

lant

s and

ani

mal

s.To

geth

er th

ese

Dire

ctiv

es e

stab

lishe

d a

com

mitm

ent t

o de

sign

atin

g a

netw

ork

of si

tes k

now

nIn

tern

atio

nally

, nat

iona

lly a

nd lo

cally

desi

gnat

ed s

ites;

as N

atur

a 20

00 s

ites.

Sp

ecia

l Pro

tect

ed A

reas

(SPA

) are

des

igna

ted

unde

r the

Bird

s D

irect

ive

and

Spec

ial A

reas

of C

onse

rvat

ion

(SA

C) a

re d

esig

nate

d un

der t

he H

abita

ts D

irect

ive.

Thi

s is

a ke

y un

derly

ing

inte

rnat

iona

l pol

icy

com

mitm

ent,

to b

e re

flect

ed in

the

pol

icie

s of t

he L

ocal

Dev

elop

men

t Pla

n.th

e re

quire

men

t for

aqu

acul

ture

pro

pos

als

to u

nder

go a

Hab

itats

Reg

ulat

ions

Ap

pra

isal

whe

re th

e lik

elih

ood

of si

gnifi

cant

eff

ects

on

a N

atur

a si

te c

anno

t be

rule

d ou

t;Th

e C

on

ve

nti

on

on

We

tla

nd

s o

f In

tern

ati

on

al

Imp

ort

an

ce

19

71

(a

me

nd

ed

19

82

an

d

19

87

) em

pha

sise

s th

e sp

ecia

l val

ue o

f wet

land

, par

ticul

arly

as

a ke

y ha

bita

t for

wat

erfo

wl.

The

Con

vent

ion

resu

lted

in d

esig

natio

n of

site

s kno

wn

as R

amsa

r Site

s for

man

agem

ent a

ndco

nser

vatio

n at

an

inte

rnat

iona

l lev

el.

Spec

ies

that

are

pro

tect

ed b

y le

gisl

atio

n,in

clud

ing

Euro

pea

n Pr

otec

ted

Spec

ies

and

spec

ies

such

as

seal

s w

hich

are

cov

ered

by

diff

eren

t are

as o

f leg

isla

tion;

’co

nser

vatio

n of

the

wid

er b

iodi

vers

ity, a

ndth

e pr

otec

tion

of p

riorit

y ha

bita

ts a

nd sp

ecie

sou

twith

des

igna

ted

area

s;Th

e W

ild

life

an

d C

ou

ntr

ysi

de

Act

(19

81

) is t

he U

K le

gisl

atio

n w

hich

impl

emen

ts th

e H

abita

tsan

d Bi

rds

Dire

ctiv

es, t

o p

rote

ct h

abita

ts a

nd s

pec

ies

and

desi

gnat

ed s

ites

(up

date

d b

y th

eN

atur

e C

onse

rvat

ion

(Sco

tlan

d) A

ct 2

004)

and

pub

lic ri

ghts

of w

ay (u

pda

ted

by

the

Cou

ntry

side

and

Rig

hts

of W

ay A

ct 2

000)

.

Prio

rity

Mar

ine

Feat

ures

Inte

rnat

iona

l and

nat

iona

l nat

ural

her

itage

desi

gnat

ions

sho

uld

be

illus

trat

ed th

roug

h an

indi

cativ

e m

ap.

The

Na

ture

Co

nse

rva

tio

n (

Sc

otl

an

d)

Ac

t 2

00

4 in

trod

uced

the

‘bio

dive

rsity

dut

y’ -

a ‘d

uty

to fu

rthe

r the

con

serv

atio

n of

bio

dive

rsity

’ for

all

pub

lic b

odie

s, a

nd s

ets

out m

ore

spec

ific

pro

visi

ons

with

in th

is (e

.g. f

or S

SSIs

).Th

e le

gisl

atio

n an

d ot

her P

PS li

sted

will

hel

pin

form

the

bio

dive

rsity

sec

tions

of t

he S

G in

part

icul

ar to

ens

ure

habi

tats

and

spec

ies a

re g

iven


Context 3

Ho

w i

t a

ffe

cts

or

is a

ffe

cte

d b

y A

qu

ac

ult

ure

Su

pp

lem

en

tary

Gu

ida

nc

e (

the

SG

)E

nv

iro

nm

en

tal

req

uir

em

en

ts o

f P

PS

As

a p

ublic

bod

y, H

ighl

and

Cou

ncil

ther

efor

e ha

s a

duty

, “…

. in e

xerc

isin

g an

y fu

nctio

ns, t

ofu

rthe

r the

con

serv

atio

n of

bio

dive

rsity

so

far a

s it

is c

onsi

sten

t with

the

prop

er e

xerc

ise

ofth

ose

func

tions

.” Th

e A

ct a

lso

stat

es th

e re

quire

men

t for

the

pre

par

atio

n of

a S

cott

ish

Biod

iver

sity

Str

ateg

y, to

whi

ch a

ll p

ublic

bod

ies

shou

ld p

ay re

gard

.

app

rop

riate

con

side

ratio

n in

the

aqua

cult

ure

pla

nnin

g ap

plic

atio

n p

roce

ss, a

s gu

ided

by

the

SG.

The

SG s

houl

d al

so h

ighl

ight

the

need

for w

ider

bio

dive

rsity

inte

rest

s to

be

take

n in

to a

ccou

nt in

pla

nnin

g de

cisi

ons.

The

SG

sho

uld

high

light

the

Wil

dli

fe a

nd

Na

tura

l En

vir

on

me

nt (

Sc

otl

an

d)

Ac

t 2

01

1 w

ill su

pp

ort s

usta

inab

le e

cono

mic

activ

ity, p

artic

ular

ly in

the

coun

trys

ide,

and

to p

rese

rve

the

high

qua

lity

of th

e na

tura

len

viro

nmen

t for

the

ben

efit

of th

e p

ublic

and

man

y ru

ral b

usin

esse

sris

ks p

osed

to w

ild sa

lmon

ids b

y aq

uacu

ltur

e, e

.g.

in te

rms

of s

ea li

ce in

fest

atio

n an

d fis

h es

cap

esan

d p

rop

ose

miti

gatio

n.T

he

UK

Bio

div

ers

ity

Ac

tio

n P

lan

Lis

t in

clud

es a

roun

d 40

0 sp

ecie

s an

d 45

hab

itats

that

shou

ld b

e co

nsid

ered

to a

dopt

a st

rate

gic

appr

oach

to n

atur

al h

erita

ge p

lann

ing

by c

onse

rvin

gan

d w

here

ap

pro

pria

te e

nhan

cing

hab

itats

.

20

20

Ch

all

en

ge

fo

r S

co

tla

nd

’s B

iod

ive

rsit

y 2

013

is a

sup

ple

men

t to

the

Sc

ott

ish

Bio

div

ers

ity

Str

ate

gy

200

4. T

hese

doc

umen

ts fo

rm th

e S

co

ttis

h B

iod

ive

rsit

y S

tra

teg

y

with

aim

to p

rote

ct b

iodi

vers

ity w

hils

t sup

por

ting

sust

aina

ble

eco

nom

ic g

row

th.

Both

the

UK

BAP

and

the

Scot

tish

Biod

iver

sity

list

s id

entif

y p

riorit

y sp

ecie

s an

d ha

bita

ts fo

rco

nser

vatio

n, p

rovi

ding

a b

asis

for b

iodi

vers

ity c

onse

rvat

ion

in S

cotl

and

and

the

wid

er U

K.

Th

e H

igh

lan

d L

oc

al B

iod

ive

rsit

y A

cti

on

Pla

n a

nd

th

e u

pd

ate

d d

raft

HB

AP

(2

01

5),

alo

ng

wit

h t

he

eig

ht

“c

ou

nty

-wid

e”

LB

AP

S li

st th

e p

riorit

y ha

bita

ts a

nd s

pec

ies

that

are

foun

din

Hig

hlan

d, h

ighl

ight

ing

thei

r sen

sitiv

ities

and

iden

tifyi

ng a

ctio

ns w

hich

can

be

take

n lo

cally

,an

d w

hich

mak

e a

cont

ribut

ion

to th

e co

nser

vatio

n of

thos

e sp

ecie

s an

d ha

bita

ts id

entif

ied

as b

eing

“at

risk

” or

“th

reat

ened

” in

the

UK

as a

who

le.


3 Context

Ho

w i

t a

ffe

cts

or

is a

ffe

cte

d b

y A

qu

ac

ult

ure

Su

pp

lem

en

tary

Gu

ida

nc

e (

the

SG

)E

nv

iro

nm

en

tal

req

uir

em

en

ts o

f P

PS

Sc

ott

ish

Ma

rin

e N

atu

re C

on

serv

ati

on

Str

ate

gy

pro

vide

s ob

ject

ives

for m

arin

e b

iodi

vers

ityun

der t

he th

ree

pill

ar a

pp

roac

h, in

clud

ing

Prio

rity

Mar

ine

Feat

ures

.

Na

tio

na

l M

ari

ne

Pla

n: M

arin

e Sc

otla

nd h

as c

onsi

dere

d a

wid

e ra

nge

of s

ecto

ral u

ses

and

activ

ities

and

hav

e de

term

ined

how

thes

e di

ffer

ent o

bje

ctiv

es a

re re

flect

ed a

nd w

eigh

ted

in th

e m

arin

e p

lan.

Lan

d-se

a in

tera

ctio

ns h

ave

also

bee

n ta

ken

into

acc

ount

as

par

t of t

hem

arin

e p

lann

ing

pro

cess

.

Sc

otl

an

d’s

Ma

rin

e A

tla

s - I

nfor

mat

ion

for t

he N

atio

nal M

arin

e Pl

an is

an

asse

ssm

ent o

f the

cond

ition

of S

cotl

and'

s se

as, b

ased

on

scie

ntifi

c ev

iden

ce fr

om d

ata

and

anal

ysis

, sup

por

ted

by

exp

ert j

udge

men

t. It

pro

vide

s b

asel

ine

info

rmat

ion

from

whi

ch th

e na

tiona

l mar

ine

pla

nw

as d

evel

oped

.

Ther

e w

ill b

e a

degr

ee o

f ove

rlap

bet

wee

n th

elo

cal a

utho

rity

pla

nnin

g sy

stem

and

the

spat

ial

pla

n fo

r the

Pen

tlan

d Fi

rth

and

Ork

ney

Wat

ers

The

Mar

ine

(Sco

tlan

d) A

ct (2

010)

pro

vide

s fo

r the

follo

win

g:

A n

ew m

arin

e p

lann

ing

fram

ewor

k so

that

incr

easi

ng u

se o

f the

seas

for e

nerg

y, fi

shin

g,aq

uacu

ltur

e, re

crea

tion

and

othe

r pur

pos

es is

wel

l man

aged

;(P

FOW

). Su

pp

lem

enta

ry G

uida

nce

shou

ld b

eco

mp

atib

le w

ith th

e em

ergi

ng P

FOW

Mar

ine

Spat

ial P

lan.

New

Mar

ine

Plan

ning

Par

tner

ship

s w

hich

will

invo

lve

loca

l age

ncie

s, c

omm

uniti

es a

ndst

akeh

olde

rs to

ens

ure

a st

rong

loca

l voi

ce;

A s

imp

ler l

icen

sing

sys

tem

to re

duce

the

adm

inis

trat

ive

bur

den

and

cut b

urea

ucra

cyre

duci

ng b

usin

ess

cost

s in

key

gro

wth

are

as s

uch

as re

new

able

ene

rgy;

Det

aile

d gu

idan

ce o

n th

ese

desi

gnat

ions

can

be

foun

d in

the

Hw

LDP.

The

SG

sho

uld

ensu

reap

pro

pria

te p

rote

ctio

n is

giv

en to

des

igna

ted

Imp

rove

d m

arin

e na

tura

l and

cul

tura

l her

itage

con

serv

atio

n to

saf

egua

rd a

nd p

rote

ctSc

otla

nd's

uni

que

hab

itats

, wild

life

and

mar

ine

arch

aeol

ogy

and

wre

cks;

and

hab

itats

and

sp

ecie

s in

line

with

Hw

LDP

pol

icie

s.

Full

regu

latio

n of

sea

l man

agem

ent g

ivin

g im

pro

ved

pro

tect

ion

for s

eals

and

a n

ewco

mp

rehe

nsiv

e lic

ence

sys

tem

.Th

e SG

sho

uld

seek

to p

reve

nt o

r min

imis

e th

ecu

mul

ativ

e ef

fect

s of

aqu

acul

ture

dev

elop

men

ton

coa

stal

and

mar

ine

ecos

yste

ms.

The

Scot

tish

Gov

ernm

ent i

s cu

rren

tly

wor

king

to d

evel

op A

Ma

rin

e S

pa

tia

l P

lan

fo

r th

e

Pe

ntl

an

d F

irth

an

d O

rkn

ey

Wa

ters

, whi

ch w

ill in

clud

e gu

idan

ce o

n th

e ar

eas

whi

ch w

ill b

ep

rom

oted

for m

arin

e en

ergy

dev

elop

men

t.


Context 3

Ho

w i

t a

ffe

cts

or

is a

ffe

cte

d b

y A

qu

ac

ult

ure

Su

pp

lem

en

tary

Gu

ida

nc

e (

the

SG

)E

nv

iro

nm

en

tal

req

uir

em

en

ts o

f P

PS

The

SG s

houl

d hi

ghlig

ht th

e ris

ks p

osed

to w

ildsa

lmon

ids

by

aqua

cult

ure,

e.g

. in

term

s of

sea

lice

infe

stat

ion

and

fish

esca

pes

and

pro

pos

em

itiga

tion.

Nat

ure

Con

serv

atio

n &

His

toric

Mar

ine

Prot

ecte

d A

reas

, Eur

opea

n Pr

otec

ted

Spec

ies,

Prio

rity

Mar

ine

Feat

ures

, Sea

l Con

serv

atio

n A

reas

and

Des

igna

ted

Seal

Hau

l-out

Are

as, S

AC

s, S

PAs,

Ram

sar s

ites

and

thei

r rel

ated

gui

danc

e.

WA

TE

R

The

SG s

houl

d b

e co

mp

atib

le w

ith th

e ob

ject

ives

of th

e W

ater

Fra

mew

ork

and

the

WEW

S A

ct.

