Draft Outline Biodiversity Management Strategy

The Moorside Project Stage Two

MAY 2016

This page has been left intentionally blank

Moorside Project Biodiversity Management Strategy

Copyright The contents of this report are subject to copyright owned by NuGeneration Limited (© NuGeneration Limited 2016) (“NuGen”) save to the extent it is used by NuGen under licence.

Disclaimer This report was prepared by Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure UK Limited (“Amec Foster Wheeler”) at the instruction of, and for use by, NuGen in connection with the proposed Moorside Project. It does not in any way constitute advice to any third party who is able to access it by any means and any use of or reliance placed on this report is at the user's sole risk. Both NuGen and Amec Foster Wheeler (which shall include any of NuGen’s and/or Amec Foster Wheeler’s agents, employees or advisers) exclude to the fullest extent lawfully permitted all liability whatsoever for any loss or damage (including, without limitation, loss of profits or any incidental or consequential loss or damage) howsoever arising from reliance on the contents of this report. Notwithstanding the aforementioned, neither NuGen nor Amec Foster Wheeler exclude their liability (if any) for personal injury or death resulting from their negligence, for fraud (including fraudulent misstatement) or any other matter in relation to which liability cannot legally be excluded. This report has not been approved by any external agencies to NuGen or Amec Foster Wheeler. Neither NuGen nor any of NuGen's agents, employees or advisers give, have given or have authority to give, any undertakings, representations, warranties or other assurance (express or implied) as to, or in relation to, the accuracy, usefulness, reliability or completeness of the information or opinions contained in this report, or any revision thereof, or of any other written or oral information made or to be made available to any interested party or its advisers. The information in this document may be incomplete, subject to updating, completion, revision and amendment without notice. Further, NuGen shall have no obligation to update or to correct any inaccuracies which may become apparent in this document.

May 2016 NuGen Reference - N0010302

Moorside Project Biodiversity Management Strategy

Contents 1.

Introduction

1.1

NuGen’s sustainability strategy

1-1

1.2

The NuGen contribution - environment

1-1

1.3

Scope of this document

1-2

1.4

Purpose of the BMS

1-2

1.5

BMS – core documents

1-3

1.6

The Moorside Project

1-3

2.

Biodiversity mitigation and offsetting plan

2.1

Purpose

2-1

2.2

Biodiversity offsetting

2-1

2.3

Biodiversity mitigation measures

2-6

3.

Habitat Management Plan

3-1

3.1

Introduction

3-1

3.2

The Moorside Project Sites

3-1

3.3

Habitat management

3-1

3.4

Implementation

3-2

4.

Habitat Enhancement Plan

4.1

Introduction

Rationale Biodiversity offsetting principles Biodiversity offsetting calculations Determining the potential offset provision Delivering the planned biodiversity offsetting (habitat creation) Implementation Designated sites and habitats of notable nature conservation value Legally protected and notable species Licensing Requirements for Protected Species Bats Badger Birds Otter Great crested newt Natterjack toad Reptiles Section 41 species (terrestrial) Migratory fish Freshwater mussels Other invertebrates Marine species

HMP purpose The HMP and related documents

Coordination of management activities Schedule of management and monitoring Monitoring and verification Habitat Management Plan review

HEP purpose The HEP and related documents and initiatives

May 2016 NuGen Reference – N0010302

1-1

2-1

2-1 2-2 2-3 2-4 2-6 2-6

2-6 2-7 2-7 2-7 2-8 2-8 2-9 2-9 2-9 2-10 2-10 2-10 2-11 2-11 2-11

3-1 3-1

3-2 3-2 3-4 3-4

4-1 4-1

4-1 4-1

Moorside Project Biodiversity Management Strategy

4.2

Enhancement options and areas

4-1

4.3

Habitat enhancements

4-1

4.4

Delivery of the HEP

4-1

Table 3.1 Table 3.2 Table 3.3

Example/template schedule of habitat management activities: objective 1 (Lowland Meadow) Example/template schedule of habitat management activities: objective 2 (reptiles) Monitoring and verification pathway

Coordination of enhancement activities Enhancement schedule Monitoring and Verification Review of HEP

May 2016 NuGen Reference – N0010302

4-1 4-1 4-2 4-2

3-3 3-3 3-4

1-1

Moorside Project Biodiversity Management Strategy

1.

Introduction

1.1

NuGen’s sustainability strategy

1.1.1

NuGen recognises that the Moorside Project development activities may have an impact upon social, environmental and economic conditions.

1.1.2

NuGen is committed to providing the energy which is vital to society in a way that better protects the natural environment. By delivering clean, affordable, low-carbon electricity, NuGen is contributing to national reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and is also helping to secure the UK’s future energy supplies, whilst making positive social and economic impacts in the locations which may be affected by its activities.

1.1.3

NuGen’s commitments to sustainability principles and values are set out in their Sustainability Policy, and Sustainability Strategy (‘The NuGen Contribution’) which will help focus and maximise the social and economic benefit to the communities in which they operate, whilst minimising the environmental impact of their activities.

1.2

The NuGen contribution - environment

1.2.1

NuGen’s Sustainability Strategy has four key themes: Market Place and Economy; Environment (including Biodiversity); Innovation and Legacy; Workplace and Community.

