Appendix D. Seabird Foraging and Migratory Baseline Review for the Draft OWE Plan HRA
To inform the HRA for the Draft OWE Plan HRA, this appendix reviews what is known about the foraging behaviour and migration routes of coastal and offshore bird colonies (overwintering and breeding populations).
D2. Seabird Foraging Behaviour
The distances over which waterbirds forage offshore has been initially reviewed to inform both the screening and assessment phases for the HRA. For this review, information was drawn upon from a range of studies including the review of seabird foraging distances that was undertaken by BTO (Roos et al 2009) as part of the PFSAHRA work ( ABPmer, 2010), and reports reviewed therein including; Dillon et al., (2009), Furness and Tasker (2000), Hamer et al., (2000, 2001, 2007), Suryan et al. (2000), Thaxter et al. (2010) and Wanless et al. (1990, 1991, 1998). The online BirdLife International (2010) seabird foraging database 21 was also reviewed along with a number of other papers including; BirdLife International (2000), Fenny & Walls (2009) and Ratcliffe et al. (2000) and the maximum foraging ranges for each species were identified. The reference section in each of the retrieved papers was also scanned to make sure that no relevant key studies were missed. Where possible the methodology used in each study was identified, as different approaches may have intrinsic problems. The results are presented as a summary table showing maximum foraging ranges for each species along with text summaries for each of the species that forage over the greatest distances offshore.
This summary review is designed to provide guidance of the sites and species that need to be considered during the screening and assessment work for this Plan-level HRA as well as for future project-level HRAs. Focus is on seabirds foraging offshore as opposed to species (especially waders) that forage in intertidal areas. In summary the factors that might affect offshore seabird foraging range distances include:
- Spatial variation in food abundance (including anthropogenic factors such as fishing vessels);
- The risk of predation/kleptoparasitism by other bird species;
- The importance of nest attending to incubate eggs and protect nest from predators; and
- Weather and climatological factors (British Trust for Ornithology (Roos et al., 2009).
The distances that are typically covered by seabirds foraging offshore varies greatly between species (see Table D1) and our research and understanding of their foraging behaviour has increased in recent years. As part of this research increasingly novel techniques and technologies are being developed to track birds and to investigate foraging behaviour in particular. Over relatively short distances and timescales transects, ship-based surveys and radio-telemetry have been used (Perrow et al., 2006; Wilson et al., 2009). To track birds over considerably greater distances and over larger time frames GPS data loggers are deployed, however they necessitate recovery of the data logger to extract information, or close approach for remote data download (Guilford et al., 2008). The greatest opportunity to follow birds over potentially huge distances and over extended time periods comes from satellite tracking, but at present this is only useful for birds of large body size such as northern gannet (Hamer et al., 2000; 2001; 2007). Radar is one of the more powerful tools available to describe the movement of birds in three-dimensional space and its use has been long-established and well described (Desholm et al., 2004). Relationships between foraging trip duration and, respectively, maximum distance from the colony and total trip distance have also been estimated for many bird species to determine foraging behaviour (Hamer et al., 2007).
Table D1. Foraging ranges of breeding seabirds (from breeding colonies) taken from a number of literature sources
Although foraging distances are relatively well understood, little is known about foraging direction. Hamer et al. (2007) produced a study into the foraging behaviour of gannets in the North Sea and found that they tended to forage repeatedly over a narrow range of bearings, despite marked annual variations in foraging ranges and trip durations (Image D1). Hamer et al. (2001) also recorded gannets foraging repeatedly over a narrow range of bearings from their breeding location at Bass Rock. This study also observed gannets switching to a separate range of bearings in a markedly different direction from the breeding colony, providing strong evidence that on subsequent foraging trips individuals remembered the directions to feeding sites (Hamer et al., 2007). However, conversely to this, birds at a much smaller site in the Celtic Sea (Great Saltee) did not show this pattern (Hamer et al., 2001). Hamer et al. (2007) concluded that these differences in the consistency of foraging locations were related mainly to difference in the spatial and temporal predictability of prey resources in the North Sea and Celtic Sea.
Image D1. Representation of one of the maps produced in Hamer et al. (2007) indicating the foraging locations of Northern Gannet from Bass Rock in 2002
The review undertaken by BTO as part of the PFSAHRA work (Roos et al., 2009 in ABPmer, 2010) identified the maximum distances seabirds foraged based on a review of studies including RSPB (2000), Furness & Tasker (2000) and Thaxter et al. (2010) along with the UK Seabirds at Sea data ( JNCC 2009). This study found that most birds typically forage within 100km of breeding site with the exception of the following species (for which the foraging distances are highlighted in brackets): Razorbill (150km); Guillemot (123km); Puffin (137km); Fulmar (245km); Gannet (540km); Manx Shearwater (330km). Following a further review of the available information and, based on advice from SNH, appendix has included relevant information from the BirdLife International (2010) seabird foraging database on maximum foraging distances for key species (see Table D1). Using the information, as set out in Table D1, the species with maximum foraging distances greater than 100km include; (maximum foraging distances are highlighted in brackets)
- Atlantic Puffin (200km);
- Black-legged Kittiwake (200km);
- Common Guillemot (200km);
- Common Scoter (200km);
- Manx Shearwater (400km);
- Northern Fulmar (664km);
- Northern Gannet (640km); and
- Razorbill (150km).
In addition to the above sources of information we note that further details about the maximum foraging distances can be obtained from the Interreg FAME project (Aedán Smith, RSPB Pers. Comm.) 22. Fieldwork for this project in 2010 recorded the following foraging ranges using high-resolution GPS tags:
- Fulmar 506km
- Kittiwake 231km
- Razorbill 213km
The distances found for Kittiwake and Razorbill are greater than those referenced above. For this review of foraging distances and the HRA screening work ABPmer, with advice from SNH and JNCC, focused on using the data in the Birdlife international foraging database to identify the maximum foraging distances. However, other studies such as this FAME project will need to be re-considered further as part of future project-level HRAs to ensure that proposed developments do not have an adverse effect on forging seabirds.
D2.1 Species Review
Those species listed-above which forage over long distances have been included in more detail in the following review. These species are reviewed particularly because the could forage within the short of medium term option areas even though the designated European/Ramsar sites for which they are a qualifying interest features lies at some distance away. In particular, because they forage over distances of greater than 100km, the designated sites for which they are feature could lie outside the 100km boundary area that was used to inform the screening of the AA. In addition, the Arctic Skua, Common Eider and Great Skua which have relatively lager foraging distances (100km) have also been reviewed (although where these are qualifying features for a designated they would be automatically screened in using the 100km boundary approach adopted). These reviews of foraging distances for individual species draw predominantly upon the information contained within the online BirdLife International (2010) seabird foraging database.
D2.1.1 Arctic Skua Stercorarius parasiticus
There is little detailed information on the foraging ranges of Arctic Skuas, but since the majority of breeding birds in the north-east Atlantic and non-breeders in other regions are kleptoparasites (a form of feeding in which one animal takes prey or other food from another), their foraging distributions are largely determined by opportunities for kleptoparasitism, most of which takes place close to host colonies (BirdLife International, 2010).
Studies by Furness (1978) and Phillips (1995) observed very few patrolling Arctic Skuas on the island of Foula, Shetland, more than 2km from the coast, and pursuit of hosts appeared to be initiated within 1km of two principal sites, both of which were located within less than 2-3km of all Skua territories on the island. Briggs et al., (1987) however reported Arctic Skuas occasionally as far as 75km off the California coast, although most were found within 15km or in estuaries, often with colonies of terns or small gulls (Stallcup, 1990).
For the purposes of this draft OWE Plan HRA, the maximum quoted foraging range of 100km has been assumed for Arctic Skua (see Table D1) as quoted by BirdLife International (2010).
D2.1.2 Atlantic Puffin
There are few studies containing direct information on the foraging range of Atlantic Puffins. An individual Puffin breeding on Isle of May, Scotland, was studied during the breeding season 1987 using a radio transmitter. Of the trips made 64% were within 2km, 7% between 2-10km and 29% more than 10km (Wanless et al., 1990). Transect surveys around the Isle of May also found that Puffins were most common close to the colony but on some occasions birds occurred at a sandbank, the Wee Bankie, 40km away.