The

Wa

ter

Fra

me

wo

rk D

ire

cti

ve

20

00

/60

/ E

C p

rovi

des

an o

vera

rchi

ng s

trat

egy

for t

heaq

uatic

env

ironm

ent,

incl

udin

g a

requ

irem

ent f

or E

U M

emb

er S

tate

s to

ens

ure

that

they

achi

eve

'goo

d ec

olog

ical

sta

tus'

by

2015

. Th

e SG

sho

uld

mak

e re

fere

nce

to th

e C

AR

Regu

latio

ns a

nd S

EPA

’s ro

le in

the

aqua

cult

ure

licen

sing

and

con

sent

ing

pro

cess

.T

he

Wa

ter

En

vir

on

me

nt

an

d W

ate

r S

erv

ice

s (S

co

tla

nd

) A

ct

20

03

(T

he

WE

WS

Ac

t)

tran

spos

es th

e W

ater

Fra

mew

ork

Dire

ctiv

e in

to th

e Sc

ottis

h co

ntex

t. A

ims

to p

rote

ct th

ew

ater

env

ironm

ent i

nclu

ding

by

ensu

ring

a re

liabl

e an

d hi

gh q

ualit

y su

pply

of w

ater

, red

ucin

ggr

ound

wat

er p

ollu

tion

sign

ifica

ntly

, and

pro

tect

ing

mar

ine

and

othe

r wat

ers.

Th

e W

ate

r E

nv

iro

nm

en

t (C

on

tro

lle

d A

cti

vit

ies)

(S

co

tla

nd

) R

eg

ula

tio

ns

20

05

sets

out

the

pro

cess

by

whi

ch a

ctiv

ities

whi

ch h

ave

the

pot

entia

l to

affe

ct th

e w

ater

env

ironm

ent a

rere

gula

ted.

La

nd

Use

Pla

nn

ing

Sy

ste

m S

EP

A G

uid

an

ce

No

te 1

7:

Ma

rin

e D

ev

elo

pm

en

t a

nd

Ma

rin

e

Aq

ua

cu

ltu

re P

lan

nin

g G

uid

an

ce

pro

vide

s gu

idan

ce o

n th

e ap

pro

ach

that

SEP

A s

houl

dta

ke w

hen

deal

ing

with

con

sult

atio

ns re

latin

g to

the

mar

ine

envi

ronm

ent a

nd a

quac

ultu

rede

velo

pm

ents

.


3 Context

Ho

w i

t a

ffe

cts

or

is a

ffe

cte

d b

y A

qu

ac

ult

ure

Su

pp

lem

en

tary

Gu

ida

nc

e (

the

SG

)E

nv

iro

nm

en

tal

req

uir

em

en

ts o

f P

PS

Rive

r Bas

in M

anag

emen

t Pla

nnin

g se

ts w

ater

qual

ity o

bje

ctiv

es re

quiri

ng a

ll w

ater

bod

ies

toac

hiev

e go

od e

colo

gica

l sta

tus

with

no

dete

riora

tion

in c

urre

nt s

tatu

s.

The

Riv

er

Ba

sin

Ma

na

ge

me

nt

Pla

n (R

BM

P) 2

00

9-2

01

5 f

or

the

Sco

tla

nd

riv

er

ba

sin

dis

tric

t

(RB

D)

and

sup

ple

men

tary

are

a m

anag

emen

t pla

ns o

utlin

e w

ater

imp

rove

men

t pla

ns fo

r the

next

six

yea

rs (2

009–

2015

).

The

SG s

houl

d su

pp

ort t

hese

ob

ject

ives

by

pre

vent

ing

or m

inim

isin

g ad

vers

e im

pac

ts o

n th

ew

ater

env

ironm

ent.

Thes

e re

gula

tions

and

gui

danc

e ai

m to

ens

ure

wat

er q

ualit

y is

mai

ntai

ned.

The

SG

will

sig

npos

tto

the

mos

t up

to d

ate

clas

sific

atio

ns, w

hich

are

upda

ted

and

mon

itore

d b

y SE

PA.

The

EC D

irect

ive

2006

/113

/EEC

on

the

qual

ity re

quire

d of

she

llfis

h w

ater

s

The

Surf

ace

Wat

ers

(She

llfis

h) (C

lass

ifica

tion)

(Sco

tlan

d) R

egul

atio

ns 1

997

and

rela

ted

Am

endm

ent 2

007

Aqu

acul

ture

and

Fis

herie

s A

ct 2

013

The

curr

ent S

hellf

ish

Wat

er P

rote

cted

Are

as w

illb

e m

app

ed in

the

SG a

nd th

eref

ore

guid

ede

velo

per

s to

ap

pro

pria

te lo

catio

ns.

The

Wat

er E

nviro

nmen

t (Sh

ellfi

sh W

ater

Pro

tect

ed A

reas

: Des

igna

tion)

(Sco

tland

) Ord

er 2

013

and

loca

tion

map

s

The

Wat

er E

nviro

nmen

t (Sh

ellfi

sh W

ater

Pro

tect

ed A

reas

: Env

ironm

enta

l Ob

ject

ives

etc

.)(S

cotl

and)

Reg

ulat

ions

201

3

The

Scot

land

Riv

er B

asin

Dis

tric

t (Q

ualit

y of

She

llfis

h W

ater

Pro

tect

ed A

reas

) (Sc

otla

nd)

Dire

ctio

ns 2

015.

Gui

danc

e co

ntai

ned

with

in: h

ttp

://w

ww

.sea

guid

ance

.org

.uk/

1/H

omep

age.

asp

x

http

://w

ww

.env

ironm

ent.s

cotl

and.

gov.

uk/

http

://w

ww

.sep

a.or

g.uk

/


Context 3

Ho

w i

t a

ffe

cts

or

is a

ffe

cte

d b

y A

qu

ac

ult

ure

Su

pp

lem

en

tary

Gu

ida

nc

e (

the

SG

)E

nv

iro

nm

en

tal

req

uir

em

en

ts o

f P

PS

The

SG s

houl

d p

rovi

de s

ignp

ost l

inks

to th

eLo

catio

nal G

uide

lines

as

they

are

regu

larly

upda

ted.

Lo

ca

tio

na

l G

uid

eli

ne

s: M

ari

ne

Fis

h F

arm

s in

Sc

ott

ish

Wa

ters

Iden

tifie

s Cat

egor

y 1,

2 a

nd 3

are

as, d

esig

nate

d on

the

basi

s of M

arin

e Sc

otla

nd S

cien

ce (M

SS)

pre

dict

ive

mod

els

to e

stim

ate

envi

ronm

enta

l sen

sitiv

ity o

f sea

loch

s.

CU

LT

UR

AL

HE

RIT

AG

E

The

SG s

houl

d se

t out

the

cult

ural

her

itage

issu

esw

hich

sho

uld

be

take

n in

to a

ccou

nt in

pla

nnin

gfo

r aqu

acul

ture

. The

se in

clud

e:

The

Sc

ott

ish

His

tori

c E

nv

iro

nm

en

t P

oli

cy

(S

HE

P)

The

SHEP

was

orig

inal

ly d

evel

oped

as

a se

ries

of fr

ee-s

tand

ing

pub

licat

ions

(SH

EPs

1 to

5,

pub

lishe

d b

etw

een

2006

and

200

8).

The

serie

s w

as c

onso

lidat

ed in

to a

sin

gle

docu

men

t in

2008

and

was

revi

sed

in J

uly

2009

. SH

EP h

as n

ow b

een

upda

ted

to ta

ke a

ccou

nt o

f:Sc

hedu

led

Mon

umen

ts, o

ther

uns

ched

uled

site

s of

arc

haeo

logi

cal s

igni

fican

ce a

nd th

eir

sett

ing;

the

His

toric

Env

ironm

ent (

Am

endm

ent)

(Sco

tlan

d) A

ct 2

011

the

Mar

ine

(Sco

tlan

d) A

ct 2

010;

List

ed B

uild

ings

and

thei

r set

ting;

the

adop

tion

of a

UK

Mar

ine

Polic

y St

atem

ent;

and,

Con

serv

atio

n A

reas

Scot

tish

Min

iste

rs’ p

olic

ies

for t

he d

esig

natio

n an

d m

anag

emen

t of H

isto

ric m

arin

ePr

otes

ted

Are

as.

His

toric

Gar

dens

and

Des

igne

d La

ndsc

apes

Des

igna

ted

War

Gra

ves;

His

toric

Bui

ldin

gs a

nd A

ncie

nt M

onum

ents

Act

195

3, th

e A

ncie

nt M

onum

ents

and

Arc

haeo

logi

cal A

reas

Act

197

9 an

d th

e p

lann

ing

(Lis

ted

Bui

ldin

gs a

nd C

onse

rvat

ion

Are

as)

(Sco

tlan

d) A

ct 1

997.

Add

ition

ally

, the

Sco

ttis

h H

isto

ric E

nviro

nmen

t Pol

icy

(201

1) a

nd th

e

Uns

ched

uled

terr

estr

ial a

nd m

arin

ear

chae

olog

y

Man

y kn

own

and

unkn

own

wre

cks

and

subm

erge

d ar

chae

olog

ical

feat

ures

are

dis

trib

uted

alon

g H

ighl

and’

s co

astl

ine.

The

SG

sho

uld

mak

e

Stra

tegy

for t

he P

rote

ctio

n, M

anag

emen

t and

Pro

mot

ion

of M

aine

Her

itage

201

2-15

are

key

pol

icy

docu

men

ts fo

r the

his

toric

env

ironm

ent.

Fur

ther

info

rmat

ion

and

links

to th

ese

and

othe

r key

legi

slat

ion,

pol

icy

and

guid

ance

in re

latio

n to

the

hist

oric

env

ironm

ent a

re a

vaila

ble

here

.re

fere

nce

to s

ourc

es o

f inf

orm

atio

n su

ch a

s th

eRo

yal C

omm

issi

on o

n th

e A

ncie

nt a

nd H

isto

rical

Mon

umen

ts o

f Sco

tlan

d an

d th

e C

ounc

il H

isto

ricEn

viro

nmen

t Rec

ord.

Sc

ott

ish

Pla

nn

ing

Po

lic

y s

ets

out h

ow th

e p

lann

ing

syst

em w

ill c

ontr

ibut

e to

war

ds th

ede

liver

y of

Sco

ttis

h M

inis

ters

’ pol

icie

s as

set

out

in th

e cu

rren

t Sco

ttis

h H

isto

ric E

nviro

nmen

tPo

licy

(SH

EP).


3 Context

Ho

w i

t a

ffe

cts

or

is a

ffe

cte

d b

y A

qu

ac

ult

ure

Su

pp

lem

en

tary

Gu

ida

nc

e (

the

SG

)E

nv

iro

nm

en

tal

req

uir

em

en

ts o

f P

PS

The

Pro

tec

tio

n o

f W

rec

ks

Ac

t 1

97

3 s

ets

out t

he d

irect

resp

onsi

bili

ties

of H

isto

ric S

cotl

and

for t

he u

nder

wat

er h

erita

ge.

PA

N 2

/20

11

Pla

nn

ing

an

d A

rch

ae

olo

gy

: as p

art o

f its

inte

ntio

n to

wor

k to

war

ds su

stai

nab

lede

velo

pm

ent,

the

Gov

ernm

ent s

eeks

to e

ncou

rage

the

pre

serv

atio

n of

our

her

itage

of s

ites

and

land

scap

es o

f arc

haeo

logi

cal a

nd h

isto

ric in

tere

st, s

o th

at th

ey m

ay b

e en

joye

d to

day

and

pas

sed

on in

goo

d or

der t

o fu

ture

gen

erat

ions

Re

lati

on

ship

wit

h o

the

r P

PS

an

d e

nv

iro

nm

en

tal

ob

jec

tiv

es

I not

e th

at T

able

1 li

sts

rele

vant

pla

ns, p

rogr

amm

es a

nd s

trat

egie

s w

hich

are

rele

vant

to th

eSG

. I n

ote

and

wel

com

e th

at y

ou h

ave

incl

uded

the

hist

oric

env

ironm

ent a

s an

envi

ronm

enta

lp

rote

ctio

n ob

ject

ive.

You

hav

e id

entif

ied

the

His

toric

Env

ironm

ent (

Am

endm

ent)

(Sco

tlan

d)A

ct 2

011

as th

e ke

y le

gisl

atio

n gi

ving

rise

to th

e en

viro

nmen

tal p

rote

ctio

n ob

ject

ive.

How

ever

,th

is A

ct is

a ti

ghtl

y fo

cuse

d te

chni

cal a

men

ding

pie

ce o

f leg

isla

tion

that

imp

rove

s th

em

anag

emen

t and

pro

tect

ion

of S

cotl

and'

s his

toric

env

ironm

ent b

y ad

dres

sing

spec

ific

gap

san

d w

eakn

esse

s in

the

pre

-exi

stin

g he

ritag

e le

gisl

atio

n fr

amew

ork.

In

view

of t

his,

it s

houl

db

e re

ad in

con

junc

tion

with

the

thre

e se

par

ate

pie

ces

of le

gisl

atio

n w

hich

it a

men

ds: t

heH

isto

ric B

uild

ings

and

Anc

ient

Mon

umen

ts A

ct 1

953,

the

Anc

ient

Mon

umen

ts a

ndA

rcha

eolo

gica

l Are

as A

ct 1

979

and

the

Plan

ning

(Lis

ted

Build

ings

and

Con

serv

atio

n A

reas

)(S

cotl

and)

Act

199

7. A

dditi

onal

ly, t

he S

cott

ish

His

toric

Env

ironm

ent P

olic

y (2

011)

and

the

Stra

tegy

for t

he P

rote

ctio

n, M

anag

emen

t and

Pro

mot

ion

of M

arin

Her

itage

201

2-20

15 a

reke

y p

olic

y do

cum

ents

for t

he h

isto

ric e

nviro

nmen

t. F

urth

er in

form

atio

n an

d lin

ks to

thes

ean

d ot

her k

ey le

gisl

atio

n, p

olic

y an

d gu

idan

ce in

rela

tion

to th

e hi

stor

ic e

nviro

nmen

t are

avai

lab

le h

ere .

