Cairngorm National Park Local Development Plan

Transcription

1 Cairngorm National Park Local Development Plan The development of a strategic approach to Natura within the Cairngorms National Park

2 The hope of the future lies not in curbing the influence of human occupancy it is already too late for that but in creating a better understanding of the extent of that influence and a new ethic for its governance. Aldo Leopold

3 Introduction Session 1 Progress of the CNPA Local Development Plan Update on the HRA New issue arising since the last draft Session 2 Discussion on HRAs around the group Session 3 Other species with HRA implications LDP2

4 Participation Warning Please think about the HRA for a plan or project in your area. In session 2 we will be discussing: What the Natura site is What the qualifying interests are What are the main issues

5 The Cairngorms National Park (and its Natura Sites)

6

7

8

9

10 More than 50% of area of Park is designated for Natura 43 Natura sites Most with multiple qualifying interests SPA, SAC and Ramsar sites

11 CNP Natura Sites

12 SAC

13 SPA

14 Ramsar

15 ...and sometime all three!

16 Capercaillie

17

18 Capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus) Capercaillie Gaelic for horse of the woods The largest member of the grouse family Population estimated at 1200 in UK, (down from 20,000 in 1970) All in Scotland, 85% in Cairngorms National Park and 75% in Badenoch and Strathspey

19

20 Capercaillie Large woodland bird size of a turkey Habitat is exclusively native scots pine woods Eats insects, blaeberries and pine needles (especially in winter) Spectacular courtship display in April, males are very territorial Hens nest on the ground and chicks are mobile from an early age Warm dry weather in June and July is critical for chick survival

21 Capercaillie Females will disperse up to 20 km to new areas They use smaller woods as refuges ( stepping stones ) during dispersal The population of an area can act as is one effective meta population despite not being continuous woodland All woods with capercaillie contribute to the population dynamics not just designated ones Effecting birds in one wood can have effects for the birds in others

22

23 Capercaillie threats: climate change

24 Capercaillie threats: Habitat loss

25 Capercaillie threats: Predation

26 Capercaillie threats: Disturbance

27 Capercaillie threats: Disturbance

28 Recreational disturbance Disturbance can scatter broods, prevent breeding and effect energy balance of individuals in winter Birds are disturbed by walkers, cyclists, runners (orienteering), cross country skiers and often by wildlife photographers! Dogs are the biggest factor Birds avoid paths up to 125m away this reduces available habitat Clear visibility within woods increased flushing distance

29 Capercaillie population decline has been dramatic since the 1970 s. Reason is likely to be a balance of all four factors We do not know which is most significant Conservation measures are aimed at those we can actually tackle - habitat improvement and expansion, reducing predation and disturbance

30 Case Study: Boat of Garten

31

32 Boat of Garten 200+ houses; 25% holiday homes Housing needs assessment points to shortage of affordable and rented accommodation Primary school 2 shops Golf course Steam Railway and station

33

34

35 The development Housing proposal goes back to pre NP days (2003) Within Badenoch and Strathspey Local Plan (1996) Originally 140 homes set within the woodlands Removed from 2010 local plan environmental concern and over provision of housing site remained within settlement boundary Application for 77 houses rejected on advice from SNH for capercaillie impacts (2011) effects on meta population

36 The role of HRA Application submission raised questions about numbers of new residents HRA provided framework to establish all the effects and mitigations Led to need for more data on peoples use of sites Process has some reassurance to conservation groups about rigour of process RSPB involvement The legal weight and strictness of tests focused minds

37 Problem identification Worked with developer and land owner to identify main issues and mitigations Camera trapping of wood users revealed more activity than anticipated and not just residents Paths close to brood rearing and lekking sites 90% dogs were off lead in caper sensitive areas Used all times of the day Paths visible from key habitat for brood rearing Habitat loss not considered important

38 Mitigation Overall aim to reduce the effects of disturbance from people using the woods Direct effects of development eliminated through screen fencing and timing of construction Visibility of the paths reduced by planting and screening Dogs on lead area message used to limit impacts Seasonal Ranger used to engage community and reinforce message

39 The outcome Planning permission granted for a revised application in March Section 75 signed October 2014 and likely to start on site next year. 33 units (original HRA limited it to 30 but size of units has reduced) 12 of units are affordable Ranger in post for 3 seasons monitoring shows 66% fewer dogs in sensitive area and 80% under control. Trend continued in 2014 High productivity for caper in 2012, 2013 and 2014

40 The Boat effect Review of CNPA internal HRA process and format. Complete revaluation of LDP HRA much more complicated - all sites are linked and effect on one means an effect on them all Review of An Camas Mor HRA (1500 houses) taken back to committee last year revised HRA incorporates the lessons from Boat. PPP granted in June next application in preparation. All new housing developments will be scrutinised for LSE with more required from developments; this may affect other planning gain

41 Cairngorms Local Plan Local Plan adopted October 2010 Subject to legal challenge in court of sessions from a consortium of conservation NGOs lead by BSCG Original challenge focused on housing allocations. This was rejected in September 2012 by Lord Glenny Appeal to High Court November 2012 on the grounds that HRA inadequate. Appeal dismissed July the CNPA s appropriate assessment cannot be said to be one which no reasonable authority would have produced in the circumstances. Appeal to Supreme Court was to be heard in March 2014 this is still outstanding. Initial request for costs protection was rejected.