After a crash of herring stocks near to the colony, Puffins at Røst Island, Norway were observed to travel at least 137km to fishing grounds (Anker-Nilssen and Lorentsen, 1990). Another study (Pearson, 1968) also estimated that Puffins breeding on the Farne Islands could forage a maximum distance of 137km from the colony. On the basis of average trip durations at UK colonies (various sources) and flight speeds of 82km/h one study suggested a potential range of over 200km from Great Island, Newfoundland, Canada (Bradstreet & Brown, 1985). Although this method of calculating foraging range has been criticised as being inaccurate and may be an overestimate, the conservative estimate by Bradstreet & Brown (1985) of 200km has been given as a maximum foraging range for Atlantic Puffin. Therefore the purposes of this draft OWE Plan HRA, this maximum quoted foraging range has been assumed for Puffin (see Table D1) as also quoted by BirdLife International (2010).
D2.1.3 Black-legged Kittiwake Rissa tridactyla
The foraging range of Kittiwakes has been widely studied using a range of techniques. Radio tracked Kittiwakes were found to forage a maximum of 62km in Prince William Sound, Alaska (Ostrand et al., 1998), and over 40km at Sumburgh Head, Scotland (Hamer et al., 1993). Kittiwakes have also been calculated to forage 55km from a colony at Farne Island based on mean trip duration of 158 min during chick-rearing, and a flight speed of 48km/h (Pearson, 1968). A study at Prince Leopold Island, Canada used aerial surveys of Kittiwake densities. They found that during chick-rearing Kittiwakes were most abundant within 48km of the colony, although some large concentrations were found up to twice that distance away (Nettleship & Gaston, 1978). High concentrations of Kittiwakes have also been observed 20-30km from the nearest colonies at Caithness, Scotland (Mudge & Crooke, 1986) and at 30km from a colony on the Isle of May (Wanless et al., 1998). Both Daunt et al., (2002) and Humphreys et al., (2006) recorded that the maximum foraging range for Kittiwakes on the Isle of May was 83km.
Foraging distances have shown to be dependent on prey availability. Suryan et al., (2000) found that increased foraging distance at two separate colonies at Prince William Sound, Alaska were associated with low prey abundance. In years where herring dominated diets mean distance to the farthest feeding location was 40km, whereas when Kittiwakes consumed other species foraging distance increased to 60km, with the maximum recorded foraging range being 120km (Suryan et al., 2000).
For the purposes of this draft OWE Plan HRA, the maximum quoted foraging range of 200km has been assumed for Kittiwake (see Table D1) as quoted by BirdLife International (2010).
D2.1.4 Common Eider
Two studies observed Common Eider foraging very close to shore, within 50m, in southwest Greenland (Merkel & Mosbech, 2008) and southeast Newfoundland (Goudie & Ankney, 1988). Durinck et al., (1994) and Petersen et al., (2003) studied Common Eider at Kattegat, Denmark, recording large concentrations 40km and 20km offshore respectively. Common Eider has also been observed much further offshore. Merkel et al., (2006) fitted satellite transmitters to Common Eiders and observed that wintering birds in southwest Greenland had a mean home range size of 68km. Cooch (1965) however suggested the maximum foraging range used by nesting females could be over 80km and Goudie et al., (2000) reported Common Eiders flew 50-100km to feed. Although this maximum foraging range has been observed in North America it has been taken as a precautionary estimate of maximum foraging range for this study. For the purposes of this draft OWE Plan HRA, the maximum quoted foraging range of 100km has been assumed for Common Eider (see Table D1) as also quoted by BirdLife International (2010).
D2.1.5 Common Guillemot Uria aalge
The foraging behaviour of auks, including foraging range, has been studied in depth for many years throughout the UK and North America using a variety of different methods. Numerous studies have taken place in Scotland, in particular at the Isle of May (Tasker et al., 1987, Thaxter et al., 2009; 2010, Wanless et al., 1990; 1998). The most recent of these surveys by Thaxter et al., used bird-borne compass loggers to study foraging ranges. Thaxter et al., (2009) found that of 19 Common Guillemots breeding on the Isle of May (28 trips from 11 males plus 29 trips from 8 females), the maximum range for males was 14.4 ± 6.6km and 7.9 ± 5.3km for females. During a similar study Thaxter et al., (2010) observed 61 Guillemots travel an average distance of 34.5km/trip (±29.8), with the maximum observed distance from the colony being 14.1km (±12.2).
A study from North America (Cairns et al., 1987), used data loggers in combination with recorded flight speed, to estimate that the longest foraging range for Guillemots was 123km during incubation and 80km during chick rearing. However, median foraging ranges were much smaller.
For the purposes of this draft OWEHRA Plan, the maximum quoted foraging range of 200km has been assumed for Common Guillemot (see Table D1) as quoted by BirdLife International (2010).
D2.1.6 Common Scoter
A number of studies into the foraging range of Common Scoter have taken place off the Welsh coast. At Llanfairfechan concentrations of birds were found between 1-4km offshore and at Red Wharf Bay the majority of birds were more than 3km offshore (Kaiser, 2004). In Conwy Bay birds were also recorded 3-4km offshore (Kaiser et al., 2006). However, studies over Lithuania and Estonia, using radar observations, recorded massive summer movements of Scoter with birds travelling 20-30km from the shore over the Baltic Sea (Kumari, 1979; Zalakevicius & Jacoby, 1992).
Based on an estimate by BirdLife International (2010), the maximum foraging range of Common Scoter has been given in Table D1 as 200km and this value has been used for the purposes of this draft OWE Plan HRA.
D2.1.7 Great Skua Catharacta Skua
As with the Arctic Skua, there is little detailed information on the foraging ranges of Great Skua. A number of studies (Votier et al., 2004; 2006, Wood, 1989) have found that Great Skuas feeding on seabird prey tend to have small foraging ranges confined to the coastline of their breeding colonies, and seldom move more than 2km from their nest site (Votier et al., 2004).
In contrast Skuas feeding on fish will often travel long distances to find them at sea. The study by Votier et al., (2004) used radio-transmitters to track Great Skuas at Hermaness. Those feeding on discards often flew several tens of km to fishing fleets off Muckle Flugga. Smith & Jones (2006) indirectly estimated a foraging range of 31km for Great Skua following the recovery of a bird ring from a Razorbill chick in a Skua pellet.
During the early-mid 1970s the estimated maximum foraging range of breeding Great Skua on Foula was 14km, based on the mean length of foraging trips of around 35minutes (Furness, 1978). However, probably due to a reflection of changes in diet, foraging trip durations have become far longer in more recent years. Throughout the 1994 and 1995 breeding seasons, feeding trips were taking in excess of one hour, with a median length during chick-rearing of more than 3.5 hrs, and some breeding adults could easily have been ranging much further afield, perhaps 50-100km or more (BirdLife International, 2010). Although larger than other records of foraging range, for the purposes of this draft OWE Plan HRA, the maximum quoted foraging range of 100km has been assumed for Great Skua (see Table D1) as quoted by BirdLife International (2010).
D2.1.8 Manx Shearwater Puffinus puffinus
Guilford et al., (2008) made an interesting study of foraging behaviour of Manx Shearwaters from Skomer Island, Wales using GPS tags attached to individuals. These birds were tracked flying north to the Mull of Galloway to feed, travelling a straight-line distance of more than 330km each way. Another study by Brooke (1990) estimated that Manx Shearwater could travel as far as 360km from the colony during chick rearing, based on an absence of two days, a flight speed of 45km/hr and 8hr flying in each direction (although the values chosen for the time spent flying were arbitrary). A conservative estimate of 400km, as set out in Table D1, has been given as maximum foraging range for Manx Shearwater, based on the assessment by BirdLife International (2010). This value has been used for the draft OWE Plan HRA.
D2.1.9 Northern Fulmar Fulmarus glacialis
Most of the information on Fulmar foraging ranges is based on trip durations, which given the many assumptions involved in calculating ranges from such data, should be viewed as maxima. Foraging trip durations for Fulmars are variable among sites and years.