PO

PU

LA

TIO

N


Context 3

Ho

w i

t a

ffe

cts

or

is a

ffe

cte

d b

y A

qu

ac

ult

ure

Su

pp

lem

en

tary

Gu

ida

nc

e (

the

SG

)E

nv

iro

nm

en

tal

req

uir

em

en

ts o

f P

PS

The

SG s

houl

d in

clud

e p

olic

y to

saf

egua

rd a

cces

sto

the

fore

shor

e fo

r rec

reat

iona

l act

iviti

es.

Th

e L

an

d R

efo

rm (

Sc

otl

an

d)

Ac

t, S

co

ttis

h E

xe

cu

tiv

e (

20

03

) set

out

a n

ew ri

ght o

fre

spon

sib

le a

cces

s in

Sco

tlan

d. C

ore

pat

hs a

re to

be

iden

tifie

d in

eac

h lo

cal a

utho

rity

area

,p

rom

otin

g m

ore

wid

esp

read

and

func

tiona

l wal

king

, cyc

ling

and

ridin

g an

d th

ereb

ysu

pp

ortin

g im

pro

ved

leve

ls o

f phy

sica

l act

ivity

.

Th

e H

igh

lan

d C

ore

Pa

ths

Pla

n,

HC

(2

01

1) f

orm

s th

e b

asic

fram

ewor

k of

key

pat

hs th

atal

low

peo

ple

to e

njoy

and

get

aro

und

the

coun

trys

ide.

Thi

s fr

amew

ork

of ro

utes

will

link

to,

and

sup

por

t, w

ider

net

wor

ks o

f oth

er p

aths

. Cor

e Pa

ths

will

be

wel

l mai

ntai

ned

and

clea

rlysi

gnp

oste

d.

MA

TE

RIA

L A

SS

ET

S

The

Was

te D

irect

ive

requ

ires t

he p

lann

ing

syst

emto

pro

vide

pol

icie

s an

d si

tes

for w

aste

dis

pos

al.

The

Wa

ste

Dir

ect

ive

20

06

/12

/EC

and

20

08

/98

/EC

and

subs

eque

nt u

pdat

es, r

equi

re M

embe

rSt

ates

of t

he E

U to

:

The

SG s

houl

d p

rom

ote

the

was

te h

iera

rchy

of

pre

vent

ion,

redu

ctio

n, re

-use

and

recy

clin

g of

was

te.

esta

blis

h b

oth

a ne

twor

k of

dis

pos

al fa

cilit

ies

and

com

pet

ent a

utho

ritie

s w

ithre

spon

sib

ility

for i

ssui

ng w

aste

man

agem

ent a

utho

risat

ions

and

lice

nses

;en

sure

the

reco

very

of w

aste

or i

ts d

isp

osal

with

out e

ndan

gerin

g hu

man

hea

lth

and

the

envi

ronm

ent.

It s

houl

d hi

ghlig

ht th

e re

quire

men

t to

pro

vide

info

rmat

ion

on h

ow s

ite w

aste

will

be

deal

t with

,in

clud

ing

step

s th

at w

ould

be

take

n to

redu

ce,

re-u

se a

nd re

-cyc

le w

aste

s an

d ho

w a

ny re

sidu

alw

aste

s w

ill b

e di

spos

ed o

f.

The

revi

sed

Dire

ctiv

e 20

08/9

8/EC

set

s th

e b

asic

con

cep

ts a

nd d

efin

ition

s re

late

d to

was

tem

anag

emen

t and

lays

dow

n w

aste

man

agem

ent p

rinci

ple

s su

ch a

s th

e "p

ollu

ter p

ays

prin

cipl

e" a

nd th

e "w

aste

hie

rarc

hy",

whi

ch fa

vour

s pre

vent

ion

over

reus

e, re

cycl

ing,

reco

very

then

dis

pos

al, g

uidi

ng c

hoic

es a

bou

t was

te m

anag

emen

t op

tions

.

Sc

otl

an

d’s

Ze

ro W

ast

e P

lan

(2

01

0) s

ets

a ta

rget

of 7

0% re

cycl

ing

and

max

imum

5%

tola

ndfil

l by

2025

for a

ll Sc

otla

nd’s

was

te. I

ts m

issi

on is

to a

chie

ve a

zer

o w

aste

Sco

tlan

d, w

here

we

mak

e th

e m

ost e

ffic

ient

use

of r

esou

rces

by

min

imis

ing

Scot

land

’s d

eman

d on

prim

ary

reso

urce

s an

d re

cove

ry o

f res

ourc

es in

stea

d of

trea

ting

them

as

was

te.


3 Context

Ho

w i

t a

ffe

cts

or

is a

ffe

cte

d b

y A

qu

ac

ult

ure

Su

pp

lem

en

tary

Gu

ida

nc

e (

the

SG

)E

nv

iro

nm

en

tal

req

uir

em

en

ts o

f P

PS

OT

HE

R/C

RO

SS

SE

CT

OR

AL

PO

LIC

IES

The

SG s

houl

d b

e co

nsis

tent

with

the

pol

icy

asp

rese

nted

in th

e co

nsol

idat

ed p

olic

y do

cum

ent.

As

par

t of t

he c

omm

itmen

t to

pro

por

tiona

te a

nd p

ract

ical

pla

nnin

g p

olic

ies,

the

Scot

tish

Gov

ernm

ent h

as ra

tiona

lised

the

Scot

tish

Plan

ning

Pol

icy

and

Nat

iona

l Pla

nnin

g Po

licy

In p

artic

ular

, par

agra

phs

249

-253

pro

vide

the

pol

icy

bac

kgro

und

to A

quac

ultu

reG

uide

lines

into

a s

ingl

e st

atem

ent o

f nat

iona

l pla

nnin

g p

olic

y, S

co

ttis

h P

lan

nin

g P

oli

cy

(20

14

)

The

SG s

houl

d b

e co

mp

atib

le w

ith lo

cal

deve

lop

men

t pla

n p

olic

ies

and

its re

late

dH

igh

lan

d-w

ide

Lo

ca

l D

ev

elo

pm

en

t P

lan

and

rela

ted

loca

l pla

ns, s

upp

lem

enta

rygu

idan

ce/s

upp

lem

enta

ry p

lann

ing

guid

ance

. N

ote

the

Hw

LDP

is u

nder

revi

ew, a

long

sid

eal

l ass

ocia

ted

guid

ance

guid

ance

. A

s th

e H

wLD

P is

und

er re

view

, the

SG

will

be

upda

ted

as re

quire

d in

line

with

this

revi

ew

The

SG s

houl

d b

e co

mp

atib

le w

ith th

e st

ruct

ure

and

them

es o

f the

cor

por

ate

stra

tegi

c p

lan

and

cont

ribut

e to

war

ds a

chie

vem

ent o

f its

targ

ets

Hig

hla

nd

Co

un

cil

Sin

gle

Ou

tco

me

Ag

ree

me

nt

and

asso

ciat

ed g

uida

nce

Plan

ning

Circ

ular

1 a

nd re

late

d le

gisl

atio

n w

ill h

elp

info

rm th

e SG

Pla

nn

ing

Cir

cu

lar

1 2

00

7:

Pla

nn

ing

Co

ntr

ols

fo

r M

ari

ne

Fis

h F

arm

ing

was

issu

ed to

exp

lain

and

giv

e gu

idan

ce to

pla

nnin

g of

ficer

s, d

evel

oper

s, c

omm

uniti

es a

nd re

gula

tors

on

the

pro

visi

ons

cont

aine

d in

the

follo

win

g A

cts,

Reg

ulat

ions

and

Ord

er w

hich

per

tain

spec

ifica

lly to

mar

ine

fish

farm

ing

and

whi

ch c

ome

into

forc

e on

the

rele

vant

dat

es a

roun

dA

pril

200

7.

Wat

er E

nviro

nmen

t and

Wat

er S

ervi

ces

(Sco

tlan

d) A

ct 2

003

Plan

ning

etc

. (Sc

otla

nd) A

ct 2

006

Tow

n an

d C

ount

ry P

lann

ing

(Mar

ine

Fish

Far

min

g) (S

cotl

and)

Ord

er 2

007

Tow

n an

d C

ount

ry P

lann

ing

(Pre

scrib

ed D

ate)

(Sco

tlan

d) R

egul

atio

ns 2

007

Tow

n an

d C

ount

ry P

lann

ing

(Mar

ine

Fish

Far

min

g) (S

cotl

and)

Reg

ulat

ions

200

7

Aq

ua

cu

ltu

re a

nd

Fis

he

rie

s A

ct

20

13


Context 3

Ho

w i

t a

ffe

cts

or

is a

ffe

cte

d b

y A

qu

ac

ult

ure

Su

pp

lem

en

tary

Gu

ida

nc

e (

the

SG

)E

nv

iro

nm

en

tal

req

uir

em

en

ts o

f P

PS

Th

e W

ate

r E

nv

iro

nm

en

t (S

he

llfi

sh W

ate

r P

rote

cte

d A

rea

s: D

esi

gn

ati

on

) (S

cotl

an

d) O

rde

r

20

13

an

d l

oc

ati

on

ma

ps

Th

e W

ate

r E

nv

iro

nm

en

t (S

he

llfi

sh W

ate

r P

rote

cte

d A

rea

s: E

nv

iro

nm

en

tal

Ob

jec

tiv

es

etc

.) (

Sc

otl

an

d)

Re

gu

lati

on

s 2

01

3

Th

e S

cotl

an

d R

ive

r B

asi

n D

istr

ict

(Qu

ali

ty o

f S

he

llfi

sh W

ate

r P

rote

cte

d A

rea

s) (

Sco

tla

nd

)

Dir

ec

tio

ns

20

15

.

Prep

arat

ion

of A

quac

ultu

re S

upp

lem

enta

ryG

uida

nce

shou

ld b

e un

dert

aken

in c

onju

nctio

nD

eli

ve

rin

g P

lan

nin

g R

efo

rm f

or

Aq

ua

cu

ltu

re 2

(2

01

0)

sets

out

a s

hare

d in

tent

ion

toim

pro

ve th

e ex

istin

g To

wn

and

Cou

ntry

pla

nnin

g sy

stem

as i

t rel

ates

to a

quac

ultu

re. I

n te

rms

of D

evel

opm

ent P

lann

ing

the

shar

ed o

bje

ctiv

es fo

r a m

oder

nise

d aq

uacu

ltur

e p

lann

ing

syst

em a

re:

with

con

sult

atio

n w

ith a

ll re

leva

nt s

take

hold

ergr

oup

s

An

effe

ctiv

e pl

anni

ng sy

stem

and

wel

l-con

ceiv

ed d

evel

opm

ent p

ropo

sals

whi

ch in

crea

seth

e su

stai

nab

le e

cono

mic

gro

wth

of a

quac

ultu

re fo

r Sco

tlan

d;Th

e aq

uacu

ltur

e in

dust

ry e

ngag

es m

ore

fully

in D

evel

opm

ent P

lan

pre

par

atio

n;St

atut

ory

cons

ulte

es c

o-op

erat

e w

ith p

lann

ing

auth

oriti

es in

pre

par

ing

Dev

elop

men

tPl

ans;

and

The

new

gen

erat

ion

of D

evel

opm

ent P

lans

are

robu

st a

nd w

ell-i

nfor

med

and

giv

e aq

uacu

lture

deve

lop

ers

and

com

mun

ities

a g

reat

er d

egre

e of

cer

tain

ty.


3 Context

Ho

w i

t a

ffe

cts

or

is a

ffe

cte

d b

y A

qu

ac

ult

ure

Su

pp

lem

en

tary

Gu

ida

nc

e (

the

SG

)E

nv

iro

nm

en

tal

req

uir

em

en

ts o

f P

PS

The

SG s

houl

d ex

pla

in th

e ro

les

of o

ther

auth

oriti

es in

term

s of

lice

nsin

g an

d co

nsen

ting

aqua

cult

ure.

It s

houl

d no

t dup

licat

e th

e ro

les

ofot

her a

utho

ritie

s

Th

e A

qu

ac

ult

ure

Wo

rkin

g A

rra

ng

em

en

ts s

ets

out t

he re

spon

sib

ilitie

s of

org

anis

atio

nsw

ith a

form

al ro

le in

aqu

acul

ture

dev

elop

men

t, in

clud

ing

how

they

will

con

sult

eac

h ot

her

and

how

info

rmat

ion

will

be

shar

ed

The

SG s

houl

d in

clud

e re

fere

nce

to T

he R

enew

edFr

amew

ork

for S

cott

ish

Aqu

acul

ture

A F

resh

Sta

rt:

Th

e R

en

ew

ed

Str

ate

gic

Fra

me

wo

rk f

or

Sc

ott

ish

Aq

ua

cu

ltu

re (

20

09

) se

tsou

t its

vis

ion

for t

he a

quac

ultu

re in

dust

ry in

Sco

tlan

d an

d de

scrib

es th

e ec

onom

ic,

envi

ronm

enta

l, so

cial

and

ste

war

dshi

p a

spec

ts o

f the

ove

rarc

hing

prin

cip

le o

f sus

tain

abili

tyto

whi

ch it

had

rega

rd in

dev

elop

ing

the

docu

men

t

The

SG s

houl

d in

clud

e re

fere

nce

to th

e C

ode

ofG

ood

Prac

tice

A C

od

e o

f G

oo

d P

rac

tic

e f

or

Sc

ott

ish

Fin

fish

Aq

ua

cu

ltu

re w

as p

rodu

ced

in re

spon

se to

the

reco

mm

enda

tions

of t

he S

trat

egic

Fra

mew

ork

for S

cott

ish

Aqu

acul

ture

(200

3). S

ince

its

imp

lem

enta

tion

in 2

006,

the

CoG

P ha

s b

een

wid

ely

adop

ted

as a

n in

dust

ry p

rodu

ctio

nst

anda

rd in

Sco

tlan

d


Context 3

3.23 Key points arising from this analysis are that Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance shouldprovide planning guidance which contributes to ensuring that new and modified aquaculturedevelopment in Highland is sustainable. The SG should enable the effective protection of:

Landscape and visual amenity;The historic environment;Biodiversity;The water environment;Other users of the marine environment;Environmental issues arising from operational considerations.