1.2.2

NuGen incorporates environmental considerations into the decision-making process for all its operations, protecting and where possible, enhancing the areas it operates in. To achieve this aim, NuGen has an Environmental Policy in place which applies across all operations. The core features of the Policy are commitments by the company to: 

apply the principles of best practice, learning both from NuGen’s experience and that of others;



meet regulatory requirements described in environmental permits, exceeding expectations in relation to relevant standards and codes of practice and applying best available techniques to processes and operations;



promote sustainable use of natural resources used in NuGen’s business, minimising emissions where practicable, preventing pollution, reducing waste, reusing and recycling materials to the extent that is economically and technically feasible;



protect and enhance the local habitats NuGen is working in, avoiding, mitigating or offsetting adverse impacts on the existing ecology, biodiversity and air, water and land quality; and

May 2016 NuGen Reference – N0010302

1-2

Moorside Project Biodiversity Management Strategy



protect and enhance the local landscape and in particular the historic environment, avoiding impacts on existing features.

1.2.3

This reflects NuGen’s commitment to conduct its activities in such a way as to avoid or minimise impacts on biodiversity.

1.2.4

NuGen is committed to going beyond regulatory requirements and, in partnership with others, to make a positive contribution to environmental enhancement, including biodiversity benefits.

1.2.5

In accordance with this commitment, NuGen is continuing to develop the BMS, including the Moorside Farmer Biodiversity Initiative and planned launch with a Farmers Forum; the launch of the annual Green Grants Scheme; and the appointment of a partner for its environmental associated improvement activities.

1.3

Scope of this document

1.3.1

In accordance with their Sustainability Strategy NuGen is committed to developing a Biodiversity Management Strategy (BMS) for the Moorside Project. This document provides an outline structure of the BMS that will accompany the application for the Moorside Project Development Consent Order (DCO). It also includes principles on which the final NuGen BMS will be based.

1.3.2

Its focus is primarily on the structure and principles of four core documents (a Biodiversity Mitigation and Offsetting Plan; a CEMP; a Habitat Management Plan; and a Biodiversity Enhancement Plan, as described in section 1.5 below) that will provide the framework for mitigating and offsetting the effects of the Moorside Project on biodiversity.

1.3.3

The BMS will continue to develop alongside the emerging scheme design for the Moorside Project, informed by the ongoing programme of data gathering and consultation throughout 2016.

1.4

Purpose of the BMS

1.4.1

The primary purpose of the BMS, including the four core documents listed above, is to provide a framework for: 

mitigating the effects of the proposed Moorside Project on ecological receptors (terrestrial, freshwater and marine), both during and postconstruction;



ensuring compliance with protected species and other nature conservation legislation;



offsetting the loss of habitats and associated biodiversity within the development footprint, by creating habitats of future nature conservation value within areas outside the development footprint;

May 2016 NuGen Reference – N0010302

1-3

Moorside Project Biodiversity Management Strategy



managing retained and created (offset) habitats to enhance and maintain their nature conservation value for at least the life of the Moorside Power Station; and



delivering biodiversity enhancements that are in addition to those measures that are specifically required as part of mitigation and offsetting.

1.5

BMS – core documents

1.5.1

The overall Moorside Project BMS will include the following four key documents: 

Biodiversity Mitigation and Offsetting Plan: This sets out the planned work (and associated licences and consents) that is required to mitigate effects on legally protected species and other species populations that are of notable nature conservation value and to create habitats to offset habitat loss that may arise from the Moorside Project. Protected species mitigation will be informed by published good practice and the experience of ecologists who have implemented similar mitigation schemes, also continuing to seek innovative approaches to mitigation and offsetting.



Biodiversity elements of the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP): The CEMP is a separate standalone document that covers a range of environmental and engineering disciplines, including contamination, emissions, waste management, traffic management and biodiversity. The biodiversity elements of the CEMP form part of the overall BMS and set out how, by employing effective working practices and management during site construction activities, effects on ecological receptors will be avoided or minimised.



Habitat Management Plan (HMP): This will detail the planned management of retained, created and enhanced habitats during and post-construction and for the lifetime of the Moorside Project once full operational activity of the MPS is in place. This would be driven by biodiversity conservation objectives and with a framework of monitoring and verifiable indicators in place to measure progress towards achieving the targets.



Habitat Enhancement Plan (HEP): This will detail the work that is planned to deliver a positive effect on biodiversity by enhancing the nature conservation value of habitats that will not be directly affected by the Moorside Project. It can also be referred to as a Habitat Enhancement Plan.

1.6

The Moorside Project

1.6.1

This section will provide a brief overview of the background to the Moorside Project, summarising information from the suite of Development Consent Order (DCO) Application documents, including the Environmental Statement (ES).

May 2016 NuGen Reference – N0010302

Moorside Project

1-4

Biodiversity Management Strategy

1.6.2

This section will also provide a summary overview of the individual Moorside Project Sites. This will include a summary of the pre-development, baseline status of the habitats and species at these sites; and a summary of the predicted effects on them and their anticipated post-development status. This is the background information that is continuing to be collected in 2016 and will continue to inform the scope of the BMS. This section will also explain how the predicted effects of the Moorside Project on the baseline status of ecological receptors has informed the Biodiversity Mitigation and Offsetting Plan.

May 2016 NuGen Reference – N0010302

2-1

Moorside Project Biodiversity Management Strategy

2.

Biodiversity mitigation and offsetting plan

2.1

Purpose

2.1.1

The primary purpose of the Biodiversity Mitigation and Offsetting Plan is to set out:

2.2



how Defra’s biodiversity offsetting principles and calculations will be applied to set out the scope and scale of biodiversity offsetting as part of the Moorside Project; and



the measures that are to be implemented to mitigate the effects of the Moorside Project on protected species and species of notable nature conservation value and ensure compliance with relevant nature conservation legislation.