Hamer et al., (1997) studied populations of Fulmars on St Kilda, Outer Hebrides and Foula (Shetland). They estimated that the maximum foraging trip distances would be 245km for birds on St Kilda and 122km for Fulmars on Foula (Hamer et al., 1997). A study in Scotland also trapped live one breeding adult 460km from its nest site (Dunnet & Ollason, 1982) and in north east Greenland satellite tracked radio-tagged adults foraged 40-200km during incubation and chick-rearing, with failed breeders travelling more than 300km (Falk & Møller, 1995). Other authorities have given potential maxima of foraging radii of between 140km and 750km, assuming linear flight and negligible time spent on the water. While these will be overestimates of the radii travelled (as Fulmars deviate from straight line flight and spend time on the water feeding and resting, and may make overnight visits to feed chicks, which are often not recorded), they demonstrate that Fulmars have time to travel very long distances during foraging trips and could easily exceed a 100km radius from the colony (BirdLife International, 2010). As set out in Table D1, a maximum foraging range of 664km has been given for Northern Fulmar based on BirdLife International (2010) data. This value has been used for the draft OWE Plan HRA.
D2.1.10 Northern Gannet Morus bassanus
Gannets breeding on Bass Rock, Scotland have been studied in detail using GPS transmitters (Hamer et al., 2000; 2001; 2006; 2009). Hamer et al., (2001) recorded a maximum foraging range of 540km from Gannets at Bass Rock, Wanless et al., (1998) recorded feeding at sites 33km (Wee Bankie) and 20km (Fife Ness) away whilst a more recent study (field work undertaken in July and August 2003) by Hamer et al., (2009) found the mean foraging range per trip by Gannets was 155km, with a maximum of 276km recorded.
Northern Gannets at Great Saltee, Ireland were recorded travelling a maximum of 240km (Hamer et al., 2001) and 293km (Hamer et al., 2006) to foraging grounds. At Rouzic, France a breeding colony of Gannets were found to have a mean foraging range of 100km, with a maximum of 176km (Grémillet et al., 2006). Large feeding flocks of gannets were also recorded, using ship-based transects around St Kilda, within only a few km of Boreray whilst several smaller groups were seen 40km away (at the Whale Rock Bank) (Leaper et al., 1988). A study by Tasker et al., (1985) also observed a maximum foraging range of gannets to be 150km from Noss, UK, however the majority were seen within 37km. Nelson (1978) estimated a range of 320 to 480km for breeding gannets from a colony, based on observed trip durations and assuming continuous flight at 65 to 80km/h.
A study by Lewis et al., 2001 suggests that foraging range increases significantly for Northern Gannets with increasing colony size, probably as a result of intra-specific competition causing birds to forage further away from the colony during years with higher numbers of breeding Gannets (Lewis et al., 2001). Based on an estimate by BirdLife International (2010) the maximum foraging range of Northern Gannet has been given in Table D1 as 640km. This value has been used for the draft OWE Plan HRA.
D2.1.11 Razorbill Alca torda
A study by Webb et al., (1985) at Flamborough Head found that maximum densities of Razorbill were recorded foraging at 26-28km from colonies, although large numbers were also seen from the coast within 1km from the colony. A more recent study by Thaxter et al., (2010) supports this conclusion. Using bird-borne data loggers to record foraging trips made by 14 Razorbills from the Isle of May breeding colony, they found that of the 76 foraging trips made just under half were within 10km of the coast, with the remainder of trips to areas 30-40km offshore, with the longest foraging trip being approximately 60km. Gaston and Jones (1998, cited in Thaxter et al., 2010) however, have reported Razorbills carrying prey more than 150km from the nearest breeding colony. Although higher than other estimates of foraging range this precautionary estimate by Gaston and Jones has been given as the maximum foraging range for Razorbill, as set out in Table D1. This value has been used for the draft OWE Plan HRA.
D3. Migration Behaviour and Flyways
The UK lies on some of the major migratory flyways of the east Atlantic, with large numbers of waterbirds attracted each year by the relatively mild winter climate and extensive estuarine and wetland habitats. Every year, large numbers of birds traverse the North Sea and Irish Sea during the spring and autumn migrations on their way between breeding and wintering grounds. There appear to be no fixed corridors preferred by migratory birds and instead migration usually takes the form of broad-front. There can be high intensity migration ( i.e. a few days with extremely high numbers) and flight heights can vary depending on the species and weather conditions ( DECC, 2009). Heights can range from just above the water surface to several thousand metres and as migration is costly in terms of energy expenditure, birds will generally try and fly at altitudes where effort is least (Köller et al. 2006).
The issue of potential impacts to migratory birds is key one for this Draft OWE Plan HRA and it is understood that there is a limited amount of robust data on this aspect. This is recognised within the SEA for the Draft OWE Plan (Marine Scotland, 2010) which records that there is a lack of accurate data showing migratory routes and this has also been confirmed via correspondence with the RSPB and SNH as part of consultations with HRA Project Steering Group ( PSG). It is noted however, that the Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust ( WWT) are researching migration routes of several bird species in relation to proposed UK wind farm sites. The WWT work included mapping routes of Greenland Barnacle Geese, Greenland White-fronted Geese and Whooper Swans (Griffin et al., 2010) from or along the west coast of Scotland to Iceland and Svalbard Barnacle Geese routes from South-West Scotland to Norway and Svalbard ( WWT, 2010). Geese and swans were the focus for this research as they tend to fly at less than 100m above sea level and could be at risk of collision with wind turbines. This study was commissioned by COWRIE and involved a tracking study of Whooper Swans to analyse flight heights and migration routes between their breeding grounds in Iceland and the UK in relation to offshore wind farms. The project entailed fitting satellite transmitters to forty known Whooper Swans in winter 2008/2009 at various wintering locations in mainland Britain. These included WWT sites at Caerlaverock ( SW Scotland), Welney ( SE England) Martin Mere ( NW England). Of the 40 individuals tagged, 35 were tracked to Iceland during spring migration 2009. These included 5 birds from Caerlaverock, 13 from Welney and 17 from Martin Mere. In addition 10 transmitters were fitted in August 2009 in Iceland to provide information during autumn migration of the swan's southbound tracks.
As part of this summary review, key scientific literature relating to migratory pathways has been further reviewed to provide additional information on the routes that are taken. In particular, the above study by Griffin et al. (2010) into migration routes and flight heights of Whooper Swans has been reviewed here. In addition the review by Cramp (2000) and the literature that was been compiled as part of this review was summarised to identify the locations of migrant, resident and winter distributions for a range of bird qualifying features. This review is presented in tabular for at the end of this appendix and includes maps of bird distributions that are provided within the Cramp (2000) review.
D3.1 Flight Heights
Griffin et al. (2010) concluded that on average, the flight heights for swans were lower for birds migrating over water along the British coast (9m) compared to when crossing from Britain to Iceland (32m), thus flights occurred below or within the rotor swept area and so potentially at risk of collision. Two records however may provide evidence of avoidance of offshore windfarms. At 8.9km north of Barrow (operational) and 3.8km north of Robin Rigg 23 (near operational) swans were recorded flying at altitudes of 172 metres and 160 metres respectively, where one hour previously their flight heights had been recorded at approximately 50 metres above land (Griffin et al., 2010).
D3.2 Migration Routes
Griffin et al. (2010) found that swans migrating from southeast England (Welney) generally migrated north along the east coast of Britain whereas those from northwest England and southwest Scotland (Martin Mere and Caerlaverock) followed the western coastline (see Image D2).
Image D2 Migration routes of 35 Whooper Swans tracked from the UK to Iceland from WWT Wetland Centres at Welney (red lines), Martin Mere (blue lines) and Caerlaverock (green lines)
(Griffin et al., 2010)
The swans' satellite tracks were inspected in relation to the distribution of the potential and actual footprint areas of individual windfarms in six key overlapping areas: the East Irish Sea, the Solway Firth, the North Channel/Inner Hebrides, the Greater Wash/North Sea, the Firth of Forth and the Moray Firth. A total of 48 Round 1 (R1), Round 2 (R2), Round 3 (R3) and Scottish Territorial Water ( STW) offshore sites were considered in the analysis.