42 Evolution of the Local Development Plan Call for sites 2011 and MIR in 2012 Each major allocation subject to phase 1 habitat survey Draft HRA written in parallel to LDP development summer 2012 spring 2013 LDP consultation ended July 2013 Examination was in spring 2014 Report received September 2014 Anticipated Adoption December2014

43 The HRA to the plan First report September 2012 April 2013 Several revisions with support from SNH Included Core Path Plan as Supplementary Guidance Consultation with NGOs especially RSPB though out Final draft and consultation in August October 2014 following examination report working days for park staff alone 132 pages long, 32,000 words!

44 HRA process Stage 1 Decide whether plan is subject to HRA Stage 2 Identify Natura Sites that should be considered Stage 3 Gather information about the Natura Sites Stage 4 Discretionary consultation on the method and scope of the appraisal

45 HRA process Stage 5 Screening the plan for potential likely significant effects on Natura sites

46 Screening matrix

47 HRA process Stage 6 Apply mitigation measures Stage 7 Re-screen the plan after mitigation measures have been applied

48 HRA process Stage 8 If significant effects still likely, undertake an appropriate assessment in view of conservation objectives

49

50 HRA process Stage 9 Apply mitigation measures until there is no adverse effect on site integrity

51 Criteria for mitigation to capercaillie disturbance Criterion 1 - Current and estimated recreational use and provision Criterion 2 - Capercaillie population and site issues Criterion 3 - Best practice Criterion 4 - Deliver targeted site-specific mitigation Criterion 5 - Community engagement and support Criterion 6 - Practical enforcement Criterion 7 - Phasing Criterion 8 - Monitoring Criterion 9 - Co-ordinated action Criterion 10 - Proportionality

52 Mitigation 1 Capercaillie Framework

53 Mitigation 1 Capercaillie Framework Aims to manage cumulative impacts of individual developments and cover impacts of allocations with consents Framework development started in September 2013 Development officer employed for 9months (p/t) extended to March 2015 Framework will consider: climate change, predation, habitat and disturbance effects Baseline studies being planned collation of capercaillie information and recreational use of key woodlands Integrated approach with all stakeholders involved

54 RMP for developments

55 Mitigation 2 - RMP for developments All allocated housing sites on Deeside and in Badenoch and Strathspey have been identified within the HRA as potentially contributing to disturbance to Caper. All will have to produce a recreational management plan providing measures specific to their development effects All have to meet the criteria of the LDP HRA

56 Mitigation 3- Habitat expansion

57 Mitigation 3- Habitat expansion Habitat expansion is key outcome of Cairngorms Nature Action Plan 4000ha by 2017 of new scots pine woodland Capercaillie Framework undertaken under CNAP banner, also delivering LDP mitigation Woodland improvement is also priority

58 Mitigation 4 larger refuge areas

59 Mitigation 4 larger refuge areas Increase in core area will mean greater refuges for the birds Achieved through expansion of woodlands in areas less desirable for recreation May be achieved through removal of tracks or making access harder working within SOAC

60 Any Questions?

61 Section 2 30 minute discussion on Natura issues around the room.

62 Section 3 Other issues for the LDP: Fresh water Pearl Mussel Golden Eagle Otter Salmon and Lamprey

63 Fresh Water Pearl Mussel

64 FWPM ecology

65 FWPM: the main issues Salmon population levels Sensitivity to water quality in particular phosphate (eutrophication), River bed morphology and condition around flooding and silt management, Increased spread of rannunculus aquatilis (water crowfoot) Water temperature (climate change and more drought conditions) Illegal poaching Small boys and recreation (swimming, canoeing)

66

67 FWPM Impacts of development: Abstraction Removal of water from water systems (river or ground water) can reduce the flow rates and water levels in river systems. This can increase water temperature and concentration of pollutants. This can include to transfer of water between catchments for HEP as well as drinking water Pollution discharge from WWTW has higher levels of phosphate, diffuse pollution, roads flooding Siltation - from construction, roads and run off from fields (highlights the value of riparian woodland)

68 Golden Eagle

69

70 Otter

71 Atlantic Salmon

72 Sea Lamprey

73 LDP 2: a new approach Starting work on base line information Enhanced ecological surveys limit the uncertainty for developers and assure CNPA that sites are truly viable. Try to lower the risks to developers of unexpected species being on site, though we cannot remove them altogether, eg Green Shield Moss. Surveys will include: Phase 1 habitats and if needed NVC Mosses, lichens and liverworts Fungi Invertebrates reptiles Breeding birds Protected mammals including bats.

74 Answer the question on if there is a finite capacity for development in such a sensitive area. More certainty from results of monitoring for capercaillie and recreation activity arsing from Framework. Leading to better certainty and reduced survey requirements for development Opportunities for biodiversity offsetting? either internally to the CNPA or as a target area for development offsets outwith the NP. Would we aim it at Natura sites or non Natura sites? priority would be to enhance ecological networks

75 Any Questions?

76