Biodiversity offsetting

Rationale 2.2.1

Biodiversity offsetting is effectively habitat creation/enhancement activities which are designed to deliver biodiversity benefits to offset losses due to a development. While potentially subject to change as a result of further discussions with consultees, it is currently assumed that Defra’s biodiversity offsetting principles and calculations will be the starting point for deriving an initial potential scope and scale of habitat creation/enhancement to be delivered as part of the Moorside Project.

2.2.2

While biodiversity offsetting effectively remains at the trial stage, the principles and guidance developed by Natural England and Defra have been piloted by local authorities in six pilot areas1. It is therefore anticipated to be accepted by Regulators and other key stakeholders as an appropriate initial basis for developing habitat creation proposals as part of the Moorside Project, with the specific details continuing to be refined through consultation.

2.2.3

Habitat creation/offsetting proposals are being investigated based on the UK Government’s (Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs – Defra) pilot Biodiversity Off-setting Scheme and associated guidance documents2. The following sections outline the principles of Biodiversity Offsetting and the approach to the offsetting calculations. Detailed proposals will be developed and it is anticipated that these will be subject to consultation in the first instance with Natural England and Copeland Borough Council as part of the ongoing DCO consultation process.

2.2.4

Any habitat creation scheme would seek to: offset habitat losses to development; provide enhanced/replacement habitats for species that will be

1

Coventry, Solihull and Warwickshire; Devon; Doncaster; Essex; Greater Norwich; and Nottinghamshire.

2

www.gov.uk/government/collections/biodiversity-offsetting

May 2016 NuGen Reference – N0010302

2-2

Moorside Project Biodiversity Management Strategy

displaced from the Indicative Development Area (IDA); and also contribute to a return to more traditional farming practices, providing a legacy agricultural landscape more akin to one characteristic of the area. This accords with Natural England’s/Defra’s Countryside Stewardship Scheme3 and the Biodiversity Enhancement Plan. 2.2.5

In developing the proposals, the professional judgement of experienced ecologists, along with ongoing consultation with Natural England and Copeland Borough Council, will seek to ensure that the requirements of species, as well as the offsetting calculations, inform the development of specific habitat creation proposals. The proposals will be informed by ongoing ecological surveys at the Moorside Project Sites.

Biodiversity offsetting principles 2.2.6

Biodiversity offsets are habitat creation/enhancement activities designed to deliver biodiversity benefits to counteract habitat losses in a measurable way. The losses resulting from development impact and the gains achieved through offsetting are both measured in the same way in terms of 'Biodiversity Units'.

2.2.7

The calculation of Biodiversity Units does not simply take into account the areas and type of habitat lost/gained, but also factors in a measure of their ‘distinctiveness’ (a measure of a habitats value, based on it being either 'low', 'medium' or 'high') and ‘condition’, recognising that different areas of the same broad habitat type may vary widely in their condition.

2.2.8

Similarly, Biodiversity Offsetting calculations factor in a measure of the difficulty in recreating the habitats that may be lost and the length of time it is likely to take for them to become established, recognising that some habitats are more difficult to create than others, with an associated increase in the risk that Biodiversity Offsetting will not be entirely successful.

2.2.9

Defra identifies the following guiding principles for biodiversity offsetting: 

no change in existing levels of protection for biodiversity;



expand and restore habitats, rather than protect the extent and condition of exiting habitats;



contribute to enhancing England's ecological network by creating larger connected areas for biodiversity;



proposals for habitat creation and management should be delivered at the local level as far as possible;



proposals should be as simple and as straightforward as possible; and

3

Countryside Stewardship (CS) provides financial incentives for land managers to look after their environment through activities such as: conserving and restoring wildlife habitats; flood risk management; woodland creation and management; reducing widespread water pollution from agriculture; keeping the character of the countryside; preserving features important to the history of the rural landscape; encouraging educational access.

May 2016 NuGen Reference – N0010302

2-3

Moorside Project Biodiversity Management Strategy



proposals should be transparent, giving clarity on how the offset calculations are derived, allowing individuals to see how offset resources are being used.

2.2.10

Offsetting should result in an improvement in the extent or condition of the ecological network. To do this, the focus of habitat restoration or creation through offsetting should be on priority habitats. Where development will result in loss/degradation of habitats in the 'low' distinctiveness band, the offset actions should result in expansion or restoration of habitats in the 'medium' or, preferably, 'high' distinctiveness band.

2.2.11

At no time should an offset result in ‘trading down’, for instance in the replacement of habitat of high distinctiveness with creation or restoration of a habitat of medium distinctiveness. Habitats that are of high distinctiveness would generally be expected to be offset by creation of habitats that are also of high distinctiveness i.e. on a ‘like for like’ basis.

2.2.12

Some habitats are either very rare, difficult/impossible to recreate, or both. Where development activities would result in significant loss of these habitats, any habitat creation offsetting would have to be bespoke and any proposed habitat recreation techniques would need to be tailored to the individual situation.

Biodiversity offsetting calculations 2.2.13

This section will describe the Defra biodiversity offsetting approach. The details of the proposed habitat creation/biodiversity offsetting will be informed by planned additional survey work within the Indicative Area for Environmental Measures (IAEM), primarily an extended Phase 1 habitat survey of this area. This will provide a more informed assessment of the existing condition, distinctiveness and extent of habitats within areas that will potentially be allocated for habitat creation/offsetting.