3.24 The draft environmental report has been drafted and modified in light of comments receivedfrom colleagues within the Council and from the consultation authorities. These include suggestionsfor additional baseline data, minor alterations to the headings or placement of issues and referencerequired for additional PPS. Where reference was required to data not yet published or finalised,this will be checked for availability for the final documents. The final supplementary guidance andEnvironmental Report will reflect the changes made throughout the SEA process.

Relevant aspects of the current state of the environment – Environmental

Baseline

3.25 Schedule 3 of the Environmental Assessment (Scotland) Act 2005 requires that theEnvironmental Report includes a description of “the relevant aspects of the current state of theenvironment and the likely evolution thereof without implementation of the plan or programme”,and “the environmental characteristics of areas likely to be significantly affected”. This sectionaims to describe the environmental context within which the PPS operates and the constraintsand targets that this context imposes on the PPS. Table 9 summarises the data collected and thesource.


3 Context

Ta

ble

9 D

ata

wh

ich

wa

s c

oll

ate

d i

n o

rde

r to

est

ab

lish

an

En

vir

on

me

nta

l B

ase

lin

e

So

urc

e o

f D

ata

Da

ta R

eq

uir

ed

SE

A I

ssu

e

ww

w.s

nh.o

rg.u

k an

d ht

tps:

//ga

tew

ay.s

nh.g

ov.u

k/si

telin

k/In

tern

atio

nal a

nd n

atio

nal

desi

gnat

ions

Biod

iver

sity

ww

w.h

ighl

and.

gov.

uk

http

://w

ww

.gov

.sco

t/To

pic

s/m

arin

e/m

arin

e-en

viro

nmen

t/m

pan

etw

ork

MPA

s

http

://w

ww

.snh

.gov

.uk/

pro

tect

ing-

scot

land

s-na

ture

/prio

rity-

mar

ine-

feat

ures

/p

riorit

y-m

arin

e-fe

atur

es/

Prio

rity

Mar

ine

Feat

ures

inH

ighl

and

wat

ers

http

://w

ww

.gov

.sco

t/To

pic

s/m

arin

e/m

arin

e-en

viro

nmen

t/sp

ecie

s/19

887/

2081

4/ha

ulou

tsD

esig

nate

d se

al h

aul-o

uts

http

://w

ww

.gov

.sco

t/To

pic

s/m

arin

e/m

arin

e-en

viro

nmen

t/sp

ecie

s/19

887/

2081

4/se

alco

nare

asSe

al c

onse

rvat

ion

area

s

SNH

Com

mis

sion

ed R

epor

t 419

: Ab

unda

nce

and

beh

avio

ur o

f cet

acea

ns a

nd b

aski

ng s

hark

s in

the

Pent

land

Firt

h an

d O

rkne

y W

ater

s ht

tp://

ww

w.s

nh.g

ov.u

k/p

ublic

atio

ns-d

ata-

andr

esea

rch/

Cet

acea

n ro

utes

pub

licat

ions

/sea

rch-

the-

cata

logu

e/p

ublic

atio

ndet

ail/

?

id=

1875

Mar

ine

Scot

land

(out

com

e of

con

sult

atio

n –

see

http

://w

ww

.sco

tlan

d.go

v.uk

/Res

ourc

e/D

oc/3

4721

0/01

1557

1.p

df

http

://w

ww

.gov

.sco

t/Pu

blic

atio

ns/2

013/

07/9

185/

9W

ild s

alm

on ri

vers


Context 3

So

urc

e o

f D

ata

Da

ta R

eq

uir

ed

SE

A I

ssu

e

Scot

land

’s M

arin

e A

tlas

Gen

eral

mar

ine

bio

dive

rsity

info

rmat

ion

http

://w

ww

.gov

.sco

t/To

pic

s/m

arin

e/sc

ienc

e/at

las

Mar

LIN

: htt

p://

ww

w.m

arlin

.ac.

uk/b

acs.

php

NM

Pi: h

ttp

s://

mar

ines

cotl

and.

atki

nsge

osp

atia

l.com

/nm

pi/

SEPA

web

site

ww

w.s

epa.

org.

uk &

link

s th

erei

nW

ater

cla

ssifi

catio

ns &

wat

erqu

ality

Wat

er

Scot

tish

Gov

ernm

ent L

ocat

iona

l Gui

delin

es fo

r the

Aut

horis

atio

n of

Mar

ine

Fish

Far

ms

in S

cott

ish

Wat

ers

http

://w

ww

.sco

tlan

d.go

v.uk

/Top

ics/

mar

ine/

scie

nce/

Pub

licat

ions

/pub

licat

ions

late

st/f

arm

edfis

h/lo

catio

nalfi

shfa

rms

Loca

tiona

l gui

delin

es –

Cat

egor

y 3

area

s

http

://w

ww

.sco

tlan

d.go

v.uk

/Top

ics/

Envi

ronm

ent/

Wat

er/1

5561

/Sh

ellfi

shW

ater

sSh

ellfi

sh W

ater

Pro

tect

edA

reas

Scot

land

’s e

nviro

nmen

t web

site

ww

w.e

nviro

nmen

t.sco

tlan

d.go

v.uk

Use

ful b

ackg

roun

din

form

atio

n of

rele

vanc

e to

aqua

cult

ure

SNH

web

site

htt

p://

ww

w.s

nh.g

ov.u

k/p

rote

ctin

g-sc

otla

nds-

natu

re/

pro

tect

ed-a

reas

/nat

iona

l-des

igna

tions

/nsa

/N

atio

nal S

ceni

c A

reas

Land

scap

e

http

://w

ww

.hig

hlan

d.go

v.uk

/inf

o/17

8/lo

cal_

and_

stat

utor

y_de

velo

pm

ent_

pla

ns/2

13/

sup

ple

men

tary

_gui

danc

e_fo

r_p

lann

ing/

13Sp

ecia

l Lan

dsca

pe

Are

as

http

://da

ta.h

isto

ric-s

cotl

and.

gov.

uk/p

ls/h

tmid

b/f

?p=

2000

:10:

0Sc

hedu

led

Mon

umen

tsC

ultu

ral

herit

age


3 Context

So

urc

e o

f D

ata

Da

ta R

eq

uir

ed

SE

A I

ssu

e

http

://he

r.hig

hlan

d.go

v.uk

/G

arde

ns a

nd d

esig

ned

land

scap

es

http

://hi

stor

ic-s

cotl

and.

gov.

uk/i

ndex

/her

itage

/wre

cksi

tes/

mar

ine.

htm

List

ed b

uild

ings

http

://hi

stor

ic-s

cotl

and.

gov.

uk/i

ndex

/her

itage

/pol

icy/

pla

nnin

g-p

olic

y-an

d-le

gisl

atio

n.ht

mC

onse

rvat

ion

Are

as

http

://w

ww

.his

toric

-sco

tlan

d.go

v.uk

/ind

ex/h

erita

ge/

wre

cksi

tes/

scot

land

s-hi

stor

ic-w

reck

s.ht

mPr

otec

ted

wre

cks

(war

grav

es)

Roya

l Com

mis

sion

on

Anc

ient

and

His

toric

Mon

umen

ts w

ww

.rcah

ms.

gov.

ukH

isto

ric M

arin

e Pr

otec

ted

Are

as

Hig

hlan

d C

ounc

il H

isto

ric E

nviro

nmen

t Tea

mH

isto

ric M

PAs

Adm

iralt

y ch

arts

Und

esig

nate

d/un

know

nm

arin

e/co

asta

l arc

haeo

logy

or la

nd-b

ased

des

igna

ted

hist

oric

ass

ets

for

fres

hwat

er/l

and-

bas

edaq

uacu

ltur

e de

velo

pm

ent

http

://w

ww

.hig

hlan

d.go

v.uk

/inf

o/14

57/t

ouris

m_a

nd_v

isito

r_at

trac

tions

/163

/pat

hs_i

n_th

e_hi

ghla

nds

Cor

e Pa

ths

Plan

Pop

ulat

ion

ww

w.s

nh.g

ov.u

k/do

cs/B

7207

65.p

dfN

atur

e to

uris

m

http

://w

ww

.hie

.co.

uk/g

row

th-s

ecto

rs/t

ouris

m/o

verv

iew

.htm

lTo

uris

m

Cro

wn

Esta

te h

ttp

://w

ww

.thec

row

nest

ate.

co.u

k/m

arin

e/A

reas

leas

ed fo

r aqu

acul

ture

deve

lop

men

tM

ater

ial

asse

ts


Context 3

So

urc

e o

f D

ata

Da

ta R

eq

uir

ed

SE

A I

ssu

e

Are

as le

ased

for m

arin

ere

new

able

ene

rgy

deve

lop

men

t

Adm

iralt

y ch

arts

Nav

igat

ion

rout

es

Reco

gnis

ed a

ncho

rage

s

Spor

t div

ing

site

s

ww

w.s

epa.

org

and

refe

renc

es th

erei

nC

umul

ativ

e &

cro

ss-c

uttin

gis

sues

Cro

ss-c

uttin

g

ww

w.s

nh.o

rg a

nd re

fere

nces

ther

ein


3 Context

3.26 The following paragraphs describe the area of Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance.

Biodiversity

Designated sites

3.27 Highland has a rich and varied natural heritage which includes international, national andlocal sites as well as the wider biodiversity. Internationally protected sites include Special ProtectionAreas (SPA) and Special Areas for Conservation (SAC), designated under the EC Birds and HabitatsDirectives as part of the EU Natura 2000 network. These sites are strictly protected; a similar levelof protection is also afforded in the UK to wetland sites, known as Ramsar sites, which are designatedas internationally important under the 1971 Convention on Wetlands. These are shown in Map 4in the supplementary guidance.

Area Covered (ha)Number of SitesDesignation

141797.9361Site of Special Scientific Interest

151.347.291Special Area of Conservation

13102385.751Special Protection Area

134206.723National Nature Reserve

3114.5171Site of Local nature Conservation Importance

55.281Local Nature Reserve

167876.713Ramsar

3.28 In addition, there are six Nature Conservation Marine Protected Areas: East Caithness Cliffs,Noss Head, Wester Ross, Lochs Duich, Long and Alsh, Loch Sunart and the Small Isles. MarineScotland has now identified Nature Conservation MPAs in Scotland to either protect a range ofbiodiversity or geodiversity features in their current state for the future, or to allow them to recoverto the state in which they should be in order to remain healthy and productive.

3.29 Nationally protected sites are the Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). The boundariesof SSSIs do not extend below Mean Low Water Springs, nonetheless there is potential for aquaculturedevelopment to have an effect upon the qualifying interests of sites either directly or indirectly,e.g. where these qualifying interests include seals or certain bird species.

3.30 Special Landscape Areas have been identified as being of local importance to wildlife orexhibiting features of local natural heritage interest. Although these are predominantly in terrestriallocations, a number are in the intertidal area. Wild Land Areas have been identified at nationallevel, but are not a statutory designation. These areas are shown in Map5 of the supplementaryguidance.

3.31 SNH has undertaken reviews of a large number of marine habitats and species in order toidentify those it considers to be of greatest marine nature conservation importance in Scottishterritorial waters; these are termed Priority Marine Features (PMFs). Information can be accessed


Context 3

from the SNH website athttp://www.snh.gov.uk/protecting-scotlands-nature/priority-marine-features/priority-marine-features/.

3.32 Many of the proposed PMFs are already included in the Scottish Biodiversity List which wascompiled to help public bodies carry out their Biodiversity Duty, by identifying the species andhabitats which are the highest priority for biodiversity conservation in Scotland. Further informationon the Biodiversity List is available from the SNH website athttp://www.snh.gov.uk/protecting-scotlands-nature/biodiversity-scotland/scottish-biodiversity-list/

Protected species

3.33 The Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended) enact the provisionsof the Habitats Directive. Schedule 2 of the Regulations identifies European Protected Species (EPS)which are afforded the highest level of legal protection available under European and UK legislation.EPS which may be found in the marine environment of Highland and are of relevance to aquacultureinclude European otter, any cetacean species and any marine turtle species. Information on thedistribution of Priority Marine Features in Highland waters is available in Scotland’s Marine Atlaswhich may be accessed at http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2011/03/16182005/0. Specieswhich depend on other species for part of the their life cycle also require consideration, e.g. theFreshwater Pearl Mussel.

3.34 SNH Commissioned Report 419: Abundance and behaviour of cetaceans and basking sharksin the Pentland Firth and Orkney Waters provides further information on the distribution of cetaceanspecies and may be accessed athttp://www.snh.gov.uk/publications-data-and-research/publications/search-the-catalogue/publication-detail/?id+1875.

3.35 Highland’s marine environment supports many other species and habitats that are legallyprotected. A list of species that are protected in Scotland, along with information on the legislationwhich gives protection, can be accessed from the Scottish Natural Heritage website athttp://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/A306244.pdf.

3.36 Stocked cages attract wild predators, which may include seals and certain bird species, andfor this reason information of their distribution is an important factor in the selection of newaquaculture sites.

Seals

3.37 The Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 provides for improved protection of seals by making it anoffence to kill or take seals at any time. The Act allows exceptions only under specific licence or foranimal welfare and introduces a new offence of harassment of seals at listed haul-out sites (ScottishGovernment, 2011). Details of designated haul-out sites on the coastlines of Highland may beaccessed at http://www.gov.scot/Topics/marine/marine-environment/species/19887/20814/mapsFurther information on seals and licensing is available from the Scottish Government website athttp://www.gov.scot/Topics/marine/Licensing/SealLicensing.


3 Context

Fish and shellfish-eating birds

3.38 A number of fish and shellfish-eating bird species, including cormorant and eider, are foundaround the coasts of Highland. Information on the locations of regionally important colonies oraggregations of these and other fish-eating bird species may be found athttp://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-4460. Additional information is also available from the local RSPBoffice.

3.39 The Highland Local Biodiversity Action Plan (Consultative Draft)http://www.highlandbiodiversity.com/highland-bap.asp and the various Local Biodiversity ActionPlans provide descriptions and other useful information on selected priority marine habitats andwider coastal wildlife issues. Lists of priority species and habitats which appear on the UKBiodiversity Action Plan list and/or the Scottish Biodiversity List can be found here:http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-5717;http://www.biodiversityscotland.gov.uk/advice-and-resources/scottish-biodiversity-list/ .