Of the 19 Whooper Swans tagged at Martin Mere seven flight lines (37%) across the East Irish Sea passed across or immediately adjacent to existing or proposed R1 and R2 windfarm sites with an additional eight tracks (42%) passing within 5km of these sites. Whilst up to ten flight lines (50%) crossing the Solway Firth passed across or immediately adjacent to the existing or proposed R1 or STW windfarm sites with another two (10%) passing within 5 km of these sites. Of these birds crossing the North Channel/Inner Hebrides area no birds were likely to have flown across or adjacent to (within 5km) of STW sites. Of the 15 swans tagged at Welney only one bird stopped and flew across a proposed STW site (Neart na Gaoithe) and one bird flew within 4km of the site proposed at Westermost Rough (R2).
Of the eight birds producing reasonably detailed tracks during the return autumn migration from Iceland, five birds passed across or immediately adjacent to planned offshore windfarm sites with six birds passing within 10km of the planned sites.
Griffin et al. (2010) concluded that swans migrating along the east coast of Britain tended not to pass within or near the footprints of existing or proposed offshore windfarms, preferring to stick close to the coast or overland. However, swans migrating along the west coast more frequently flew into or close to the footprints of several offshore windfarms, preferring to fly over coastal waters. Although this tracking study is not representative of the migration pathways taken by Whooper Swans every year, it is a useful study to add to understanding and risk evaluation to birds arising from windfarms.
Information and knowledge on specific migration routes is also expanding rapidly with recent technological advances and through the application of useful tools ( e.g. Burger & Shaffer, 2008). However it is recognised that identifying distinct flyway routes is difficult both because of the nature and limitations of available information on this subject and because these movements are likely to occur across broad fronts rather than along clearly definable routes. Although little information is known about actual routes taken between breeding and non-breeding areas, a relatively large amount of information is known about the origins and destinations for many bird species, through data from the UK ringing scheme (Langston, 2010 - Wernham et al., 2002, BTO Migration Mapping Tool http://blx1.bto.org/ai-eu/). The destinations outside of the UK where tagged birds migrate to and from Scotland has been reproduced in Table D2. This table is derived from information within the BTO Migration Atlas Project report (Wernham et al., 2002) and is presented within the SEA Environmental Report (Marine Scotland, 2010). As recognised within the SEA document, this information does not specifically describe the migration routes but presents a useful collection of ringing recovery information 'for birds that fly to and from Scotland (not necessarily from other parts of the UK)'.
Further details and maps describing the origins and destinations for many bird species are also presented in Table D3 which provides general information on migrant, resident and winter distributions around the UK and the rest of Europe for a number of bird species (Cramp et al., 2000). The birds listed in this table have been included as they have been identified as qualifying features within SPA designated sites within 100km of the proposed OWE sites.
Table D2. Principal recovery locations for likely focal bird species
Principal Recovery Locations of Ringed Birds Outside of Mainland UK
Concentrated around Orkney and Shetland Isles
Concentrated around Orkney and Shetland Isles, Scandinavia, W Africa
Barnacle Goose (Nearctic)
Iceland, Greenland, Svalbard
USA, Greenland, Faroes, Continental Europe
Brent Goose (light bellied, E. Canada)
Continental Europe , Ireland, W Africa
Continental Europe, Scandinavia, Ireland, Orkney and Shetland Isles, Iceland
Unrecorded in Bird Atlas
European Storm Petrel
Ireland, Iceland, Faroe Islands, Scandinavia, Portugal, S Africa
Ireland, Faroe Islands, Continental Europe, Scandinavia
Great Northern Diver
Unrecorded in Bird Atlas
Greenland White fronted Goose
Iceland, Greenland, Orkney
Ireland, Orkney, Shetland Isles
Ireland, Continental Europe
Ireland, Iceland, Continental Europe, Orkney, Shetland Isles,
northern Scandinavia, NW Africa
Continental Europe, Scandinavia, Ireland, Orkney and Shetland Isles
Ireland, Western Isles, Orkney
(Marine Scotland, 2010)
Table D3. Migrant, resident and winter distributions, as well as general flight heights, for a number of bird species (Cramp et al., 2000 and references therein)
Migrate between Iceland and Britain (Orkney to Hampshire) (Ogilvie 1963; Hale 1973; Folkstad 1975; Minton 1975; Boere 1976; Holden & Cleeves, 2002).
Some birds from Scotland and northern England winter in Ireland, but southward movement within Britain more usual, and others continue south to continental coasts (Netherlands to Portugal, especially western France).
Flies freely in lower airspace.
Great Crested Grebe
As few ringed, little known of migration routes, though apparently broad-front overland as well as coastal. Some autumn and winter immigration into British waters from Denmark and Netherlands.
Often active aerially on moonlight nights, visiting neighbouring waters in search of mate or territory. Uses airspace somewhat sparingly, although strong flier once airborne, not often at much height.
Migrate between Iceland and Britain (Pennycuick et al., 1996; Holden & Cleeves, 2002).
Once thought to fly at high altitudes between Iceland and the UK; more recent evidence shows that the birds also migrate at just above sea level, and land on the sea in adverse weather or poor visibility (Pennycuick et al., 1996).
East Greenland population migrates via Iceland to winter in west Scotland and Ireland (Salomonsen 1967; Holden & Cleeves, 2002). The Svalbard population moves down the west coast of Norway and across the North Sea, crossing overland in north England and South Scotland to winter in Solway Firth (Holden & Cleeves, 2002).
Migrates between Iceland and Scotland and Ireland (Mitchell 1996; Hearn 2000; Swann and Brockway 2002; Swann 2000; Mitchell and Sigfússon 1999; Cranswick et al., 1997; Holden & Cleeves, 2002)
Greenland White-fronted Goose
Geese collared in Scotland, Iceland, and Greenland as part of continuing international marking programme.
Migrates between Iceland and Britain (Fisher 1951, Thom 1983, Newton et al., 1990, Dix 1991, 1992; Fox et al., 1992; Holden & Cleeves, 2002)
Light-bellied Brent Goose
Migrates between Spitsbergen and Franz Josef Island to Britain and Denmark (Løvenskiold 1964)
Although strong flier, takes wing with some reluctance, and flies no higher than essential.
Winters North Sea and Atlantic coasts of Europe. Major passages in spring and autumn are through Baltic and North Seas and thence along western seaboard.
Exceptional flight capability used at relatively low height except on migration.
Migrates between Iceland and Britain
Fenno-Scandia and USSR east populations migrate to winter quarters in west and south-west Europe, especially Britain and Ireland.
Usually fly at no great height.
Migrates between Iceland to Britain and Ireland (Bruun 1971; Holden & Cleeves, 2002). Breeding populations of north Russia east to north-west Siberia (Omsk), Fenno-Scandia, and Baltic migrate south-west to winter Netherlands and British Isles.
Use of airspace even freer than for other Anas and often at considerable heights.
Migration occurs from Canada and Greenland to western Europe, including Britain and southern north sea (Andreasson and Råd 1977; Netterstrøm 1970; Holden & Cleeves, 2002)
Winter range of Spitsbergen birds unknown.
Migrates between Iceland and Norway to Britain (Atkinson et al., 1981; Holden & Cleeves, 2002)
Not known to fly regularly in upper airspace.
Migration occurs between Northern Europe, Greenland and Canada to Britain and Ireland (Holden & Cleeves, 2002; Morrison 1975; Clapham 1979; Wilson 1981; Branson et al., 1978)
Also a strong flier, most often within lowest airspace.
Breeding populations in Iceland, Norway and Scotland winter around Scotland and Atlantic coast of Ireland.
Flies readily, visiting neighbouring waters but observations of high flight lacking
Migration routes not well known. Migration occurs between Spitsbergen, Lapland and USSR to Atlantic and North Sea coasts around Britain and Ireland. 2 chicks from Scotland (Shetland) also found French coast (Finistère, Vendée). Migrants from Europe and Iceland winter around British and Irish coasts (Holden & Cleeves, 2002)
Entirely aquatic and aerial, normally on land only for nesting. Inadequacy of food on small breeding pools requires frequent flighting to better fishing lakes or sea, involving dual aquatic habitat and much use of airspace up to at least 1000 m. Mobility aided by ability to rise readily from small water surfaces, and exceptionally from land.