2.2.14

The metric that Defra has promoted to be used to calculate biodiversity offsetting is based on habitats4. This section of the BMS will present the calculations used to derive the planned scope of offsetting at Moorside, based on estimated habitat loss within the IDA.

2.2.15

The Phase 1 habitat surveys carried out in June and July 2015 mapped the extent of different habitats within the majority of the IDA (and within part of the IAEM). The results of these surveys, along with surveys of the remaining areas of the IAEM will inform the offsetting calculations.

2.2.16

The Defra Biodiversity offsetting approach involves assigning each habitat type/area to one of three bands, based on their ‘distinctiveness’. Distinctiveness is a collective measure of a habitat type’s biodiversity and is determined by parameters such as species richness, diversity, rarity and the degree to which the habitat type supports species rarely found in other habitats. Each distinctiveness band has a rating/score associated with it,

4

www.gov.uk/government/publications/technical-paper-the-metric-for-the-biodiversity-offsetting-pilot-in-england (Accessed 24th February 2016)

May 2016 NuGen Reference – N0010302

2-4

Moorside Project Biodiversity Management Strategy

which provides a starting point for calculating the number of ‘Biodiversity Units’ per hectare associated with a particular habitat area. 2.2.17

Different areas and habitats will be in different conditions when they are lost to development and the metrics Defra has proposed for biodiversity offsetting therefore also take into account habitat ‘condition’. Habitat condition is also assigned a rating/score.

2.2.18

A simple multiplication of the condition rating/score and distinctiveness rating is used to derive the overall number of Biodiversity Units associated with each hectare of each habitat area/type. This can be undertaken for each habitat type that would be lost and can determine the offsetting requirements of a development.

2.2.19

The contribution hedgerows make to biodiversity in the landscape is greater per unit area than even the most diverse habitats because of their role in provision of nest sites, corridors, feeding sites and shelter belts etc. For offsetting purposes, it is therefore necessary to use a mechanism to account for hedgerows that recognises their unique contribution to biodiversity. In terms of the offset requirement for hedgerows, Defra recommends that only expansion (in effect planting new hedges rather than enhancing or management) is appropriate.

2.2.20

The term ‘currency based multiplier’ describes the difference in size between an impacted area of habitat and the offset area. This can be the case as a result of the difference in habitat quality between the areas impacted and the offset areas to be created/enhanced. For example, if an impacted habitat area has 10 Biodiversity Units/ha and the offset habitat area is predicted to have 30 units/ha, then potentially 3 ha of impacted area could be offset with 1 ha of offset area.

2.2.21

The offsetting calculations also factor in risk or uncertainty associated with habitat creation. The three main areas of risk are delivery risk, spatial risk and temporal risk. These risks are dealt with by the application of further multipliers within the offsetting calculations.

Determining the potential offset provision As well as calculating the offsetting requirements of a development, it is also necessary to measure the offsetting potential of proposed offset sites. Offset providers can either expand5 or restore6 habitat to deliver Biodiversity Units. The number of units an offset can provide could therefore be based on either:

2.2.22



a future target value, where improvement to the land as a result of management is calculated. In this case, the number of Biodiversity Units available would be the difference between the current condition and the target future condition; or

5

expansion (creation): establish priority habitat on land where it is not present and where no significant relicts of the habitat currently exist 6 restoration: improve the condition of the existing habitat resource

May 2016 NuGen Reference – N0010302

2-5

Moorside Project Biodiversity Management Strategy



the habitat’s current condition, where improvement measures have already been undertaken, in which case there would need to be a record of the initial condition of the habitat, before the work was undertaken, so the number of units provided could be calculated.

2.2.23

When selecting suitable habitats as offset provision, emphasis will be placed on enhancing existing habitats within the IAEM that are considered to have high distinctiveness and restoring them to good condition and maintaining them at that level.

2.2.24

The process of identifying the available Biodiversity Units associated with each habitat type proposed for enhancement or creation within the IAEM is outlined below. The calculations will be based on the guidance provided by Defra and also applying professional judgement, for example in assigning ratings to the difficulty in creating habitats and in assessing condition and distinctiveness. 

Identify habitat types/areas that are currently within the IAEM that can be retained and enhanced/managed to deliver an increase in the associated Biodiversity Units, by improving their condition.



Identify habitat types that would be of greatest nature conservation value, and are feasible to create within the IAEM, taking into account the habitats that are already currently within this area; the existing environmental conditions; and the requirements of the species present, including species of nature conservation value that will be displaced from the IDA.



Calculate the total number of Biodiversity Units that the areas of enhanced/created habitat would deliver: 





for habitats that are to be enhanced within the IAEM subtract the number of Biodiversity Units currently associated with the habitat from the target/predicted Biodiversity Units that will be associated with the enhanced habitat to derive the net gain in Biodiversity Units that the habitat enhancement will target/deliver; and for newly created habitats, subtract the Biodiversity Units associated with the habitat that will be replaced from those associated with the habitat to be created.

Apply risk multipliers to take into account the difficulty in successfully creating the habitat type and the length of time required to achieve the desired end point. In the absence of a local authority offsetting strategy, no spatial risk multiplier will be applied, however there will be consultation with the local authority and other regulators/stakeholders on the offsetting proposals.



Subtract the number of Biodiversity Units attributable to the same habitat type that would be lost within the IDA (if present).