Marine Mammals

3.40 The Highland waters are rich in protected marine mammal species. The Highland-wide‘Wild Coastal Trail’ provides information on the variety of cetaceans and seals:http://www.highland.gov.uk/downloads/file/1016/wild_coastal_trail_-_highland . As some Highlandwaters are used as migratory routes, nursery areas and/or key feeding sites, these may need to beconsidered for some aquaculture proposals.

Wild Salmonids

3.41 The sea trout (Salmo trutta) and the salmon (Salmo salar) are listed as a Priority MarineFeatures. These salmonids are vulnerable to infection by sea lice, in particular the salmonid-specificLepeophtheirus salmonis. Studies have demonstrated a spatial link between fin fish farming andincreased levels of sea lice infection in wild salmonid species. Recognising the increased vulnerabilityof juvenile sea trout and salmon as they enter the marine environment from spawning burns, theSG should ensure these species are given appropriate protection. Work is underway by MarineScotland on spatial planning for aquaculture that may help provide further information once thedata are available.

Water

3.42 All aquaculture developments rely on high water quality and a degree of tidal flushing. Ininshore marine locations it is important to select sites with good water exchange characteristicswhere tidal currents can disperse waste materials, maintaining well-oxygenated water conditionsand, in the case of shellfish cultivation, providing adequate supplies of planktonic food organisms.

3.43 Cage sites may impact upon the seabed, for example by smothering with carbon fromwaste feed and faecal material and through chemical toxicity, for instance due to deposition ofsealice therapeutants and antifoulant agents from nets. The inputs from shellfish farms to the watercolumn are usually minimal as shellfish feed on marine plankton and no additional feed is required.However, where very large scale shellfish farms are proposed, water column and benthic (seabed)impacts may need to be considered.


Context 3

3.44 In order to achieve improvements to water quality, the Water Framework Directive(1) requiresmember states to identify River Basin Districts and to establish River Basin Management Plans.Most of Scotland is within the Scotland river basin district, which is covered by the Scotland RiverBasin Management Plan (RBMP). The objectives of the RBMP are implemented at the regional levelthrough Area Management Plans. A key objective of the Scotland RBMP and the various areamanagement plans covering Highlandhttp://www.sepa.org.uk/water/river_basin_planning/area_advisory_groups.aspx is that waterbodies achieve a standard known as good ecological status, and that there is no deterioration incurrent status. Coastal waters in and around Highland are generally classified as being at eithergood or high ecological status(2). Additional sources of data are listed in Table 3.

3.45 Marine Scotland’s “Locational Guidelines for the Authorisation of Marine Fish Farms inScottish Waters” categorise sea lochs, voes and embayments into 3 Categories based on predictionsof the impacts from the existing scale of development. Models predicting the nutrient enhancementof the water column and the proportion of sea bed likely to be degraded are used to identify areasmore likely to be able to support additional farmed fish biomass. Currently, no further increases inmaximum biomass are permitted in Category 1 areas. Increases are more likely to be permitted inCategory 2 and 3 areas (subject to site specific assessment through EIA and CAR). Whilst most ofthe enclosed loch systems in Highland have been categorised, the remainder of Highland watershave not been.

3.46 Shellfish growing waters are regulated by European legislation through the EC WaterFramework Directive3 and integrated into the wider River Basin Management framework, whichsupports shellfish life and growth. It contributes to the high quality of edible shellfish productsand protects Shellfish Water Protected Areas against pollution and, where necessary, establishprogrammes to reduce pollution. There are numerous areas in Highland designated as ShellfishWater Protected Areas (see Map 3 in the accompanying Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance). In addition, there are various Shellfish Harvesting Classifications in Highlandhttps://www.food.gov.uk/scotland/safetyhygienescot/shellmonitorscot/shellclassesscot/shell-class-scot-1415 .

Landscape

3.47 Given the vast geographic area of Highland, it has extensive and varied coastlines andfeatures a wide range of landscapes and seascapes, each with its own capacity to accommodatenew development. Five Landscape Character Assessments were done by SNH in the 1980s’http://www.snh.gov.uk/protecting-scotlands-nature/looking-after-landscapes/lca/ ; these arecurrently under review.

3.48 Scotland’s National Scenic Areas (NSA) are areas which are considered to be of nationalsignificance on the basis of their outstanding scenic interest, and which must be conserved as partof the country’s natural heritage. Unsurprisingly, there are numerous NSAs in Highland, coveringall three coasts, with a variety of special qualities. In particular, large areas of the west coast andthe small isles are designated for their outstanding scenic value; details can be accessed from theScottish Natural Heritage website at http://www.snh.gov.uk/protecting-scotlands-nature/protected-areas/national-designations/nsa/special-qualities/ .

1 Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC2 North Highland Area Management Plan; West Highland Area Management Plan


3 Context

3.49 Special Landscape Areas (SLA) are non-statutory but may be designated in order to protect,enhance and encourage the enjoyment and understanding of locally/regionally importantlandscapes. The Highland wide Local Development Plan (HwLDP) includes protection for 27 SLAs;many of which have a coastal element. Citations have been prepared for each one:http://www.highland.gov.uk/downloads/file/2937/assessment_of_highland_special_landscape_areas . The HwLDP is currently under review and will include consideration of Wild Land Areasand areas of unspoilt coast to ensure these are also appropriately safeguarded.

Cultural heritage

3.50 Highland has a rich and diverse cultural heritage, much of which has a close associationwith the coastal and marine environments. Many of the Highland Scheduled Monuments have acoastal setting and these include a number of sites which are popular tourist attractions. Theremains of many ship wrecks are located in the marine environment around Highland’s extensivecoastlines. Further information on unscheduled archaeology, wrecks and underwater sites isavailable from Highland Council’s own historic environment team (http://her.highland.gov.uk/).The Interim Supplementary Planning Guidance: Highland Historic Environment Strategy providesmore detailed guidance on the variety of cultural assets of the area. In addition, the RoyalCommission on Ancient and Historic Monuments (www.rcahms.gov.uk) and Historic Scotland’sData Services Website (http://data.historicscotland.gov.uk/pls/htmldb/f?p=2000:10:0) providedata on nationally designated heritage assets.

3.51 Conservation Areas, Listed Buildings Historic and gardens and designed landscapes willnot normally be affected directly by aquaculture development but their setting may be impactedif the buildings or conservation area have a coastal position. Listed buildings can also be found inlocations outside Conservation Areas and many have a coastal setting which may be affected byaquaculture development.

3.52 The Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 has established a new power for Marine Protected Areas(MPAs) in the seas around Scotland, to recognise features of national importance and to meetinternational commitments for developing a network of MPAs.

3.53 The Act allows for three different types of MPAs to be set up:

Nature Conservation MPAsDemonstration and Research MPAsHistoric MPAs

3.54 Historic Scotland has been working with Marine Scotland, Scottish Natural Heritage, andthe Joint Nature Conservation Committee on the Scottish Marine Protected Areas Project, to makerecommendations to Scottish Ministers to development of a network of MPAs in the seas aroundScotland. These currently include four Historic MPAs in Highland, designated to protect vesselswrecked around 1590-1690. As the area of seabed protected is relatively small, these MPAs areunlikely to have a significant impact on aquaculture and vice versa, but any development wouldbe considered on a case-by-case basis.

Population

3.55 The population of Highland is approximately 232,950 (figures for mid 2013)(http://www.highland.gov.uk/info/695/council_information_performance_and_statistics/


Context 3

165/highland_profile_-_key_facts_and_figures/2). Highland generally has an older populationprofile than that of Scotland with a slightly higher percentage of children, but higher proportionsin all the age groups above 45 years. Highland Council serve a third of the land area of Scotlandincluding the most remote and sparsely populated parts of the United Kingdom. The total landarea including all islands at low water is 26,484 square kilometres. This is 33 per cent of Scotlandand 11.4 per cent of Great Britain and nearly the size of Belgium.

3.56 The length of coastline including islands at low water is 4,905 kilometres, 21 per cent ofthe Scottish total, and excluding islands is 1,900 kilometres (49 per cent of Scotland). Highland’scoastlines and marine environment are important in terms of their amenity and recreational value.Its many sandy beaches are enjoyed by people of all ages and the extensive network of core pathsincludes a number of recognised coastal walks, guided by Highland Council’s virtual ranger, Cameron(see wild coastal trails: http://www.highland.gov.uk/downloads/download/171/wild_coastal_trail). The coastal and marine environment is also extensively used by a range of formal recreationgroups for activities which include sport diving, surfing, sailing, sea angling and canoeing/kayaking. Further information on the Highland Core Paths Plan, as well as a full set of maps may be accessedfrom the Council’s website at http://www.highland.gov.uk/info/1457/tourism_and_visitor_attractions/163/paths_in_the_highlands .

Material assets

3.57 The Highland area has a wide range of port and harbours facilities, safe anchorages andcoastal industrial estates. Development of the marine renewable energy industry, including theMarine Energy Park and related infrastructure, is also gaining momentum, with areas leased fordevelopment, mainly on the north and east Highland coasts. Other commercial users of Highlandwaters include the local inshore fishing industry, shipping and ferries, cruise ships, defence, tourismand recreation. These are governed by a variety of consents, permits and leases as appropriate. Baseline data gathered to develop the HwLDP provides information on the variety of materialassetshttp://www.highland.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/2926/appendix_2_baseline_data_and_maps&rct=j&frm=1&q=&esrc=s&sa=U&ei=eo_kVNTuDIHxaJS-gYAO&ved=0CC0QFjAE&usg=AFQjCNFlYWTRjXhutPvP_izD_s2bTUqvrg .

3.58 The aquaculture industry in Highland is well established with many areas currently leasedfor development. Indicative Map 2 in the Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance shows the locationsof areas of seabed that are currently leased for aquaculture.

Waste

3.59 In line with the waste hierarchy, developers are encouraged to reduce, re-use and recyclewaste with disposal as a final option. Historically there have been waste issues associated with theaquaculture industry in Highland e.g. in the form of seabed and coastal debris from discardedaquaculture equipment.

Data gaps

3.60 The following summarises the likely gaps and/or unreliability of the SEA baseline data, andhow they were minimised:


3 Context

3.61 Although it is understood and agreed that fin fish farming has an effect on sea trout interms of the transmission of sea lice and their larvae, the extent of this effect on sea trout atpopulation level remains unclear. Given the continued ban on fin fish farming on the north andeast coast and the need to treat farmed salmon, it is likely there are similar sea lice effects on wildsalmon. Work is underway by Marine Scotland on spatial planning for aquaculture that may helpprovide further information once the data are available. In the meantime, any impacts will beassessed on a case-by-case basis.

Environmental problems

3.62 Schedule 3 paragraph 4 of the Environmental Assessment (Scotland) Act 2005 requires thatthe Environmental Report includes a description of existing environmental problems, in particularthose relating to any areas of particular environmental importance. The purpose of this section isto explain how existing environmental problems will affect or be affected by AquacultureSupplementary Guidance, and whether the PPS is likely to aggravate, reduce or otherwise affectexisting environmental problems. These environmental problems are summarised in Table 10.


Context 3

Ta

ble

10

En

vir

on

me

nta

l p

rob

lem

s re

lev

an

t to

Aq

ua

cu

ltu

re S

up

ple

me

nta

ry G

uid

an

ce

Imp

lic

ati

on

s fo

r S

G A

qu

ac

ult

ure

Lo

ca

l E

nv

iro

nm

en

tal

Issu

es

SE

A T

op

ic

Scot

tish

Plan

ning

Pol

icy

requ

ires

Dev

elop

men

t Pla

ns to

iden

tify

area

s w

hich

are

pot

entia

lly s

uita

ble

for n

ew o

rm

odifi

ed fi

sh fa

rm d

evel

opm

ent a

nd s

ensi

tive

area

s e.

g.SA

Cs,

MPA

s, w

hich

are

unl

ikel

y to

be

app

rop

riate

for s

uch

deve

lop

men

t unl

ess

adve

rse

imp

acts

can

be

miti

gate

d.

Whe

n de

sign

atin

g p

oten

tial d

evel

opm

ent a

reas

and

sens

itive

are

as, S

PP re

quire

s D

evel

opm

ent P

lans

to ta

kein

to a

ccou

nt n

atur

al h

erita

ge in

tere

sts.

Thi

s m

ay b

e do

neb

y p

rovi

ding

info

rmat

ion

spat

ially

on

the

exte

nt a

nd/o

rdi

strib

utio

n of

des

igna

ted

site

s, p

riorit

y ha

bita

ts a

ndp

rote

cted

sp

ecie

s.

As

a p

ublic

bod

y th

e p

lann

ing

auth

ority

has

a d

uty

unde

rth

e N

atur

e C

onse

rvat

ion

(Sco

tlan

d) A

ct 2

004

‘ in e

xerc

isin

gan

y fu

nctio

ns to

furt

her t

he c

onse

rvat

ion

of b

iodi

vers

ity so

far a

s is

con

sist

ent w

ith th

e pr

oper

exe

rcis

e of

thos

efu

nctio

ns’.

Wild

pre

dato

rs, i

nclu

ding

sea

ls, o

tter

s an

d ce

rtai

n b

ird s

pec

ies,

may

be

attr

acte

d to

sto

cked

fish

cag

es a

nd s

hellf

ish

site

s, a

nd th

ere

isp

oten

tial f

or s

ites

to s

usta

in c

onsi

dera

ble

loss

es. C

erta

in m

easu

res

to d

eter

pre

dato

rs m

ay p

rove

eff

ectiv

e in

pre

vent

ing

loss

of s

tock

but

at t

he s

ame

time

carr

y an

una

ccep

tab

le le

vel o

f ris

k to

mar

ine

bird

s an

d m

amm

als.

Inap

pro

pria

tely

des

igne

d an

d de

plo

yed

anti

pre

dato

r met

hods

pos

e a

risk

of in

cide

ntal

ent

angl

emen

t to

bot

hse

als

and

othe

r sp

ecie

s su

ch a

s di

ving

bird

s.

Ther

e m

ay b

e po

tent

ial f

or a

dver

se e

ffec

ts o

n th

e qu

alify

ing

inte

rest

sof

des

igna

ted

site

s an

d p

rote

cted

sp

ecie

s.