Partially migratory. Small movement within British and Irish breeders, rarely over 200km (Milne 1965a). Recoveries of Dutch birds in Fife. British and Irish birds do not generally move far from their breeding grounds (Holden & Cleeves, 2002).
Although flying freely, normally keeps to lowest few metres of airspace, mostly over water.
Breeders and immatures leave nesting grounds in Britain, Ireland, Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark, Scandinavia, north Germany, north Poland, and Baltic States, for annual moult in German Waddenzee area (Goethe 1961a). Birds from Germany and farther east arrive in Britain in winter (Holden & Cleeves, 2002).
Flies strongly, rising on passage to 1000 m or more above ground.
British and Irish populations non-migratory but show extensive dispersal with small proportion crossing English Channel; mainly coastwise, but also inland usually within 60 km of coast (Mills 1965). Recoveries in France and Iberia (mainly Brittany to north Portugal) continuance of southward dispersal in Britain and Ireland, and originate mainly from Irish Sea and Galloway. North Sea effective barrier to eastward movement from Britain, recoveries Norway to north France being quite exceptional.
Circles or soars up to considerable heights and flies overland, often for long distances, occasionally or regularly.
Many Icelandic birds winter Britain and Ireland. Those from north-west Russia, Fenno-Scandia, Baltic states, north Poland, north Germany, and Denmark winter from Denmark to north France and in Britain, with slight onward passage as far as north Spain. Many birds that breed in Iceland and northern Europe spend the winter in Britain and Ireland (Holden & Cleeves, 2002).
Can rise steeply up and away even in awkwardly confined spaces; much given to circling around, usually at heights below c. 500 m.
In Iceland, ringing of young showed migration chiefly to Ireland, Britain, and Netherlands (Boyd 1959), with smaller numbers reaching north France, Denmark, and north Germany. Important winter concentrations in Firth of Forth (Scotland).
Take-off somewhat laboured, and use of airspace relatively infrequent.
No evidence of Icelandic birds reaching continental Europe; yet ones ringed west Greenland moved south-east to Iceland and Denmark, and to Atlantic seaboard of North America, while others wintered in Greenland seas.
Origins of British winterers unknown.
Makes maximum use of airspace, readily flying between coast and inland sites at up to 200-1200 m over land, although usually low over water.
Black (Common) Scoter
Icelandic breeders winter around Ireland, Britain, and Atlantic coasts France, Spain, and Portugal
Movement by small British and Irish population largely unknown, but breeding lakes deserted.
Breeders from Arctic USSR, Sweden and Finland migrate WSW to winter on both sides of North Sea (west coasts of Britain).
Uses airspace often in long formations, and normally at low altitude, but flies fairly high overland; generally flies only when need pressing.
Small numbers winter around Britain (mainly east coast)
Has difficulty in becoming airborne and commonly flies low, especially over water.
Breeding populations of Fenno-Scandia, north Germany, Poland, Baltic States and north-west Russia mostly winter Baltic States, Denmark, Netherlands, Britain and Ireland.
Airspace over water and land freely used at wide range of altitudes.
Breeding population of Iceland partially migratory; some resident, others migrate to Britain and Ireland. Movements of British breeders not fully known, but at least disperse from inland breeding waters.
Migrants from Finland, Poland and north-west USSR winter in Britain.
Spends much time in aerial excursions, usually at fairly low altitude.
Large resident population in Ireland, with local movements to coast, though many also winter inland; movements unconfirmed in absence of ringing. Some British birds winter near breeding site, though most move south-west. Thus birds from Scotland and northern England move to British west coast and Ireland; those from southern England to south-west England, some to France and Iberia (Bainbridge and Minton 1978). Scandinavian population moves south-west: Norwegian birds to northern Britain, Ireland, and western France; main wintering area for Swedish birds is Britain and Ireland, though also some on Continental coasts from Denmark to western France (Nørrevang 1959). Some USSR, German and Dutch populations also reach Britain and Ireland (Holden & Cleeves, 2002).
Except on migration flies mainly in lower airspace.
Birds reared Iceland, Faeroes, and northern Britain moult and winter mainly around Irish Sea and on other western coasts of Britain and Ireland; few reach North Sea coast (Dare 1970; Dare and Mercer 1974b; Anderson and Minton 1978). Some British birds, especially in southern England, remain near breeding areas, but the general trend for these to move south to moult and winter takes some to France and Iberia and exceptionally to Morocco (Buxton 1957; Andrew 1959; Dare 1970; Pienkowski 1972).
Migration also noted frequently across southern Scotland, between Firth of Forth and Solway Firth ( e.g. Andrew 1959), and west of south from north-east England (Evans 1966); by no means certain, however, that Continental immigrants predominate in such movements.
3 recoveries of birds moving between eastern England (all autumn dates) and USSR (Murmansk, Arkhangel'sk), but clearly these atypical.
Considerable movement may occur within a linked estuarine complex, such as Wash-Humber system (England), though apparently little movement between sites within Firth of Forth (Scotland) ( e.g. Minton 1975; M W Pienkowski).
Although a strong flier, shows marked reluctance to venture out of sight of land, and usually travels within lower airspace.
Largely migratory but some British birds resident.
North-western populations of Canada and Greenland, majority pass through Britain and Ireland
European populations - Birds from coasts of Scandinavia and Baltic and from East and West Germany south-westwards move widely to wintering areas extending from Britain and Ireland to West Africa.
European Golden Plover
Partially migratory in Britain and Ireland; wholly migratory elsewhere. 23 recoveries of birds ringed Britain as chicks, 21 recovered within Britain, so only minority emigrate. British internal recoveries showed mean movement of 115 km (0-500).
Icelandic population (115 ringing recoveries) wholly migratory, with western route to and through Ireland, western Britain, western France, and Iberia.
Norway to Western Siberian birds, many found in Britain between November to April
Use of airspace (especially above the lowest) normally confined to migration, advertising flights over territory, etc. Wading also infrequent.
Those occurring in west Palearctic come from breeding population of northern USSR. In Britain, arrives July onward through autumn and winter (Mason 1969, Mason 1972; Branson and Minton 1976).
Wariness leads to frequent use of outstanding powers of flight, mostly in low airspace but migrating flocks fly high in massed formations (Bent 1929).
Britain and Ireland constitute northernmost regular wintering areas. In contrast to continental birds, British breeders mainly make short summer dispersals (within 100 km), though some indication of adult movement west to south-west into Ireland.
Birds from Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Switzerland, and southern West Germany move to Britain.
British Isles especially important as winter quarters for Scandinavian birds; south-westerly movements by those from south and east Baltic countries largely bypass Britain.
In flight, lower airspace usually preferred except on movements, when altitudes of 250-400 m are common and up to 2000 m or more recorded (Meinertzhagen 1920).
Holarctic breeding distribution, wintering on most ice-free coasts of northern hemisphere
Iceland to Britain and western France (Rosenberg et al., 1970; Meltofte 1975; Pienkowski and Dick 1975; Green 1978; Hardy and Minton 1980).
Baltic region to Britain (Minton 1966, Minton 1975; Pienkowski and Dick 1975).
Flies much in lowest airspace, infrequently higher.
Some birds from Britain and Ireland disperse to Netherlands, and vice versa (Møller 1981a). Recoveries of British and Irish birds extend from France to Angola, with 30% of recoveries in Sénégal (Langham 1971; A P Møller).
In some circumstances, as in display, rises into upper airspace, and normally flies somewhat higher over water than most seabirds.
With Holarctic breeding range, winter distribution very large: both sides of Americas and Africa, western and southern Europe, and across southern Asia to Micronesia and Australia (rare in New Zealand).
Although readily taking wing, tends to stay in lowest airspace and not to indulge much in unnecessary flights.
Icelandic population winter in large numbers in Ireland and Britain and in western France (Williamson and Ruttledge 1957; Vernon 1963; Fournier and D'Elbée 1974; Prater 1975a).
Although primarily a ground and wading species (up to belly-depth), flies readily at all seasons, rising freely above lower airspace.