The balance provides the net change in Biodiversity Units for a given habitat type. The offsetting should work towards a net change of no greater than zero i.e. no net loss of Biodiversity Units, though an increase in Biodiversity Units is preferable.

May 2016 NuGen Reference – N0010302

Moorside Project

2-6

Biodiversity Management Strategy

Delivering the planned biodiversity offsetting (habitat creation) 2.2.25

This section will summarise the planned approach to habitat creation to deliver the biodiversity offsetting proposals and will be sub-headed by habitat type, focusing on habitats that are similar to those that are known to occur at the Moorside Project Sites. For example at the Moorside Site: Ponds; Wet Woodland; Lowland Mixed Deciduous Woodland; Lowland Meadow; Coastal and Floodplain Grazing Marsh; and Purple Moor-grass and Rush Pasture.

Implementation Coordination and management 2.2.26

This section will outline the approach to coordinating the delivery of biodiversity offsetting and the mechanisms for stakeholder engagement and monitoring.

Schedule and monitoring and reporting 2.2.27

This section will set out an outline schedule for the delivery of biodiversity offsetting and the associated monitoring and stakeholder engagement.

2.3

Biodiversity mitigation measures

2.3.1

This section will set out the measures that are to be implemented to mitigate the effects of the Moorside Project on protected species and species of notable nature conservation value and identify the consents that are required and working practices that are to be implemented in order to minimise any risk of failure to comply with relevant nature conservation legislation. Mitigation principles are summarised in the sections below and are subject to further data collection and design review, which will guide the final planned mitigation measures.

2.3.2

The final CEMP will also detail the working practices and measures to be implemented to minimise effects on these species/groups during the enabling/preparatory works and throughout the construction phase.

2.3.3

The final Biodiversity Offsetting scheme will also include creation of habitats that are suitable to receive and support the species that are displaced or relocated from the development footprint.

Designated sites and habitats of notable nature conservation value 2.3.4

Mitigation and offsetting of effects on designated sites and habitats of notable nature conservation value will primarily be achieved by: development design; restricting/controlling access to and any disturbance/contamination of these areas during construction (through measures that will be incorporated in the CEMP); and Biodiversity Offsetting - habitat creation to offset habitat loss (the principles of which are summarised above).

May 2016 NuGen Reference – N0010302

Moorside Project

2-7

Biodiversity Management Strategy

Legally protected and notable species 2.3.5

The survey and desk study work that has been undertaken to date has recorded a number of European Protected Species/groups (EPS) that are either legally protected or potentially of notable nature conservation value, including: breeding birds, bats, badger, otter, polecat, hedgehog, brown hare, natterjack toad, great crested newt, adder, common lizard and slow worm, as well as number of notable fish and invertebrate species (including the freshwater mussel Margaritifera margaritifera). The coastal areas also support a variety of notable marine species, including mammals, fish and invertebrates.

2.3.6

The final BMS will include details of the pre-development and anticipated post-development status of these species/groups, informed by the ongoing ecological data collection in 2016. The principles of the measures to be implemented to mitigate effects on these species/groups are briefly summarised below. Specific and more detailed mitigation proposals will continue to be developed, informed by ongoing data collection in 2016 as well as further design review.

Licensing Requirements for Protected Species 2.3.7

Developments that affect EPS can only proceed under a Natural England protected species licence and with an approved mitigation scheme in place. Details of the planned mitigation scheme will form part of the protected species licence applications, along with a Reasoned Statement of application setting out the need for the development, its planning status and policy context and the alternatives that have been considered.

2.3.8

The relevant local planning authority will be consulted by Natural England on the mitigation scheme and Reasoned Statement as part of their review of the protected species licence application.

2.3.9

The mitigation scheme will seek to cancel or reduce any negative effects of the Moorside Project on EPS. The mitigation scheme will provide details which include: (i) timing; (ii) delivery; (iii) duration; and (iv) the difference the mitigation scheme will make to the predicted impacts of the Moorside Project on the conservation status of the EPS to enable the local planning authority to determine its effectiveness and establish whether compensatory measures would also be required.

Bats 2.3.10

Disturbance or loss of bat roosts will only be permissible under licence; and a licence is a requirement whether the known roost is currently occupied or not. Mitigating roost loss will rely on the creation of alternative roost structures by way of replacement. This can vary from installing bat boxes, mitigating loss of roosts that are used by small numbers of common bat species, to constructing purpose built ‘bat houses’ to mitigate loss of roosts that support large numbers of bats.

May 2016 NuGen Reference – N0010302

Moorside Project

2-8

Biodiversity Management Strategy

2.3.11

The specific details of any bat mitigation as part of the Moorside Project will rely on the results of the surveys of potential roost structures that are planned at Moorside Project Sites throughout 2016 i.e. to confirm presence/absence and numbers and species of roosting bats. There are a number of built structures within the Moorside Project Sites that have high or moderate bat roost potential. Therefore, there is a potential requirement for construction of purpose-built bat roost buildings, with the appropriate planning consents in place, as well as incorporating a variety of bat boxes into landscaping designs and/or incorporating features that can be used by roosting bats into new buildings.

2.3.12

The loss of bats’ foraging and commuting habitats is expected to be mitigated through the Biodiversity Mitigation and Offsetting Plan, ensuring that the mix and area of habitats to be created not only balances the offsetting calculations but also incorporates a connected network of habitats that delivers good bat foraging and commuting habitats.

Badger 2.3.13

There are badger setts on a number of the Moorside Project Sites. Disturbance or closure of active badger setts requires a badger licence from Natural England. This requirement relates to legislation protecting badgers (Protection of Badgers Act 1992) from deliberate persecution, but also applies to disturbance due to development-related activity.