Ant

i-pre

dato

r met

hods

are

not

alw

ays

effe

ctiv

e ag

ains

t per

sist

ent

pre

datio

n an

d th

e sh

ootin

g of

seal

s may

be

cons

ider

ed a

s a m

easu

reof

last

reso

rt fo

r a fi

n fis

h si

te.

Bio

div

ers

ity

Cer

tain

ben

thic

hab

itats

are

vul

nera

ble

to th

e ef

fect

s of a

quac

ultu

re,

whi

ch in

clud

e se

dim

ent d

epos

ition

and

nut

rient

enr

ichm

ent.

Exam

ple

s are

mae

rl b

eds,

hor

se m

usse

l bed

s and

seag

rass

mea

dow

sal

l of w

hich

are

Prio

rity

Mar

ine

Feat

ures

.

Cag

e si

tes m

ay im

pac

t up

on th

e se

abed

, for

exa

mp

le b

y sm

othe

ring

with

car

bon

from

was

te fe

ed a

nd fa

ecal

mat

eria

l and

by

chem

ical

toxi

city

, thr

ough

the

use

of s

ealic

e m

edic

ines

.

Ther

e is

pot

entia

l for

the

aqua

cult

ure

indu

stry

to im

pac

t up

on w

ildsa

lmon

ids

and

the

maj

or a

reas

for c

onsi

dera

tion

are

the

pot

entia

lfo

r:


3 Context

Imp

lic

ati

on

s fo

r S

G A

qu

ac

ult

ure

Lo

ca

l E

nv

iro

nm

en

tal

Issu

es

SE

A T

op

ic

imp

acts

of p

aras

ites

(sea

lice

) and

dis

ease

on

wild

fish

resu

ltin

gfr

om th

e p

rese

nce

of fi

sh fa

rms;

disr

uptio

n of

gen

etic

inte

grity

and

loca

l ada

pta

tions

of w

ildst

ocks

aris

ing

from

int

erb

reed

ing

with

esc

apee

s fr

om s

alm

onfa

rms;

intr

oduc

tion

of n

on-n

ativ

e fa

rmed

sp

ecie

s.

Ther

e is

evi

denc

e of

an

effe

ct o

f sea

lice

( Lep

eoph

thei

rus

salm

onis

)fr

om fi

sh fa

rms

on w

ild s

ea tr

out,

alth

ough

the

exte

nt to

whi

ch th

efis

h p

opul

atio

ns a

re a

ffec

ted

is n

ot c

lear

.

The

sea

trou

t (Sa

lmo

trut

ta) a

nd th

e sa

lmon

(Sal

mo

sala

r) a

re P

riorit

yM

arin

e Fe

atur

es, w

hich

repr

esen

ts th

ose

mar

ine

spec

ies a

nd h

abita

tsth

at a

re c

onsi

dere

d to

be

of g

reat

est m

arin

e na

ture

con

serv

atio

nim

por

tanc

e in

Sco

ttis

h te

rrito

rial w

ater

s.

Non

nat

ive

spec

ies

may

pos

e an

incr

easi

ng th

reat

to a

quac

ultu

re a

sth

e cl

imat

e w

arm

s and

spec

ies e

xpan

d/co

ntra

ct fr

om th

eir p

revi

ous

rang

es.

The

Cou

ncil

has a

dut

y as

a re

spon

sib

le a

utho

rity

unde

r the

Wat

er F

ram

ewor

k D

irect

ive

to p

rote

ct a

nd, w

here

pos

sib

leim

pro

ve H

ighl

and’

s w

ater

env

ironm

ent.

Ther

e is

pot

entia

l for

adv

erse

eff

ects

on

the

wat

er e

nviro

nmen

t, in

term

s of

its

chem

ical

and

bio

logi

cal q

ualit

y.W

ate

r

Whe

n de

sign

atin

g p

oten

tial d

evel

opm

ent a

reas

and

sens

itive

are

as, t

he S

G s

houl

d ta

ke in

to a

ccou

nt c

arry

ing

cap

acity

in te

rms

of th

e Sc

ottis

h G

over

nmen

t’s L

ocat

iona

lG

uide

lines

for t

he A

utho

risat

ion

of M

arin

e Fi

sh F

arm

s in

Scot

tish

Wat

er, a

s w

ell a

s re

gula

tory

con

trol

led

area

s su

chas

She

llfis

h W

ater

Pro

tect

ed A

reas

.


Context 3

Imp

lic

ati

on

s fo

r S

G A

qu

ac

ult

ure

Lo

ca

l E

nv

iro

nm

en

tal

Issu

es

SE

A T

op

ic

How

ever

, the

pla

nnin

g sy

stem

sho

uld

not d

uplic

ate

othe

rco

ntro

l reg

imes

suc

h as

Con

trol

led

Act

iviti

es R

egul

atio

n(C

AR)

lice

nces

from

SEP

A

Whe

n de

sign

atin

g p

oten

tial d

evel

opm

ent a

reas

and

sens

itive

are

as, t

he S

G s

houl

d ta

ke in

to a

ccou

nt la

ndsc

ape

inte

rest

s, in

clud

ing

unsp

oilt

coa

st a

nd w

ild la

nd.

Hig

hlan

d is

val

ued

for i

ts st

unni

ng la

ndsc

apes

and

seas

cap

es, w

hich

draw

s, a

mon

g ot

hers

, a v

arie

ty o

f tou

rists

. Poo

rly si

ted

and

desi

gned

aqua

cult

ure

deve

lop

men

t can

hav

e an

adv

erse

imp

act o

n th

ela

ndsc

ape

and

visu

al a

men

ity o

f an

area

.

La

nd

sca

pe

The

SG s

houl

d p

rovi

de a

dvic

e on

how

the

desi

gn o

f fis

hfa

rms a

nd a

ssoc

iate

d de

velo

pmen

t can

min

imis

e la

ndsc

ape,

seas

cap

e an

d vi

sual

imp

act.

Whe

n de

sign

atin

g p

oten

tial d

evel

opm

ent a

reas

and

sens

itive

are

as, t

he S

G s

houl

d ta

ke in

to a

ccou

nt h

isto

ricen

viro

nmen

t int

eres

ts.

Hig

hlan

d ha

s a

rich

and

varie

d cu

ltur

al h

erita

ge, m

uch

of w

hich

has

a cl

ose

asso

ciat

ion

with

the

coas

tal a

nd m

arin

e en

viro

nmen

ts. T

here

is p

oten

tial f

or a

quac

ultu

re d

evel

opm

ent t

o ha

ve a

n ad

vers

e ef

fect

on c

ultu

ral h

erita

ge s

ites,

incl

udin

g th

eir s

ettin

g.

Cu

ltu

ral

he

rita

ge

The

SG s

houl

d ad

dres

s is

sues

suc

h as

noi

se, l

ight

ing

and

odou

r whi

ch c

ould

cau

se n

uisa

nce.

The

pot

entia

l im

pac

ts o

f noi

se fr

om fi

sh fa

rmin

g ac

tiviti

es, f

orex

amp

le th

e us

e of

gen

erat

ors,

bot

h on

and

off

sho

re c

an b

ede

trim

enta

l to

neig

hbou

ring

uses

. Oth

er so

urce

s of n

uisa

nce

incl

ude

odou

r and

art

ifici

al li

ghtin

g.

Po

pu

lati

on

an

d h

um

an

he

alt

hW

here

ver p

ossi

ble

, acc

ess t

o th

e fo

resh

ore

for r

ecre

atio

nal

pur

pos

es s

houl

d no

t be

imp

eded

.

Op

por

tuni

ties

for s

hare

d us

e of

faci

litie

s e.

g. je

ttie

s, c

anhe

lp m

inim

ise

envi

ronm

enta

l im

pac

ts o

n re

sour

ces.

Fish

farm

act

iviti

es m

ay o

bst

ruct

acc

ess

to c

oast

al ro

utes

or p

opul

aram

enity

site

s.

The

SG s

houl

d ad

dres

s is

sues

rela

ting

to w

aste

and

redu

ndan

t equ

ipm

ent,

incl

udin

g th

e is

sue

of s

itede

com

mis

sion

ing.

Ther

e is

pot

entia

l for

dev

elop

men

t to

gene

rate

was

te a

nd/o

rp

ollu

tion

durin

g co

nstr

uctio

n, o

per

atio

n an

d de

com

mis

sion

ing.

Typ

ical

resi

dual

was

te fr

om o

per

atio

ns in

clud

es re

dund

ant p

arts

of

Ma

teri

al

Ass

ets


3 Context

Imp

lic

ati

on

s fo

r S

G A

qu

ac

ult

ure

Lo

ca

l E

nv

iro

nm

en

tal

Issu

es

SE

A T

op

ic

Op

por

tuni

ties f

or sh

ared

use

of o

nsho

re fa

cilit

ies i

nclu

ding

jett

ies,

pie

rs a

nd a

ncill

ary

faci

litie

s sh

ould

be

pro

mot

ed.

fish

cage

s, p

last

ic b

ags,

old

rop

es, a

nd d

isca

rded

buo

ys a

nd fl

oats

.Th

ese

can

caus

e da

mag

e to

bot

h m

arin

e sp

ecie

s an

d th

e te

rres

tria

lan

d m

arin

e en

viro

nmen

ts.

Redu

ndan

t equ

ipm

ent m

ay p

ose

a na

viga

tiona

l haz

ard

as w

ell a

s a

risk

to o

ther

use

rs o

f the

mar

ine

envi

ronm

ent.

Ass

ocia

ted

onsh

ore

faci

litie

s m

ay b

e re

quire

d.

The

Mar

ine

(Sco

tlan

d) A

ct 2

010

pla

ces

a du

ty o

n p

ublic

auth

oriti

es to

‘act

in th

e w

ay b

est c

alcu

late

d to

furt

her t

heac

hiev

emen

t of s

usta

inab

le d

evel

opm

ent,

incl

udin

g th

e

Tens

ions

are

pos

sib

le, d

ue to

a d

esire

by

the

aqua

cult

ure

indu

stry

to e

xpan

d in

line

with

Sco

ttis

h G

over

nmen

t tar

gets

, and

the

requ

irem

ent t

o en

sure

that

dev

elop

men

t is

sust

aina

ble

.

Cro

ss

sec

tora

l

issu

es

prot

ectio

n an

d, w

here

app

ropr

iate

, enh

ance

men

t of t

hehe

alth

of t

hat a

rea,

so

far a

s is

con

sist

ent w

ith th

e pr

oper

exer

cise

of t

hat f

unct

ion.

’

SG A

quac

ultu

re s

houl

d en

sure

that

ade

quat

e in

form

atio

nis

pro

vide

d to

hig

hlig

ht th

e p

oten

tial f

or e

nviro

nmen

tal

effe

cts.

Thi

s w

ill e

nab

le in

form

ed d

ecis

ions

to b

e m

ade

onth

ose

issu

es w

hich

can

be

addr

esse

d th

roug

h th

e p

lann

ing

pro

cess

.

SG A

quac

ultu

re s

houl

d b

e co

mp

atib

le w

ith th

e em

ergi

ngm

arin

e p

lann

ing

syst

em a

nd in

par

ticul

ar th

e N

atio

nal

Mar

ine

Plan

. The

spat

ial g

uida

nce

and

deve

lopm

ent c

riter

ia

Ther

e m

ay b

e p

ress

ure

on a

vaila

ble

sp

ace

for o

ther

use

rs o

f the

sea

,du

e to

incr

easi

ng le

vels

of d

evel

opm

ent w

ithin

the

mar

ine

envi

ronm

ent.

with

in th

e SG

shou

ld in

form

the

deve

lop

men

t of t

he fu

ture

regi

onal

mar

ine

spat

ial p

lans

, alo

ng w

ith o

ther

sp

atia

l and

pol

icy

cons

ider

atio

ns.


Context 3

Imp

lic

ati

on

s fo

r S

G A

qu

ac

ult

ure

Lo

ca

l E

nv

iro

nm

en

tal

Issu

es

SE

A T

op

ic

Esta

blis

hed

anch

orag

es a

nd h

arb

ours

sho

uld

be

safe

guar

ded.

The

effe

cts

of fi

sh fa

rm d

evel

opm

ent o

n tr

aditi

onal

fish

ing

grou

nds

and

angl

ing

inte

rest

s sh

ould

be

cons

ider

ed. T

hene

eds o

f loc

al c

omm

uniti

es a

nd o

ther

inte

rest

s sho

uld

also

be

take

n in

to a

ccou

nt.


3 Context

Likely evolution of the environment without Aquaculture Supplementary

Guidance

3.63 Marine and freshwater aquaculture is a form of development which has potential to impactupon a number of environmental receptors. Access to a wide range of information and data sourcesis therefore necessary to inform the identification of potential new sites as well as the determinationof planning applications for new development. It is anticipated that the Supplementary Guidancewill provide further policy guidance and information which will identify those areas which arepotentially suitable for new or modified fish farm development as well as sensitive areas which areunlikely to be appropriate for such development. Without this level of information, developers andplanners may be less aware of these sensitive areas and there would be a higher risk of planningapplications being approved in areas where aquaculture development could cause significantadverse environmental effects.

SEA Objectives

3.64 A set of SEA objectives was identified. Further minor modifications were made to theseobjectives as part of the SEA development stages, in particular comments received at the scopingstage. As part of the original HwLDP, Policy 50 Aquaculture was assessed as part of the full LDPSEA process. To help ensure consistency, the Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance has beenassessed against the existing HwLDP objectives that are relevant to aquaculture development andnew guidance e.g. national marine plan. Where appropriate, the questions asked during assessmenthave been amended or additional questions included in order to focus on the likely effects ofaquaculture on the SEA issues.

3.65 Table 11 sets out the SEA objectives and questions used to undertake assessment of SGAquaculture.

Table 11 SEA Objectives

QuestionsSEA ObjectiveSEA

Receptor

Is the policy likely to significantly help to protectdesignated natural heritage sites and their

Avoid damage to designatedwildlife sites and protected

Biodiversity

qualifying interests, or is it likely to allowspecies and minimisedamage to wider biodiversity. development which would have adverse effects

on these sites?

Is the policy likely to significantly help to protectspecies that are required by law to be protected?

Is the policy like to ensure protection of wildsalmonids?

