SECTION 6 - Determine whether features are going to be exposed to an environmental change to which they are sensitive. << Prev Next >>
Section
- Use this section to make a decisions about whether the Natura 2000 features are going to be exposed to an environmental change to which they are sensitive. This is based on the knowledge and expertise of the auditor (although helpful information about species sensitivity is available in the links tab in Section 5). The auditor needs to answer questions such as:-
- Is there a pathway?
- What is the magnitude of the change?
- What is the sensitivity of the feature receptor?
- What discussions have been had with Statutory Authorities and NGOs?
- The brown ‘Matrix’ tab shows the environmental changes against the features that could be affected. This was created in Section 3 (where environmental change was predicted from activity) and Section 5 (where features sensitive to predicted environmental change identified)
Matrix
Environmental Change & Feature Matrix
Please select features
Please select activities to higlight relevant environmental change
Tips
- If you (as the auditor) are able to exclude some activities or features at this stage because there is no impact pathway then these changes should be highlighted on a hard copy print out of the change/feature table. They can though be made electronically by going back to Sections 3 and 5 to re-create a new table (to remove activities or features respectively) but this may make the process less ’auditable’ later on.
- See the Grey ‘Case Study’ tab for some examples
Case Study 1
Seaforth River Terminal - Mersey Estuary UK
1) Impact Pathways to be Included
The potential indirect physical effects of the proposed reclamation and deepening could cause changes to the extent and quality of the sandflats within the adjacent Ribble SPA and Sefton SAC (e.g. by causing erosion of the intertidal or by altering the existing landward sediment supply pathways). Therefore, these impacts need to be considered further.
If the sediment supply was significantly altered then this could ultimately affect the windblown sand pathways on the foreshore and thus the sediment supply to the dunes. Therefore, the dune interest features of the SAC need to be considered.
Further information on the bird usage of the foreshore is also required to understand what implications these changes could have to SPA interest features.
Also, the effects of noise from site construction and operation on feeding, loafing and roosting SPA and pSPA birds needs to be addressed. The area of major impact is likely to be the Seaforth Nature Reserve area (part of the Mersey Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore pSPA and pRamsar) which lies closest to the proposed river terminal.
It will also be valuable to understand whether the intertidal area to be reclaimed (although it is not part of any designated site) is of indirect value to SPA and pSPA birds as a feeding roosting area.
2) Impact Magnitude and Feature Sensitivity
In terms of the potential indirect effects from alterations to the hydrodynamic regime and sedimentary processes, it is not possible at this stage to understand the magnitude of the changes arising. These need to be investigated further within the EIA and Appropriate Assessment.
Similarly, the noise levels from the construction and operational activities, which could cause disturbance to feeding, roosting or loafing birds, are not known at this stage. Although bird species are known to be tolerant of, and habituate to, industrial noise, there is a need to confirm whether this will be the case here based on further information about noise levels, the locations of bird populations and the species present (tolerances vary between species).
3) Impact Pathways to be excluded
Two features of the SAC have been excluded 1166 Great Crested Newt (which was not selected in Section 5) and 1395 Petalwort. These species will either not be affected or will only be affected if there is a substantial changes to dune habitats. The indirect impacts to dune habitats are already being considered and it is considered to be unnecessary to assign separate consideration to these species which are too distant (in physical and impact pathway terms) from the environmental change.
It is possible at this early stage to exclude impacts via ballast water. The potential for introduction of alien species into the estuary from the discharge of ballast water from ships is not expected to be a significant issue as the development of international protocols for ballast water management and their implementation over the next few years is likely to reduce risks to a low level by the time the development comes into operation. Furthermore, the vessels using the berth will be mainly offloading containers and therefore will not need to be discharging ballast water (this would only be a requirements if they were arriving empty, discharging the stabilising ballast water and then departing loaded).
4) Discussions with Statutory Authorities and NGOs
A scoping meeting was held with English Nature at which the key issues for the AA (and EIA) were agreed. Further written and telephone consultations were held (on ecology issues as part of the wider EIA consultation process) with the Environment Agency, Lancashire Wildlife Trust and Royal Society for the Protection of Birds
Case Study 2
Text to follow..