2.3.14

Badger setts that can be retained would be demarcated within exclusion (‘no disturbance’) zones/buffers. Setts within the development footprint would in many cases have to be closed. Sett closures typically require artificial replacement setts to be created. Prior to closure of a sett, typically by installing one-way gates that allow badgers to vacate but not re-enter, it will be necessary to demonstrate that the badgers have found/located the replacement sett. Closure of setts during the breeding season (December to June inclusive) would not be permitted.

2.3.15

Badger mitigation would be informed by preconstruction surveys to update the survey findings obtained during the Preliminary Environmental Information Report (PEIR) Assessment (as part of the Stage 2 Consultation) and surveys that are continuing as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the DCO Application. The overall objective is to displace badgers from the development and into peripheral areas, without bringing them into conflict with badger groups that are already resident within these surrounding areas.

Birds 2.3.16

The mitigation strategies that are expected to be adopted to minimise impacts on breeding birds would include carrying out site vegetation clearance works outside of the breeding season (March to July inclusive, potentially extending into August) or, where this is unavoidable, pre-commencement breeding bird surveys to verify absence of breeding birds and/or to demarcate temporary exclusion zones around active nests. Such surveys may also be required to

May 2016 NuGen Reference – N0010302

Moorside Project

2-9

Biodiversity Management Strategy

check whether species that nest within open ground have ‘replaced’ species which nest within vegetation. 2.3.17

The impacts of habitat loss on breeding and non-breeding bird species would be offset by the provision of habitats of similar or improved quality as part of the biodiversity offsetting strategy. Impacts on the overall farmland bird assemblage could be further mitigated by the adoption of a phased rolling programme of supplementary winter feeding and provision of artificial nesting boxes where appropriate.

Otter 2.3.18

Disturbance or closure of otter holts/refuge/resting places would only be permissible under a protected species licence. Disturbance of such structures is in most cases avoided by maintaining a wide riparian buffer, other than in areas where works are specifically required close to (e.g. within c.30 m) of the river bank or at ‘off-line’ (away from watercourses) locations that incorporate otter refuges. Riparian buffers typically also preserve otters’ main foraging and commuting routes.

2.3.19

The requirement for and scope of any measures to mitigate effects on otters will depend on the specifics of the final development layout for the Moorside Project and will be informed by preconstruction surveys/monitoring to update the survey findings obtained during the PEIR and EIA. In the event that otter holts would be lost as a result of the Moorside Project, the creation of artificial holts in secluded locations nearby may be appropriate, followed by exclusion of otters from their holts and/or careful removal of the holt.

Great crested newt 2.3.20

Disturbance or loss of great crested newt (GCN) habitats (ponds and terrestrial habitat) would be permissible under an EPS licence. The scope/scale of the mitigation is governed by proximity of a development to the ponds used by breeding population; the size of the population; and the terrestrial habitat types within the development footprint.

2.3.21

GCN mitigation typically involves exclusion of newts from development areas by installing herpetofauna (amphibians and reptiles) exclusion fences and trapping them and translocating them out of these areas to a predetermined receptor site. The trapping period is determined by population size: large (90 days), Medium (60 days) and small (30 days). The size of the GCN population at the Moorside Site will be determined by further work in 2016 and will inform the details of any mitigation scheme. Similarly survey work will also be undertaken at the other Moorside Project Sites.

Natterjack toad 2.3.22

Disturbance or loss of natterjack toad habitats (waterbodies and terrestrial habitat) would only be permissible under an EPS licence. The scope/scale of the mitigation is governed by: proximity of a development to the ponds used

May 2016 NuGen Reference – N0010302

Moorside Project

2-10

Biodiversity Management Strategy

by breeding population; the size of the population; and the terrestrial habitat types within the development footprint. 2.3.23

At the Moorside Site, natterjack toads have only been recorded breeding at Braystones Water Treatment Works. The size of the natterjack toad population will be determined by further work in 2016. The mitigation principles that apply to natterjack toads are similar to those applicable to GCN i.e. the exclusion of toads from development areas by installing herpetofauna exclusion fences and trapping them and translocating them out of these areas to a predetermined receptor site.

Reptiles 2.3.24

Common lizard, slow worm and adder have been recorded over a relatively large area within the IDA, including the disused railway, River Ehen floodplain and throughout coastal habitats. Therefore, the reptile mitigation scheme could cover a large area of the Moorside Site. A reptile mitigation scheme could also be required at other Moorside Project Sites subject to the results of the ongoing surveys.

2.3.25

The mitigation principles that apply to reptiles are similar to those applicable to GCN and natterjack toad i.e. involving their exclusion from development areas by installing herpetofauna exclusion fences and trapping them and moving them out of these areas to a predetermined receptor site.

2.3.26

The size of the populations of the three reptile species (common lizard, slow worm and adder) known to be present on the Moorside Site will be determined by further work planned in 2016 and so the duration of any trapping effort remains to be determined. An appropriate level of trapping/translocation effort at the Moorside Site, and a receptor site, would be agreed with Natural England and Copeland Borough Council.

Section 41 species (terrestrial) 2.3.27

The mitigation of effects on red squirrel, brown hare, polecat and hedgehog will be achieved primarily by displacing them from the Moorside Project Sites via careful, phased, directional vegetation clearance, avoiding sensitive life stages e.g. breeding and hibernation. Hedgehogs will be actively translocated from the Moorside Project Sites. An appropriate level of search effort will be agreed with consultees.