Migratory and partially migratory. No evidence yet that any Icelandic breeders emigrate. Similarly, British breeders almost entirely resident, moving short distances (mainly within 150 km) from breeding waters to lakes and sheltered estuaries
All but a few Icelandic breeders migrate to Britain (chiefly Scotland) and Ireland. Most or all breeders from north Russia, Baltic states, Fenno-Scandia, north Poland, north Germany, and Denmark fly south-west in autumn to North Sea wintering grounds, chiefly Netherlands and Britain. Winter distribution between Netherlands, England, Wales, and Ireland greatly dependent on weather.
Breeders of Britain largely resident, moving only in severe weather.
Makes full use of flight, mainly at medium and low heights, for reconnoitring secure places and for daily movements between feeding and resting areas.
Icelandic breeders winter Ireland and Britain. Breeders from Scotland move to Ireland (chiefly) and England.
Those breeding north Germany, Poland, south Sweden, and west-central Russia winter North Sea, chiefly Netherlands and Britain, with some as far as Mediterranean.
Mobile on ground as well as swimming and flying. Takes off less often in steep ascent from confined spaces than A. platyrhynchos or Teal A. crecca, but equally prone to make circling reconnaissance flights at low or medium heights, and frequent local movements between resting, foraging, and breeding haunts.
Scottish population - passage occurs through Britain and Ireland
Those to and from Fenno-Scandia and Denmark show movement through Poland, West Germany, eastern Britain, Low Countries, France, Italy, Iberia, and Morocco.
Flight normally in lower airspace except during display and migration when upper airspace up to some hundreds of metres used.
European winter range extends from southern Iceland, Faeroes, southern Norway, western Baltic, Balkans, and southern Russia southwards; common winter visitor in Iberia and around Mediterranean.
Icelandic population recovered in Scotland and Ireland
Fenno-Scandian and Baltic Populations - many migrate to western seaboard countries (North Sea and British Isles to north-west Africa)
Norwegian birds winter mainly around North Sea, with those from western Norway especially in Britain.
Migratory Behaviour - Radar-tracked terns (both Arctic and Common) crossing south Sweden in late July took off in small flocks during evening, ascended at rates of c. 1.2 m/s to heights of 1000-3000 m flying 12-15 m/s (40-55 km/h) in level flight, suggesting that terns start migratory flights in evening and fly at high altitudes at night (Alerstam 1985).
In north Germany, >50% of visible terns migrate <20m or >80% <100 m, and only c. 10% higher than 250 m, single birds >500m (3985 migrating terns observed).
North and east European populations migrate westwards to Great Britain (Norman 2002).
Main wintering areas of British and Irish birds are Ghana and Senegal.
Common Gull (Mew)
Many of the Common Gulls that winter in Britain are birds that nested in Scandinavia (Holden & Cleeves, 2002).
Mostly migratory. Breeders of Iceland all migrate, probably to Ireland or Britain. Most British breeders move southwards to south France, south Spain, north and central Italy, a few to north Africa. Breeders from south Fenno-Scandia and USSR east migrate west and south-west to western seaboard, chiefly Netherlands, Britain, and Ireland.
Circles like other Anas and usually flies below 100 m; shares generic capacity for quick and ready movement between sites.
Bewick's (Tundra) Swan
Wintering sites in Denmark, northwest Germany (few), Netherlands, Britain, and Ireland
Bewick's swan leave Siberia and migrate to Britain, the Netherlands or Germany (Holden & Cleeves, 2002).
Mainly migratory, but some resident or partially migratory.
Many of the birds that winter in Britain migrate here from northern and eastern Europe and central Russia (Holden & Cleeves, 2002).
Freely uses excellent powers of flight, and will rise on occasion to considerable altitudes.
Predominantly migratory though largely resident in a few areas. Some Icelandic breeders winter on coast and other ice-free waters there, but most move to Ireland (chiefly) and Britain. Breeders of northern Britain mainly move south-west to Ireland, though Scottish juveniles recovered exceptionally north to Norway and south to Portugal; those of south Britain believed largely resident.
Vigorous flier making full use of surrounding airspace over fairly wide radius and to considerable heights.
Lesser Black-back Gull
Total winter range now extends from Britain, Mediterranean, Black and Caspian Seas (uncommon), Turkmeniya, and Persian Gulf to Arabian Sea and West and East Africa (sparingly further south).
Main wintering region for British birds comprises Portugal, south-west Spain, and north-west Africa.
Flies readily and strongly, at low and medium altitudes, and less frequently in upper airspace.
Taiga Bean Goose
In west Europe, winters in Britain (few), Denmark, south Sweden, East and West Germany, Netherlands, Belgium, France and Spain.
Birds from Scandinavia migrate to Britain (Holden & Cleeves, 2002).
As forest breeder, can rise steeply from confined spaces, but frequency and patterns of aerial activity otherwise resemble other geese.
ABPmer, 2010. Screening and Scoping Review for the Pentland Firth Strategic Area ( PFSA) Leasing Round Habitats Regulations Assessment. Appendix E: Informing Appropriate Assessment of the Pentland Firth Strategic Area Leasing Round. A report by BTO.
Anker-Nilssen, T. and Lorentsen, S.-H. (1990) Distribution of Puffins Fratercula arctica feeding off Røst, northern Norway, during the breeding season, in relation to chick growth, prey and oceanographical parameters. Polar Res. 8:67-76.
Barrett, J. and Barrett, C.R. (1985) Divers in the Moray Firth, Scotland. Scottish Birds 13:149-154.
Benn, S., Webb, A., Burton, C.A., Tasker, M.L., Murray, S. and Tharme, A. (1987) Studies of seabirds at North Rona and Sula Sgeir, June 1986. Nature Conservancy Council, CSD Report No. 736.
BirdLife International (2000). The Development of Boundary Selection Criteria for the Extension of Breeding Seabird Special Protection Areas into the Marine Environment. OSPAR Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic. Meeting of the Biodiversity Committee ( BDC) Vlissingen (Flushing): 20 - 24 November 2000.
BirdLife International (2010). BirdLife Seabird Wikispace. Available online: http://seabird.wikispaces.com/ Accessed 19/11/10.
Bradstreet, M.S.W. and Brown, R.G.B. (1985) Feeding ecology of the Atlantic Alcidae. Pp. 263-318 in The Atlantic Alcidae: the evolution, distribution and biology of the auks inhabiting the Atlantic Ocean and adjacent water areas (D. N. Nettleship and T. R. Birkhead, eds.). Academic Press, London, U.K.
Breakwell, K.J. Denny, M.J., Evans, S.M., Noble-Rollin, D.C. and Redfern, C.P.F. (1996) Foraging distributions of terns and Puffins in coastal waters off Coquet Island (Northumberland). Transactions of the Natural History Society of Northumbria 57:13-20.
Briggs, K.T., Tyler, W.B., Lewis, D.B. and Carlson, D.R. (1987) Bird communities at sea off California: 1975-1983. Stud. Avian Biol. 11:1-74.
Brooke, M. (1990) The Manx Shearwater. T & AD Poyser, London.
Burger, A. E. & Shaffer, S. A. 2008. Application of tracking and data-logging technology in research and conservation of seabirds. The Auk 125: 253-264.
Cairns D.K., Bredin K.A. and Montevecchi W.A. (1987). Activity budgets and foraging ranges of breeding Common Murres. The Auk 102: 218-224
Cooch, F.G. (1965) The breeding biology and management of the Northern Eider (Somateria mollissima borealis) in the Cape Dorset Area, North-west Territories. Canadian Wildlife Service Wildlife Management Bulletin. Series 2, Number 10.
Cramp S (ed.) (2000) Birds Of The Western Palearctic Edited by Stanley Cramp 1832 pages, col plates, illus, figs, maps.  BWPi DVD Oxford University Press
Daunt, F., Benvenuti, S., Harris, M.P., Dall'Antonia, L., Elston, D.A. and Wanless, S. (2002) Foraging strategies of the Black-legged Kittiwake Rissa tridactyla at a North Sea colony: evidence for a maximum foraging range. Mar. Ecol. Progr. Ser. 245:239-247.
Davis, R.A. (1972) A comparative study of the use of habitat by Arctic and Red-throated loons. Phd Thesis. Univ. of Western Ontario, London.
