disturbance which is likely to have any of the negative effects which are potentially significant contributors, with regard to impact on the conservation status of EPS, will amount to disturbance under regulation 39(1)(b).
34. 35.
The draft guidance (JNCC et al. 2010a) also highlights that sporadic “trivial disturbance” should not be considered as a disturbance offence under Article 12.
For the purposes of marine users, the draft guidance states that a disturbance which can cause offence should be interpreted as:
“Disturbance which is significant in that it is likely to be detrimental to the animals of an EPS or significantly affect their local abundance or distribution.”
36.
The draft guidelines also state that a disturbance offence is more likely where an activity causes persistent noise in an area for long periods of time, and a disturbance offence is more likely to occur when there is a risk of:
37.
Animals incurring sustained or chronic disruption of behaviour scoring five or more in the Southall et al. (2007) behavioural response severity scale; or
Animals being displaced from the area, with redistribution significantly different from natural variation.
In order to assess whether a disturbance could be considered non-trivial in relation to the objectives of the Directive, JNCC et al. (2010a) suggest that consideration should be given to the definition of the FCS of a species given in Article 1(i) of the Habitats Directive. There are three parameters that determine when the conservation status of a species can be taken as favourable:
Population dynamics data on the species concerned indicate that it is maintaining itself on a long-term basis as a viable element of its natural habitats.
38.
The natural range of the species is neither being reduced nor is likely to be reduced for the foreseeable future.
There is, and will probably continue to be, a sufficiently large habitat to maintain its populations on a long-term basis.
Therefore, any action that could increase the risk of a long-term decline of the population, increase the risk of a reduction of the range of the species, and/or increase the risk of a reduction of the size of the habitat of the species can be regarded as a disturbance under the Regulations. For a disturbance to be considered
Preliminary Environmental Information May 2014
East Anglia THREE Offshore Windfarm
Chapter 12 Marine Mammal Ecology Page 23
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140