2.3.28

Any common toads encountered during the great crested newt, natterjack toad and reptile translocations, or at other times, will be translocated and released at suitable ponds that are not in proximity to the development footprint of the Moorside Project Sites and that do not support natterjack toads.

Migratory fish 2.3.29

Effects on migratory fish will be mitigated through the design of the Circulating Water System (CWS) and fish return system; timing those works

May 2016 NuGen Reference – N0010302

Moorside Project

2-11

Biodiversity Management Strategy

that are likely to disturb the channel and banks in order to avoid the breeding season where possible; and again, where possible, restricting the timing and duration of noise/vibration emissions associated with piling during the construction of the Marine Off-loading Facility (MOLF) in particular. These elements are subject to ongoing design review.

Freshwater mussels 2.3.30

Where there is a risk of disturbing occasional/isolated freshwater mussels (Margaritifera margaritifera), for example associated with any bank engineering or in-channel works in the Lower River Ehen, it would be necessary to mitigate any detrimental effects by relocating individual mussels under a protected species licence from Natural England. A mitigation scheme would be required to confirm the proposals to relocate isolated individuals to established populations further upstream. Any such mitigation measures would be devised and developed through liaison/consultation with Natural England in relation to existing freshwater mussel conservation projects on the River Ehen.

Other invertebrates 2.3.31

Mitigation of effects on invertebrates will primarily be achieved by development design; restricting/controlling access to areas that are known to support notable invertebrate species/assemblages during construction, through measures incorporated in the CEMP; and also by tailoring the Biodiversity Mitigation and Offsetting Plan to incorporate habitat types that benefit the Invertebrate assemblages/species on the Moorside Project Sites.

Marine species 2.3.32

Due to the nature of activities within the marine environment, i.e. the construction of infrastructure including the MOLF, breakwaters, CWS and beach-landing facilities, some degree of habitat loss within the intertidal and subtidal zones is inevitable. However, this effect can be lessened through careful design and management of marine infrastructure, resulting in the creation of artificial rocky reef habitat, offsetting the loss of such habitat (and potentially Sabellaria reef) during construction/operation of the MOLF and other marine structures. Further mitigation measures, specifically mitigating the risk of introducing invasive and non-native species, would include the use of clean materials for such infrastructure.

2.3.33

Detailed construction methodologies are not confirmed; however, should noise-generating methods be employed, e.g. piling for the MOLF, then suitably accredited and experienced Marine Mammal Observers (MMOs) will be present during the works, mitigating harm to marine mammal species. These measures will also be detailed in the CEMP, along with, for example, measures to control the effect of noise and vibration on other marine species.

May 2016 NuGen Reference – N0010302

Moorside Project

3-1

Biodiversity Management Strategy

3.

Habitat Management Plan

3.1

Introduction

HMP purpose 3.1.1

The primary purpose of the Habitat Management Plan (HMP) is to provide a framework for managing retained and created (offset) habitats to enhance and maintain their nature conservation value for at least the life of the Moorside Power Station; and also to enhance and maintain the conservation status of species associated with these habitats, particularly species that will be affected (including displaced or translocated) by the Moorside Project. In this way the HMP will seek to ensure that the mitigation and offsetting is successful in the long term i.e. beyond the initial mitigation and offsetting measures within the Biodiversity Mitigation and Offsetting Plan.

The HMP and related documents 3.1.2

This section will explain how the HMP has been developed and will cross-refer to other relevant documents, for example assents and protected species licences.

3.2

The Moorside Project Sites

3.2.1

This section will provide an overview of the baseline status of ecological receptors at the Moorside Project Sites pre-development and their anticipated status post-development, drawing on similar information presented in other final DCO/ES documents and informed by survey data collected throughout 2015 and 2016.

3.3

Habitat management

3.3.1

This section will set out for each habitat or ecological receptor, the anticipated post-construction status; habitat management objectives; and the measures/management prescriptions that are planned to work towards these objectives. It will also identify potential constraints on the achievement of objectives and how these will be managed/mitigated. In some cases, in addition to management objectives, it may be appropriate to identify specific measurable targets against which to monitor success e.g. target population sizes for key species.

May 2016 NuGen Reference – N0010302

Moorside Project

3-2

Biodiversity Management Strategy

3.4

Implementation

Coordination of management activities 3.4.1

NuGen will retain ownership of the HMP and will oversee its implementation and regular review. It is anticipated that the HMP will be the basis of an agreement, with a nature conservation body/partner, governing the stewardship of the Moorside Project Sites. Implementation of the HMP will commence under the direction of suitably experienced ecologists appointed by NuGen and with the assistance of a landscape contractor following completion of protected species translocation and habitat (offset) creation.

3.4.2

Discrete management compartments will be defined based on their key features of nature conservation importance and associated management requirements. This is intended to enable the maximum efficiency of management and monitoring activities across similar areas/habitats.

3.4.3

It is anticipated that all management and monitoring activities will be coordinated by experienced ecologists and reviewed on a regular basis. This will ensure that the methods and timing of the activities comply with prevailing wildlife legislation, including any licensing requirements, and have taken account of any results/feedback from earlier monitoring. It is envisaged that this will require the development of a series of simple proformas, which will standardise the way in which the location, methods, timing and results of management and monitoring activities are recorded. This will also be a transparent method of identifying any remedial action required.