DECC, 2009. UK Offshore Energy Strategic Environmental Assessment. Future Leasing for Offshore Wind Farms and Licensing for Offshore Oil & Gas and Gas Storage. Environmental Report.
Desholm, M., Fox, A.D. and Beasley, P.D. 2004. Best practice guidance for the use of remote techniques for observing bird behaviour in relation to offshore wind farms. COWRIE - REMOTE-05-2004, 94 pp.
Drewitt AL & Langston RHW (2006). Assessing the impacts of wind farms on birds. Ibis 148, 29-42
Dunnet, G.M. and Ollason, J.C. (1982) The feeding dispersal of Fulmars Fulmarus glacialis in the breeding season. Ibis 124:359-361.
Durinck, J., Skov, H., Jensen, F.P. and Pihl, S. (1994) Important Marine Areas for Wintering Birds in the Baltic Sea. Ornis Consult report to the European Commission. 110 pp.
Elkins, N. and Williams, M.R. (1974) Shag movements in northeast Scotland. Bird Study 21:149-151.
Everaert J, Devos K & Kuijken E (2001). Windturbines en vogels in Vlaaneren: Voorlopige
Onderzoeksresultaten En Buitenlandse Bevindingen [Wind Turbines and Birds in Flanders (Belgium): Preliminary Study Results in a European Context]. Instituut Voor Natuurbehoud. Report R.2002.03. Brussels B.76pp. Brussels, Belgium: Institut voor Natuurbehoud.
Falk, K. and Møller, S. (1995) Satellite tracking of high-arctic Northern Fulmars. Polar Biol. 15:495-502.
Fenny, M. and Walls, R. 2009. UK Offshore Energy Strategic Environmental Assessment ( SEA) Environmental Report Briefing Note. Prepared for SeaEnergy Renewables.
Fox, A.D. (1981) Red-throated Diver Gavia stellata pp.158-160 in: Fox, A.D. and Stroud, D.A. (eds) Report of the 1979 Expedition to Eqalungmiut Nunaat, west Greenland. Greenland White-fronted Goose Study, Aberystwyth
Furness, R.W. (1978) Kleptoparasitism by Great Skuas (Catharacta Skua Brunn.) and Arctic Skuas (Stercorarius parasiticus L.) at a Shetland seabird colony. Animal Behaviour 26:1167-1177.
Furness, R.W. & Tasker, M.L. 2000. Seabird-fishery interactions: quantifying the sensitivity of seabirds to reductions in sandeel abundance, and identification of key areas for sensitive seabirds in the North Sea. Marine Ecology Progress Series 202: 253-264.
Gaston, A.J., & Jones, I. (1998). The auks. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Goudie, R.I. and Ankney, C.D. (1988) Patterns of habitat use by sea ducks wintering in southeastern Newfoundland. Ornis Scandinavica 19:249-256.
Goudie, R.I., Robertson, G.J. and Reed, A. (2000) Common Eider (Somateria mollissima), The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/546 doi:10.2173/bna.546
Grémillet, D., Pichegru, L., Siorat, F., and Georges, J. (2006). Conservation implications of the apparent mismatch between population dynamics and foraging effort in French Northern Gannets from the English Channel. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 319: 15-25.
Griffin, L. 2010. Migration Routes of Birds in Relation to Current and Proposed UK Wind Farm Sites [online] Available at: http://www.microwavetelemetry.com/newsletters/spring09page5.pdf , accessed on 29/11/2010.
Griffin, L., Rees, E. & Hughes, B. 2010. The Migration of Whooper Swans in Relation to Offshore Wind Farms. WWT Final Report to COWRIE Ltd, WWT, Slimbridge. 69 pp.
Guilford, T.C., Meade, J., Freeman, R., Birdo, D., Evans, T., Bonadonna, F., Boyle, D., Roberts, S. and Perrins, C.M. (2008). GPS Tracking of the foraging movements of Manx Shearwaters Puffinus puffinus breeding on Skomer Island, Wales. Ibis 150(3):462-473.
Hamer, K.C., Monaghan, P., Uttley, J.D., Walton, P. and Burns, M.D. (1993) The influence of food supply on the breeding ecology of Kittiwakes Rissa tridactyla in Shetland. Ibis 135:255-263.
Hamer, K.C., Phillips, R.A., Wanless S., Harris M.P. and Wood, A.G. (2000). Foraging ranges, diets and feeding locations of Gannets Morus bassanus in the North Sea: evidence from radio tracking. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 200:257-264.
Hamer, K.C., Phillips, R.A., Hill, J.K., Wanless, S. and Wood, A.G. (2001). Contrasting foraging strategies of gannets Morus bassanus at two North Atlantic colonies: foraging trip duration and foraging area fidelity. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 224:283-290.
Hamer, K.C., Lewis, S., Wanless, S., Phillips, R.A., Sherratt, T.N., Humphreys, E.M., Hennicke, J., and Garthe, S. (2006). Use of gannets to monitor prey availability in the northeast Atlantic ocean: colony size, diet and foraging behavior. Pp. 236-248 in: Boyd, I.L., Wanless, S. and Camphuysen, C.J. (Eds). Top Predators in Marine Systems. Cambridge University Press.
Hamer, K. C., Humphreys, E. M., Garthe, S., Hennicke, J., Peters, G., Grémillet, D., Phillips, R. A., Harris, M. P., & Wanless, S. (2007). Annual variation in diets, feeding locations and foraging behaviour of gannets in the North Sea: flexibility, consistency and constraint. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 338: 295-305.
Hamer, K.C., Humphreys, E.M., Magalhães, M.C., Garthe, S., Hennicke, J., Peters, G., Grémillet, D., Skov, H, and Wanless, S. (2009). Fine-scale foraging behaviour of a medium-ranging marine predator. Journal of Animal Ecology. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2009.01549.x
Holden, P. and Cleeves, T., 2002. RSPB Handbook of British Birds.Publishers Ltd., London.
Humphreys, E.M., Wanless, S. and Bryant, D.M. (2006) Stage-dependent foraging in breeding Black-legged Kittiwakes Rissa tridactyla: distinguishing behavioural responses to intrinsic and extrinsic factors. J. Avian Biol. 37:436-446.
Kaiser, M.J. (2004) Predicting the displacement of common scoter Melanitta nigra from benthic feeding areas due to offshore wind farms. Centre for Applied Marine Sciences, School of Ocean Sciences, University of Wales, Bangor. Interim Report 2004 No 4.
Kaiser, M.J., Galanidi, M., Showler, D.A., Elliott, A.J., Caldow, R.W.G., Rees, E.I.S., Stillman, R.A. and Sutherland, W.J. (2006) Distribution and behaviour of Common Scoter Melanitta nigra relative to prey resources and environmental parameters. Ibis 148:110-128.
Köller J, Köppel J & Wolfgang P Eds (2006). Offshore wind energy research on environmental
impacts. Springer publications.
Kumari, E. (1979) Moult and moult migration of waterfowl in Estonia. Wildfowl 30:90-98.
Langston, R. 2010. Offshore wind farms and birds: Round 3 zones, extensions to Round 1 & Round 2 sites & Scottish Territorial Waters. RSPB Research Report No. 39
Leaper, G.M., Webb, A., Benn, S., Prendergast, H.D.V., Tasker, M.L., and Schofield, R. (1988) Seabird studies around St Kilda, June 1987. Nature Conservancy Council, CSD Report No. 804.
Lewis, S., Sherratt, T.N., Hamer, K.C. and Wanless, S. (2001) Evidence of intraspecific competition for food in a pelagic seabird. Nature 412:816-819.
Marine Scotland, 2010. Strategic Environmental Assessment ( SEA) of Draft Plan for Offshore Wind Energy in Scottish Territorial Waters: Volume 1: Environmental Report
Merkel, F.R. and Mosbech, A. (2008). Diurnal and nocturnal feeding strategies in Common Eiders. Waterbirds 31(4):580-586.
Merkel, F.R., Mosbech, A., Sonne, C., Flagstad, A., Falk, K. and Jamieson S.E. (2006) Local movements, home ranges and body condition of Common Eiders Somateria mollissima wintering in Southwest Greenland. Ardea 94:639-650.