Is it likely to safeguard areas of priority habitat thatare sensitive to the effects of aquaculture, for

Safeguard valuable habitatfrom loss and fragmentationthrough development. example maerl beds, seagrass meadows or horse


Context 3


Receptor

mussel beds? Alternatively, is it likely to fail toprotect sensitive habitat?

Where appropriate, is the policy likely to contributetoward achievement of LBAP actions and targets?

Protect and, whereappropriate, enhancebiodiversity and contribute

Is the likelihood of cumulative effects ofaquaculture development on natural environmentinterests, including noise impacts on species, takeninto account?

towards achievement of theHighland LBAPs actions andtargets.

Is the policy likely to significantly help to protector enhance water quality, reducing the risk ofunacceptable deterioration in water quality or isit likely to allow development which would havesignificant adverse effects on water quality?

Protect the biological andchemical quality of aquaticenvironments, maintainingand, where appropriate,restoring key ecological

Water

processes (e.g. hydrology,Is the likelihood of cumulative effects ofaquaculture development on the waterenvironment taken into account?

water quality, coastalprocesses and groundwater).

Does the policy protect the diversity and localcharacter of Highland’s landscapes and seascapes,including those within National Scenic Areas, otherdesignated and non-statutory designated areas?

Value and protect thediversity and localdistinctiveness of Highland’scoastal landscapes andseascapes.

Landscape

Does the policy offer effective guidance on thesiting and design of aquaculture development? Isit likely to ensure that the design and siting ofdevelopment is such that it can be effectivelyaccommodated in the landscape?

Does the policy/proposal promote respect forurban form, pattern and identity?

Respect urban form,settlement pattern andidentity.

Is the likelihood of cumulative effects ofaquaculture development on landscape andseascape taken into account?

Cumulative impacts.

Is the policy likely to significantly protectHighland’s historic, archaeological or cultural

Preserve historic buildings,archaeological sites and otherculturally important features.

Cultural

Heritage

features from the effects of development,including visual intrusion. Alternatively, is it likely


3 Context


Receptor

to allow them to be adversely impacted bydevelopment?

Does it safeguard cultural heritage features andtheir settings through the promotion ofresponsible design and siting of development?

Safeguard cultural heritagefeatures and their settingsthrough responsible designand siting of development.

Is the likelihood of cumulative effects ofaquaculture development on Highland’s culturalheritage taken into account?

Does the policy prevent unacceptable levels ofamenity, noise, light and odour pollution?

Maintain or improve thecommunity environment andquality of life.

Population

Is the policy likely to help sustain the characterand viability of remote communities?

Does the policy highlight the need for newdevelopment to respect the requirements ofexisting users of the marine and coastalenvironment?

Does it protect public access to the coast?Retain and, whereappropriate improve the

Does it protect areas that are important forrecreation and tourism, e.g. Core Paths, key sailinganchorages, recognised wildlife watching sites?

quality and quantity ofpublicly accessible openspace.

Is the likelihood of cumulative effects ofaquaculture development on quality of life andaccess to the marine and coastal environmenttaken into account?

Does the policy encourage use of the wastehierarchy to reduce, re-use and recycle?

Promote the efficient use ofresources and the

Material

Assets

minimisation of wastesDoes it highlight the requirement for an effectiveWaste management Plan? Is it likely to ensure theremoval of redundant equipment?

through their re-use or theirrecovery, in line with 2020national targets.

Does it encourage the use of existing infrastructureand buildings e.g. jetties and storage sheds?

Promote the use of existinginfrastructure and buildings.


Context 3

4.1 This chapter sets out the method used for the environmental assessment of AquacultureSupplementary Guidance and its reasonable alternatives.

Alternatives to which SEA was applied

4.2 A number of alternative approaches to developing the Council’s Aquaculture SupplementaryGuidance were considered. These were:

1. A criteria-based policy approach that would identify a set of development criteria againstwhich all aquaculture planning applications would be assessed.

2. An interim approach what would include a set of development criteria supported, asappropriate, by indicative maps illustrating potential constraints to development. The mapswould inform developers of the spatial distribution of constraints, enabling them to considerdevelopment potential within areas where the level of identified constraint is lower. Planningapplications would be assessed for their compliance with the development criteria.

SEA Objectives

4.3 The Scoping Report was submitted to the SEA Gateway 26 February 2015 and the responsesreceived agreed with the SEA issues that had been scoped in for consideration within theenvironmental assessment, as well as those which had been scoped out. Comments received atthe scoping stage suggested some issues should be moved under different headings, somequestions be removed and a separate question should be added on wild salmonids. The objectiveon the historic environment had been lost in error therefore was re-added.

4.4 These objectives (Table 6 above) represent the criteria against which AquacultureSupplementary Guidance and its reasonable alternatives have been assessed.

Framework used to assess Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance and its

alternatives

4.5 The reasonable alternatives described above have been assessed against the range ofenvironmental issues set out in Schedule 3 of the Environmental Assessment (Scotland) Act 2005and which have been scoped in for assessment. Comments from the Consultation Authorities,SNH, SEPA and Historic Scotland, have been taken into account regarding the methods, scope andlevel of detail in this Environmental Report.

4.6 Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance and its alternatives were assessed for their compatibilitywith the SEA objectives using a simple matrix with the following key:

Fully compatible with the SEA Objectives which are relevantto the policy

++

Partially compatible with the SEA Objectives which arerelevant to the policy

+

No compatibility with the SEA Objectives relevant to thepolicy

-

No link0



Uncertain link?

4.7 The SEA process is carried out in parallel with preparation of Aquaculture SupplementaryGuidance and its purpose is to ensure that the natural and built environment is fully consideredat all stages of decision making. Evaluation of the likely significant environmental effects of thePlan is undertaken in line with good practice as set out in the following documents:

Strategic Environmental Assessment Guidance (2013);Scottish Executive (2003) ‘Environmental Assessment of Development Plans’;OPDM (2005) A practical Guide to the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive’;Environmental Agency (2007) ‘Strategic Environmental Assessment and Climate Change’;SNIFFER (2008) ‘Air, Water and Soil Strategic Environmental Assessment Guidance’.

Assessment of PPS and its alternatives - summary

4.8 The alternative approaches considered for Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance wereassessed using a framework similar to that described above. The assessment findings are presentedin Table 12.

Table 12 Assessment of Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance and alternatives

Alternative 1: A criteria-based policy approach without a spatial

element

SEA topic

This approach could address the effects of aquaculturedevelopment on biodiversity issues such as designatedsites, protected species, wider biodiversity, priority habitat

+Biodiversity

(Priority Marine Features), potential natural heritage, NatureConservation Marine Protected Areas, predatormanagement and effects on wild fisheries.

International and national natural heritage site boundariesare already included on the HwLDP. However no furtherinformation, such as MPAs and areas protected from furtherfinfish development on the north and east coasts, wouldbe illustrated spatially.

A criteria-based policy approach could address the likelyeffects of aquaculture development on the waterenvironment.

+Water

Information on Locational Guidelines Category 3 Areas and would be provided but boundaries would not bemapped.

SEPA undertakes the main regulatory role in protectingthe water environment so adverse effects would beunlikely.


Assessment of environmental effects 4


element

SEA topic

A criteria-based policy approach could address the likelyeffects of aquaculture development on landscape, seascape and possibly siting. However, it could lack the flexibility

+Landscape

to address issues relating to design as these tend to besite-specific and vary according to the type of equipmentthat is available at the time.

The boundary of designated landscape sites such asNational Scenic Areas and Special Landscape Areas areincluded in the HwLDP.

A criteria-based policy approach could address the likelyeffects of aquaculture development on the historic

+Cultural heritage

environment. Scheduled Monuments, Conservation Areas,and Gardens and Designed Landscapes etc are covered inthe HwLDP. However there would be no spatialinformation on the locations of e.g. designated marine wargraves and Historic Marine Protected Areas would not bemapped.

Policy could effectively address public amenity issues andissues such as surrounding noise, lighting, odour and theprotection of access to the foreshore.

++Population

Policy could effectively address issues relating to wastemanagement, in particular the waste hierarchy.

+Material assets

This approach could fail to highlight certaininterrelationships, e.g. it would fail to highlight many areaswhich are sensitive to aquaculture development due tonew and existing designations.

-Interrelationships

This could result in:

delays in the determination of planning applicationsif insufficient detail is submitted at an early stage;unnecessary expense for developers due to time spentundertaking survey work to enable site selection, e.g.benthic surveys.

Does not take full account of SPP which requires planningauthorities to guide development to coastal locations thatbest suit industry needs with due regard to the marineenvironment.




element

SEA topic

Conclusions: This option would require the preparation of comprehensive criteria which wouldidentify all planning issues which could be affected by new or modified aquaculture development. There would be limited flexibility as new changes to e.g. national policy or legislative changeswould not be mapped until the review of the HwLDP or the Supplementary Guidance. It wouldmake interpretation of the guidance less accessible to the end-users.

Alternative 2: Supplementary Guidance comprising an introductory

section and a set of development criteria supported, as appropriate,

by indicative maps showing potential constraints to development

SEA topic

The policy approach of Policies 28, 50, and 57-61 inparticular of the LDP would be supported and expanded

++Biodiversity

in the Development Criteria in relation to aquaculturedevelopment. Internationally and nationally designatedsites included in the LDP would be included in an indicativemap. In addition, spatial information on seal haul-outs ormarine protected areas would also be provided, providingclear, mapped and text guidance on potential biodiversityconstraints.

The policy approach of Policy 28, 63 of the LDP would besupported and expanded in Development Criterion 4 in

+Water

relation to aquaculture activities. Information on LocationalGuidelines Category 3 Areas would be provided butboundaries would not be mapped as these are regularlyupdated. Shellfish Water Protected Areas, as at December2014, would be mapped.

The policy approach of Policies 49, 50 and 61 in particularof the LDP would be supported and expanded in the

++Landscape

Development Criterion 1 in relation to aquaculturedevelopment. An overview would be provided of guidanceon the siting and design of new or modified developmentwith references to further useful publications. Siting anddesign is a broad subject and guidance needs to be flexibleto take account of change over time. SupplementaryGuidance has the flexibility to be changed to include themost relevant and current guidance. The boundary ofdesignated sites such as National Scenic Areas and areassuch as Wild Land (not a designation) would be shown onan indicative map.

The policy approach of Policy 57 in particular of the LDPwould be supported and expanded in the Development

++Cultural heritage

Criterion 1 in relation to aquaculture development. The



Alternative 2: Supplementary Guidance comprising an introductory

section and a set of development criteria supported, as appropriate,

by indicative maps showing potential constraints to development

SEA topic

location of key historic environment assets would bemapped.

Development Criteria 5 and 6 could effectively addressissues surrounding interactions with other users that in

+Population

turn cause an environmental impact, along with issues suchas noise, lighting, odour, and the protection of access tothe foreshore.

Development Criterion 6 could effectively address issuesrelating to waste management, in particular the wastehierarchy.

+Material assets

Supplementary Guidance would bring together the policiesof the Local Development Plan and maps relevantinformation that particularly relate to aquaculture, some

+Interrelationships

of which is already mapped in the LDP; other elements arenew guidance/designations made after the production ofthe HwLDP.

Supplementary Guidance would provide useful informationto developers, planners, councillors, the aquacultureindustry and and interested members of the public,showing the different issues that require considerationwhen assessing fish farm applications.

Conclusions: Supplementary Guidance would support existing Policy 50 Aquaculture byproviding an additional level of policy guidance and information and more detailed mappingto support industry growth.

4.9 The option which has been selected is Alternative 2 Supplementary Guidance, whichcomprises an introductory section and a set of development criteria supported, as appropriate, byindicative maps showing potential sensitivities to development.

4.10 Although Alternative 1, a set of development criteria, would provide additionalenvironmental benefit, it was considered that the lack of the additional mapped informationproposed by this option was less beneficial and contained slightly more environmental risk.

Components of the Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance to which SEA was

applied in this Report

4.11 SEA has been applied to:

The introductory sectionSpatial strategy



The six Development Criteria

4.12 The Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance sets out the policy which will guide aquaculturedevelopment throughout Highland over the period 2015 -2017 and it is likely that thesedevelopments will continue operation in subsequent years. For this reason, the effects identifiedin this SEA are assumed to be long term and regional unless otherwise stated. The SG will bere-evaluated in line any revisions of the Local Development Plan as appropriate.

Assessment findings

Introduction

4.13 The introduction provides the background rationale for the document i.e. to support Policy50 of the existing Highland wide Local Development Plan. It then sets the scene, providingbackground on the value of the industry and its legislative and policy context. Information on theenvironmental considerations required in the decision making and planning application processare outlines, including Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) requirements. At the scoping stagefor EIA, the Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance will provide a useful framework for identifyingissues that should be scoped in for assessment. This section therefore has an overall positiveenvironmental effect.

4.14 Some of the licensing roles of SEPA and Marine Scotland are described, both in theintroduction and in certain Development Criteria and this is very useful in explaining other regulatorycontrols that are relevant to the industry.

Spatial Strategy

4.15 The effects of this element are generally positive. This component provides additionalmapped information and signposting to the most up to date data, therefore provides environmentalbenefits by reducing environmental risk by showing clearly in graphic form the boundaries of keyconstraints. This in turn will help ensure further support for industry growth by providing thisinformation at an early stage in a format that is readily accessible and steering development to themore appropriate locations and areas of less environmental sensitivity.

Biodiversity

4.16 All the effects are positive. DC2 lists those aspects of the natural environment which requireto be protected from significant adverse impact. However, indirect effects are not mentioned andthere is no protection for priority benthic habitats such as maerl beds, seagrass meadows and horsemussel beds which are vulnerable to the effects of aquaculture.

4.17 DC3 clearly explains the possible risks to wildlife posed by certain anti-predator measuresand sets out the issues which should be addressed in a predator management strategy. Furtherinformation on the distribution of designated seal haulouts would be beneficial in identifying areasthat are sensitive to the effects of aquaculture. Similarly it would be useful to provide a link toinformation on the locations of regionally important colonies or aggregations of fish-eating birds.

4.18 DC4 clearly identifies the potential for adverse interactions between fin fish farming andwild salmonid populations and states the Council’s preference for new development to avoid areasin the vicinity of the outflows of recognised sea trout spawning burns. Orkney’s principal sea troutspawning burns are highlighted on Indicative Map 3.