Schedule of management and monitoring 3.4.4

The schedule and timing of habitat management activities over the first 10 year period of implementation will be outlined as per the example Tables 3.1 and 3.2 below. The implementation of the HMP will begin at the earliest opportunity before construction of development on the Moorside Project Sites and is anticipated to coincide with the completion of the majority of the habitat creation to be set out in the Biodiversity Mitigation and Offsetting Plan. A review of the HMP will take place at the end of year three and therefore management activities scheduled beyond year three would be indicative.

May 2016 NuGen Reference – N0010302

3-3

Moorside Project Biodiversity Management Strategy

Table 3.1

Example/template schedule of habitat management activities: objective 1 (Lowland Meadow)

Activity

Site compartment

Timing

Priority

Yr 1

Yr 2

Yr 3

Yr 4

Yr 5

Yr 6

Yr 7

Yr 8

Yr 9

Yr 10

A

Q1

A





















A, B, F and G

Q2

MANAGEMENT Activity 1 MONITORING Activity 3

Table 3.2







Example/template schedule of habitat management activities: objective 2 (reptiles)

Activity

Site compartment

Timing

Priority

A

Q2

A

A, B, F and G

May

Yr 1

Yr 2

Yr 3

Yr 4

Yr 5

Yr 6

Yr 7

Yr 8

Yr 9

Yr 10

MANAGEMENT Activity 1











MONITORING Activity 3

May 2016 NuGen Reference – N0010302







3-4

Moorside Project Biodiversity Management Strategy

Monitoring and verification 3.4.5

Central to the success of an HMP is a monitoring and verification pathway. This defines the mechanisms by which progress towards the achievement of management objectives is monitored by NuGen and their nominated ecologists and subsequently verified by an independent arbiter.

3.4.6

A template monitoring and verification pathway is outlined in Table 3.3. This pathway should be regarded as a mechanism of improving the HMP through external consultation, rather than a measure of its success or failure. The monitoring will be undertaken by NuGen and their nominated ecologists and the resulting monitoring reports will be submitted to Natural England, the local planning authorities and other relevant stakeholders for review on an annual basis.

Table 3.3

Monitoring and verification pathway

Objective

Verifiable Indicator

Output

Means of verification

Objective 1 (e.g. Lowland Meadow)

Year 3 habitat survey records [x] ha of developing lowland meadow, supporting [xx] native grassland species.

Botanical survey report.

Report review by Copeland Borough Council.

Objective 2 (e.g. Common Lizard)

Year 3 reptile population monitoring survey records a medium sized population (HGBI7 criteria).

Common lizard population monitoring report.

Report review by Copeland Borough Council.

Objective 3 Objective 4

Habitat Management Plan review 3.4.7

The HMP will be prepared prior to the development of the Moorside Project Sites and the creation of offset habitats and will therefore be based initially on the pre-development status of flora and fauna and the predicted effects of the development on them (to be set out in the Environmental Statement). Therefore the baseline status of key ecological receptors at the postdevelopment inception of the HMP will be unknown. Therefore there will be a formal review of the HMP at regular intervals throughout its implementation. This will track the post-development status of key ecological receptors and will be the basis for refinement of future habitat management activities.

3.4.8

This HMP review will also take account of feedback from Natural England and other relevant stakeholders' and independent arbiters' reviews of monitoring reports and will identify any new, or amendments to existing, management and monitoring activities required. The output of the review will be a

7

Herpetofauna Groups of the British Isles

May 2016 NuGen Reference – N0010302

Moorside Project

3-5

Biodiversity Management Strategy

periodically revised HMP detailing the stewardship of the Moorside Project Sites up to the next review, including a forward plan of resource requirements up to the next review.

May 2016 NuGen Reference – N0010302

Moorside Project

4-1

Biodiversity Management Strategy

4.

Habitat Enhancement Plan

4.1

Introduction

HEP purpose 4.1.1

This primary purpose of the Habitat Enhancement Plan is to deliver biodiversity enhancements that are in addition to those measures that are required specifically as part of mitigation and offsetting. This can be achieved by direct habitat creation/management intervention or by providing support to ongoing/established initiatives and projects.

The HEP and related documents and initiatives 4.1.2

This section will explain how the HEP has been developed and will cross-refer to other relevant documents.

4.2

Enhancement options and areas

4.2.1

This section will provide an overview of the selection of habitat enhancement options and target areas and/or linked initiatives and/or projects. It will also provide an overview of the status of ecological receptors that are to be targeted by the HEP.

4.3

Habitat enhancements

4.3.1

This section will set out, for each habitat or ecological receptor, an overview of its status; habitat enhancement objectives; and the measures that are planned to work towards these objectives. It will also identify potential constraints on the achievement of objectives and how these will be managed/mitigated.

4.4

Delivery of the HEP

Coordination of enhancement activities 4.4.1

This section will set out how the delivery of enhancement measures will be coordinated and managed, where appropriate based on a similar framework as outlined above for the HMP.

Enhancement schedule 4.4.2

This section will set out an outline schedule for the delivery of biodiversity enhancements, where appropriate based on a similar framework as outlined above for the HMP.

May 2016 NuGen Reference – N0010302

Moorside Project

4-2

Biodiversity Management Strategy

Monitoring and Verification 4.4.3

This section will outline the mechanisms by which progress towards the achievement of enhancement objectives will be monitored and subsequently verified, where appropriate based a similar framework as outlined above for the HMP.

Review of HEP 4.4.4

This section will summarise the process of periodic review of the HEP.

May 2016 NuGen Reference – N0010302