Merrie, T.D.H. (1978). Relationship between spatial distribution of breeding divers and the availability of fishing waters. Bird Study 25:119-122.
Mudge, G.P. and Crooke, C.H. (1986) Seasonal changes in the numbers and distribution of seabirds in the Moray Firth, northeast Scotland. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh B 91:81-104.
Nelson, J.B. (1978) The gannet. T & AD Poyser, Berkhamsted, Herts.
Nettleship, D.N. and Gaston, A.J. (1978) Patterns of pelagic distribution of seabirds in western Lancaster Sound and Barrow Strait, Northwest Territories, in August and September 1976. Canadian Wildlife Service Occasional Papers No. 39.
Ostrand, W.D., Drew, G.S., Suryan, R.M. and McDonald, L.L. (1998) Evaluation of radio-tracking and strip transect methods for determining foraging ranges of Black-legged Kittiwakes. Condor 100:709-718.
Pearson, T.H. (1968) The feeding ecology of sea-bird species breeding on the Farne Islands, Northumberland. Journal of Animal Ecology 37:521-552.
Perrow M. R. Skeate E. R., Lines P., Brown D. and Tomlinson M. L. 2006. Radio telemetry as a tool for assessing impacts of windfarms: the case of Little Terns Sterna albifrons at Scroby Sands, Norfolk, UK. Ibis 148:57-75.
Petersen I.K., Fox A.D. and Clausager I. (2003) Distribution and numbers of birds in Kattegat in relation to the proposed offshore wind farm south of Læsø -Ornithological impact assessment. Department of Wildlife Ecology and Biodiversity. National Environmental Research Institute, Ministry of Environment, Denmark.
Pettersson J (2005). The impact of offshore wind farms on bird life in southern Kalmar Sound, Sweden. A final report based on studies 1999-2003. Report to the Swedish Energy Agency. ISBN 91- 631-6878-2. 124pp.
Phillips, R.A. (1995) Population ecology of Arctic Skuas Stercorarius parasiticus on Foula. PhD thesis, University of Glasgow.
Ratcliffe, N., Phillips, R. A., & Gubbay, S. 2000. Foraging ranges of UK seabirds from their breeding colonies and its implication for creating marine extensions to colony SPAs. Unpublished Report to BirdLife International, RSPB, Sandy.
Reimchen, T.E. and Douglas, S. (1984) Feeding schedules and daily food consumption in Red-throated Loons over the prefledging period. Auk 101:593-599.
Roos S, Humphreys L., Wernham C and Burton N. (2009) Informing Appropriate Assessment Of The Pentland Firth Strategic Area Leasing Round Ornithology Scoping Report. BTO report presented within the Pentland Firth Strategic Area Appropriate Assessment Information Report for The Crown Estate by ABPmer 2010
Smith, C. and Jones, T. (2005). Breeding ecology and diet of Great and Arctic Skuas on Handa Island 2005. Unpublished report to Scottish Wildlife Trust, Scottish Natural Heritage, The Seabird Group, Joint Nature Conservation Committee.
Stallcup, R. (1990) Ocean birds of the nearshore Pacific. Point Reyes Bird Observatory, Stinson Beach, CA.
Stienen E.W.M. (2006) Living with gulls. Trading off food and predation in the Sandwich Tern Sterna sandvicensis. Alterra scientific contributions 15, Alterra Wageningen. Ph.D. Thesis, Groningen University, Groningen.
Suryan, R.M., Irons, D.B. and Benson, J. (2000) Prey switching and variable foraging strategies of Black-legged Kittiwakes and the effect on reproductive success. The Condor 102:374-384.
Tasker, M.L., Jones, P.H., Blake, B.F. and Dixon, T.J. (1985) The marine distribution of the gannet Sula bassana in the North Sea. Bird Study 32:82-90.
Tasker, M.L., Webb, A., Hall, A.J., Pienkowski, M.W. and Langslow, D.R. (1987) Seabirds in the North Sea. NCC, Peterborough.
Thaxter C.B., Daunt F., Hamer K.C., Watanuki Y., Harris M.P., Grémillet D., Peters G., Wanless S. (2009). Sex-specific food provisioning in a monomorphic seabird, the Common Guillemot Uria aalge: nest defence, foraging efficiency or parental effort? Journal of Avian biology 40:75-84
Thaxter, C.B., Wanless, S., Daunt, F., Harris, M.P., Benvenuti, S., Watanuki, Y., Grémillet, D., Hamer, K.C. (2010). Influence of wing loading on trade off between pursuit-diving and flight in Common Guillemots and razorbills. J.Exp. Biol. 213: 1018-1025
Velando, A. (1997) Ecología y comportamiento del cormorán moñudo Phalacocorax aristotelisen las Islas Cíes y Ons. PhD thesis, Universidade de Vigo, Vigo
Votier S.C, Bearhop S., Ratcliffe, N., Furness, R.W. (2004) Reproductive consequences for Great Skuas specializing as seabird predators. Condor 106:275-287.
Votier, S.C., Crane, J.E., Bearhop, S., de Leo, A., McSorley, C.A., Minguez, E., Mitchell, I.P., Parsons, M., Phillips, R.A., and Furness, R.W. (2006). Nocturnal foraging by Great Skuas Stercorarius Skua: implications for conservation of storm-petrel populations. J Ornithol. 147:405-413.
Wanless, S., Harris, M.P. and Greenstreet, S.R. (1998) Summer sandeel consumption by seabirds breeding in the Firth of Forth, southeast Scotland. ICES J. Marine Science 55:1141-1151.
Wanless, S., Harris, M.P. and Morris, J.A. (1990) A comparison of feeding areas used by individual common murres (Uria aalge), razorbills (Alca torda) and an Atlantic puffin (Fratercula arctica) during the breeding season. Colonial Waterbirds 13:16-24.
Wanless, S., Harris M.P., and Morris J.A. (1991). Foraging range and feeding locations of shags Phalacrocorax aristotelis during chick rearing. Ibis 133:30-36.
Wanless, S., Harris, M.P., Greenstreet, S.P.R. and Rindorf, A. (2000) Chapter 5: Avian Predators. Pp 5.1-5.93 In: Harwood, J. (Ed.) Final report to EU, 'The effect of large-scale industrial fisheries on non-target species'.
Wanless, S., Daunt, F., Camphuysen, C.J., Humphreys, E., Scott, B. and Wanless, S. (2005) Setting the scene: seabird foraging behaviour, diet and breeding success. Pp 88-134 In: Camphuysen, C.J. (Ed.) Final report to EU, 'Interactions between the Marine environment, Predators, and prey: implications for Sustainable Sandeel fisheries ( IMPRESS)'
Webb, A., Tasker, M.L. and Greenstreet, S.P.R. (1985) The distribution of guillemots (Uria aalge), razorbills (Alca torda) and Puffins (Fratercula arctica) at sea around Flamborough Head, June 1984. Nature Conservancy Council, CSD Report No. 590.
Wernham, C. V., Toms, M. P., Marchant, J. H., Clark, J. A., Siriwardena, G. M., & Baillie, S. R. (eds). 2002. The Migration Atlas: movements of the birds of Britain and Ireland. T & A D Poyser, London.
Wildfowl and Wetland Trust ( WWT), 2010. Svalbard Barnacle Goose Tracking Map 2009 [online] Available at: http://www.wwt.org.uk/research/tracking/maps.asp, accessed on 28/4/2010.
Wilson, L. J., McSorley, C. A., Gray, C. M., Dean, B. J., Dunn, T. E., Webb, A., & Reid, J. B. 2009. Radiotelemetry as a tool to define protected areas for seabirds in the marine environment. Biol. Cons. 142: 1808-1817.
Wood, K.A. (1989). Seasonal abundance, marine habitats and behaviour of Skuas off central New South Wales. Corella 13:97-104.
Wright, P.J. and Bailey, M.C. (1993) Biology of sandeels in the vicinity of seabird colonies at Shetland. SOAFD, Marine Laboratory, Aberdeen. Report No. 15/93.
Zalakevicius, M. and Jacoby, V. (1992) Radar and visual observations of the moult migration of Common Scoter within eastern Baltic. IWRB Seaduck Bull. 1:51.