Water

4.19 The effects are broadly positive. DC5 explains how aquaculture development can impactupon water quality and the benthic environment. Further information is provided on the role ofSEPA and marine Scotland in licensing aquaculture-related activities. The Locational Guidelinesand Shellfish Growing Waters are explained and boundaries of Category 3 areas and the Bay ofFirth and Bay of Ireland Shellfish Growing Waters are illustrated on Indicative Map 4.

Landscape

4.20 The effects are broadly positive. DC1 provides a brief overview of the issues which developersshould address, whilst including links to other publications that provide relevant guidance. It setsout the issues which should be addressed in landscape and visual impact assessment. This issupported by the spatial strategy which maps the key landscape designations and other importantlandscape features.

Cultural heritage

4.21 The effects are broadly positive. DC6 lists the aspects of the historic environment whichcould be impacted by aquaculture development and provides information on the issues that shouldbe covered in an Environmental Impact Assessment. The introduction section and the spatialstrategy outline the role of other agencies and signpost to sources of up-to-date information.

Population

4.22 The effects are broadly positive. DC 5 & DC6 ensure sources of potential environmentalnuisance such as noise, lighting and odour are addressed, along with the requirement to considerpublic safety and ensure that access to the foreshore for recreational activities is not impeded.

Material assets

4.23 The effects are broadly positive. DC8 requires the preparation of a site waste managementplan. DC9 requires planning applications to be supported by a decommissioning statement. Thisis likely to benefit all environmental receptors.

Assessment of the environmental effects of Aquaculture Supplementary

Guidance

4.24 The cumulative effects of Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance following mitigationhave been assessed, using a matrix similar to Table 13 below.

Table 13 Matrix used to assess the likely cumulative environmental effects of the policies of

Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance

SummaryWeightingSEA Receptors

Introduction section

Highlights need to conform with variousenvironmental legislation.

++Biodiversity




Outlines the role of other key agencies in ensuringwater quality.

+Water

Topic not outlined in any detail in this section.0Landscape

Outlines the role of other key agencies in ensuringwater quality.

+Cultural heritage

Topic not outlined in this section.0Population

Topic not outlined in this section.0Material assets

Inter-relationship between the SEA topics: The introduction section outlinesthe main environmental considerations that should be considered when

Summary

undertaking aquaculture development, along with information on the otherkey agencies and their environmental remits.

Spatial strategy

This element lists and maps key environmentalconstraints and signposts to sources of more finescale mapping.

++Biodiversity

Some aspects linked to water quality are covered.+Water

This element lists and maps key environmentalconstraints and signposts to sources of more finescale mapping.

++Landscape

Some features are listed but there are too many tobe mapped in any meaningful way on a static map.

+Cultural heritage

Topic not outlined in any detail in this section.0Population

Topic not outlined in any detail in this section.+Material assets

Inter-relationship between the SEA topics: The spatial strategy is of particularbenefit to the biodiversity and landscape environmental objectives. Providing

Summary

clear guidance on designated species and habitats constraints will steerdevelopers to areas of least constraint.

Spatial strategy

DC 3 in particular provides detail on theenvironmental issues concerning protected species

++Biodiversity

and habitats. It steers developers away from themost sensitive areas and outlines the key issues tobe considered. It also signposts to furtherguidance.




DC4 in particular helps ensure water quality ismaintained and impacts on the benthic habitat areminimised.

++Water

DC1 outlines the key considerations to ensurelandscape/seascape quality of the Highlands is noteroded and signposts to further guidance.

++Landscape

DC2 helps ensure the environmental qualities ofHighland’s cultural heritage are not eroded.

++Cultural heritage

DC5 & DC6 in particular help ensure that publicimpacts which may lead to public health issues areconsidered and mitigated appropriately.

++Population

DC6 in particular considers waste minimisation anddecommissioning which may bring environmentalbenefits to all the other receptors.

++Material assets

Inter-relationship between the SEA topics: While there may be some negativeenvironmental impacts of development on a case-by-case basis, the

Summary

Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance brings overall positive environmentalbenefits by ensuring key environmental concerns are addressed or avoided. Most of the development criteria apply to one key receptor whilst someelements apply across receptors.

Significant negativeenvironmental effects

--Significant positiveenvironmental effects

++

Negative environmentaleffect

-Positive environmental effect

+

Uncertain environmentaleffects

?No significant environmentaleffects

0

Assessment of cumulative effects

4.25 The aim of cumulative effects assessment is to identify, describe and evaluate cumulative(including synergistic) residual effects in order that they may be avoided, minimised or enhancedas appropriate. Schedule 3 of the SEA Act refers to secondary, cumulative and synergistic effectsand these are described in more detail below.

4.26 Secondary: Effects that are not a direct result of the PPS but occur away from the originaleffect, or as a result of a complex pathway. An example of a secondary cumulative effect would bethe unsustainable planning of roads in sensitive wetland areas causing secondary developmentactivities and increased pressure on the aquatic environment.



4.27 Cumulative: Effects arise, for instance, where several developments each have insignificanteffects, but together have a significant effect. For example, incremental soil sealing in urban andrural areas due to development pressures; and

4.28 Synergistic: effects interact to produce a total effect which is greater than the sum of theindividual effects, so that the nature of the final impact is different to the nature of the individualimpacts. An example of a synergistic effect is vegetation removal, soil sealing and soil compactionwhich may all cause an increase in surface runoff and erosion of soils which could have an adversesynergistic effect on aquatic ecosystems. This would be due to increased sediment loading or siltingand possible nutrient enrichment.

4.29 The cumulative assessment includes the likely significant residual effects on the environment,including those on biodiversity, water, landscape, cultural heritage, population and material assetsand the interrelationship between these environmental receptors.

4.30 The findings of the assessment of the cumulative effects of the Aquaculture SupplementaryGuidance are included in Table 14 where the cumulative effects on each of the SEA environmentalreceptors can be seen by reading across the table.



Ta

ble

14

Ass

ess

me

nt

of

cu

mu

lati

ve

an

d s

yn

erg

isti

c e

ffe

cts

Po

ten

tia

l cu

mu

lati

ve

imp

act

of

Aq

ua

cu

ltu

re

Su

pp

lem

en

tary

Gu

ida

nc

e

Co

mp

on

en

t p

art

of

Aq

ua

cu

ltu

re S

up

ple

me

nta

ry G

uid

an

ce

SE

A t

op

ic

DC

6D

C5

DC

4D

C3

DC

2D

C1

Sp

ati

al

Intr

o

Effe

cts a

re li

kely

to b

e b

road

lypo

sitiv

e in

term

s of p

rote

ctin

gb

iodi

vers

ity.

+0

++

+0

++

++

+

Bio

div

ers

ity

Effe

cts a

re li

kely

to b

e b

road

lyp

ositi

ve o

r neu

tral

in te

rms

of+

0+

++

00

++

Wa

ter

pro

tect

ing

the

wat

eren

viro

nmen

t.

Effe

cts a

re li

kely

to b

e b

road

lypo

sitiv

e in

term

s of p

rote

ctin

gla

ndsc

ape.

++

0+

++

++

+0

La

nd

sca

pe

Effe

cts a

re li

kely

to b

e b

road

lyne

utra

l or p

ositi

ve in

term

s of

++

00

++

+0

+

Cu

ltu

ral

he

rita

ge

pro

tect

ing

cult

ural

her

itage

reso

urce

s.

Effe

cts a

re li

kely

to b

e b

road

lyne

utra

l or p

ositi

ve in

term

s of

++

+0

00

00

0

Po

pu

lati

on

prot

ectin

g pu

blic

am

enity

and

acce

ss to

the

fore

shor

e.

Effe

cts a

re li

kely

to b

e b

road

lyne

utra

l in

term

s of

ens

urin

g+

00

+0

00

0

Ma

teri

al

ass

ets

app

rop

riate

was

tem

anag

emen

t.



Po

ten

tia

l cu

mu

lati

ve

imp

act

of

Aq

ua

cu

ltu

re

Su

pp

lem

en

tary

Gu

ida

nc

e

Co

mp

on

en

t p

art

of

Aq

ua

cu

ltu

re S

up

ple

me

nta

ry G

uid

an

ce

SE

A t

op

ic

DC

6D

C5

DC

4D

C3

DC

2D

C1

Sp

ati

al

Intr

o

Stro

ng li

nks b

etw

een

biod

iver

sity

and

wat

er re

cept

ors a

s wat

er b

odie

s are

cla

ssifi

ed in

term

s of t

heir

chem

ical

and

eco

logi

cal

qual

ity. L

inks

are

als

o p

ossi

ble

bet

wee

n la

ndsc

ape,

oth

er u

sers

and

the

oper

atio

nal r

equi

rem

ents

with

cul

tura

l her

itage

,In

terr

ela

tio

nsh

ip

whe

re h

isto

ric s

ites

form

a s

igni

fican

t ele

men

t of t

he la

ndsc

ape.

Red

uctio

n in

was

te w

ill m

inim

ize

ben

thic

/coa

stal

sp

ecie

sim

pac

ts b

y re

duci

ng e

.g. e

ntan

glem

ent o

r ing

estio

n of

was

te b

y m

arin

e an

d co

asta

l sp

ecie

s.

Sign

ifica

nt A

dver

se--

Sign

ifica

nt B

enef

it+

+

Min

or A

dver

se-

Min

or B

enef

it+

Unc

erta

in?

Neg

ligib

le0

Unc

erta

in A

dver

se?/

-U

ncer

tain

Ben

efit

?/+



Measures envisaged for the prevention, reduction and offsetting of significant

adverse effects

4.31 Schedule 3 paragraph 7 of the Environmental Assessment (Scotland) Act 2005 requires anexplanation of “the measures envisaged to prevent, reduce and as fully as possible offset anysignificant adverse effects on the environment of implementing the plan or programme.” Table15 sets out any environmental problems that are likely to remain on implementation of the PPSand summarises proposed measures for the prevention, reduction and offset of significant adverseeffects.

Table 15 Measures envisaged for the prevention, reduction and offsetting of any significant

adverse effects




Impact of

PPS

Existing problem?SEA issue

DC6 highlights the need for apredator management strategy,where appropriate.

Broadlypositive

Incidental harm to nontarget species due toinappropriately designed or

Biodiversity

located anti-predatormeasures.

SG highlights the requirement toprotect vulnerable benthic habitats.

Broadlypositive

Damage to or loss of benthichabitats that are sensitive toaquaculture.

DC3.2 states that development willon be permitted where there is no

Broadlypositive

Impact on wild salmonids,e.g. due to increased

significant adverse impact on wildexposure to sea lice andtheir larvae. salmonid populations and where

cumulative impacts on wild salmonidshave been assessed and mitigatedwhere appropriate.

DC4 identifies and Shellfish WaterGrowing Areas and signposts toCategory 3 areas.

Positive orneutral

Potential for adverse effectson water quality.

Water

DC1 provides an overview ofguidance on siting and design and

Broadlypositive

Potential for adverseimpacts on landscape due

Landscape

makes reference to more detailedto poorly sited or designedaquaculture development. guidance, supported by a spatial

strategy.

DC2 provides adequate guidance onthe need to avoid significant adverse

Broadlypositive

Potential for adverse effectson historic sites, includingtheir settings.

Culturalheritage

impact on historic resources and theirsetting.






Impact of

PPS

Existing problem?SEA issue

DC6 provides policy guidance on theneed to mitigate, where necessary,

Broadlypositive

Potential nuisance in termsof noise, lighting and odour.

Population

sources of nuisance such as noise,lighting and odour.

DC6 highlights the requirement toprotect access to the foreshore.

Broadlypositive

Potential for obstruction ofaccess to coastal routes orpopular amenity sites.

DC8 requires appropriatemanagement of waste

Broadlypositive

Potential issues arising frominadequate wastemanagement.

Materialassets

All six Development Criteria aim toenable sustainability in new ormodified aquaculture development.

Broadlypositive

Tensions are possible inbalancing expansion withthe need for developmentto be sustainable.

Crosssectoralissues

DC5 requires developers todemonstrate that any potential

Broadlyneutral

Increased demand for spacein the marine environment.

impacts of proposals on other usersof the marine environment have beenidentified and, where conflicts ofinterest are likely, to provide detailsof impacts and the proposedmitigation measures.



5.1 The purpose of monitoring is to ensure that the proposed mitigation is effective and thatany unexpected effects can be detected at an early stage so that appropriate remedial action canbe put in place. Over time it is expected that environmental benefits will become apparent throughthe trends in the monitoring indicators. Monitoring will be used to provide essential informationon which to base future development. A monitoring programme may be developed with targetsrelating to the SEA objectives, within the wider LDP monitoring. Further changes to the AquacultureSupplementary Guidance are likely in order to take account of the responses to the consultation. Once the draft Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance and accompanying draft EnvironmentalReport have been consulted upon, the changes made will be summarised in the final EnvironmentalReport.


5 Monitoring

6.1 Table 16 lists future milestones in the development of the PPS and its SEA, and the dateswhen these are expected to be completed.

Table 16 Anticipated plan-making and SEA milestones

MilestoneExpected date

Environmental Report and Aquaculture Supplementary Guidancego out for public consultation

25May 2015

Deadline for consultation responses19 July 2015

Responses considered and taken into account in preparation ofa final Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance

Autumn/Winter 2015


Next steps 6

Getting Involved

If you would like more information or to get involved in the production of future plans please

contact us in one of the following ways:

Telephone

(01349) 886608

Post

Director of Planning and Development, The Highland Council, Glenurquhart Road, Inverness IV3 5NX

Email

[email protected]

Fax

(01463) 702298

For the most up to date news on the work of the Development Plans Team (and more) please

follow our twitter account and ‘Like’ our Facebook page:

Twitter

www.twitter.com/highlanddevplan

Facebook

www.facebook.com/highlandLDPs

Feedback

If you have any experience of Development Planning that you would like to comment on please complete a customer satisfaction survey:http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/X89YVTY

Documents

Aquaculture Supplementary Guidance · 1.7 The bulk of aquaculture development and activity is situated on the west coast of Highland (see Maps 2 & 3 in the Spatial Strategy). These