HomeMy WebLinkAbout2560400 - F.I. Received Doc. - Ecological Impact Assessment
Single Wind Turbine
Carney’s Island, Clones
Ecological Impact Assessment
DEC Ltd.
August 2026
RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Document Stage Document Version Prepared by
Final Updated Report 2 Pat Doherty MSc, MCIEEM
Report updated as follows:-
• Updated to incorporate additional ornithological survey effort and observational data, an
expanded assessment of surrounding waterbodies and the wider ecological context, together
with revised species-specific impact assessments and new Bird and Bat Mitigation &
Monitoring Plans.
• Typographical Errors corrected
• All updates are highlighted in grey.
This report has been prepared by Doherty
Environmental Consultants (DEC) Ltd. with all
reasonable skill, care and diligence. Information
report herein is based on the interpretation of
data collected and has been accepted in good
faith as being accurate and valid.
This report is prepared for Art Generation
Limited and we accept no responsibility to third
parties to whom this report, or any part thereof,
is made known. Any such party relies on the
report at their own risk.
For and on behalf of
Doherty Environmental Consultants Ltd
Prepared By: Pat Doherty
Signed:
Date: 25 November, 2014
RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine, Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: August 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. i 31/08/2026
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY 1
1.2 RELEVANT LEGISLATION & GUIDANCE 2
1.2.1 LEGISLATION 2
1.2.2 SCHEDULE OF WORKS 5
2.0 METHODOLOGY 7
2.1 DESK STUDY 7
2.2 SITE INVESTIGATIONS 7
2.2.1 HABITAT SURVEYS 7
2.2.2 BIRD SURVEYS 8
2.2.3 BATS 1
2.2.4 TERRESTRIAL MAMMALS 3
2.3 SITE EVALUATION 3
2.3.1 BIRDS 3
2.3.2 BATS 5
2.3.3 NON-VOLANT MAMMALS 6
2.4 IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 6
2.4.1 IMPACT MAGNITUDE 6
2.4.2 IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE 7
2.4.3 IMPACT ASSESSMENT – BIRDS 7
3.0 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 10
3.1 KEY COMPONENTS 11
3.2 WIND TURBINE 12
3.3 TURBINE HARDSTAND 13
3.4 SUBSTATION 14
3.5 GRID CONNECTION 15
3.6 TURBINE DELIVERY ROUTE 15
3.7 SITE DRAINAGE 17
3.7.1 WATERCOURSE / DRAINAGE CROSSINGS 20
3.8 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE 21 RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine, Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: August 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. ii 31/08/2026
3.9 WASTE GENERATED DURING CONSTRUCTION 22
3.10 MATERIAL & DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL 22
3.11 CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC 23
4.0 RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT 25
4.1 OVERVIEW 25
4.2 DESIGNATED NATURE CONSERVATION AREAS 25
4.3 TERRESTRIAL HABITATS 28
4.3.1 HABITATS OCCURRING UNDER THE FOOTPRINT OF THE PROPOSED TURBINE & ASSOCIATED
INFRASTRUCTURE 28
4.4 FAUNA 31
4.4.1 NON-VOLANT MAMMALS 31
4.4.2 BATS 32
4.4.3 BIRDS 35
4.4.4 HERPETOFAUNA 39
4.4.5 INVERTEBRATES 39
4.5 AQUATIC FAUNA 39
4.5.1 FISH 39
5.0 SITE EVALUATION 40
5.1 DESIGNATED CONSERVATION AREAS 40
5.2 HABITATS 40
5.3 FAUNA 40
5.3.1 NON-VOLANT MAMMALS 40
5.3.2 BATS 40
5.3.3 BIRDS 41
5.3.4 AQUATIC FAUNA 42
6.0 DO NOTHING IMPACT 42
7.0 POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT 42
7.1 CONSTRUCTION PHASE 43
7.1.1 IMPACTS TO DESIGNATED NATURE CONSERVATION AREAS 43
7.1.2 CONSTRUCTION PHASE IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED TURBINE TO HABITATS 43
7.1.3 CONSTRUCTION PHASE IMPACTS TO FAUNA 52 RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine, Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: August 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. iii 31/08/2026
7.2 OPERATIONAL PHASE 61
7.2.1 IMPACTS TO DESIGNATED NATURE CONSERVATION AREAS DURING THE OPERATION PHASE 61
7.2.2 OPERATION PHASE IMPACTS TO HABITATS 61
7.2.3 OPERATION PHASE IMPACTS TO TERRESTRIAL FAUNA 61
8.0 MITIGIATION MEASURES 75
8.1 CONSTRUCTION PHASE MITIGATION 75
8.1.1 MITIGATION BY AVOIDANCE 75
8.1.2 MITIGATION BY REDUCTION 75
8.1.3 CONSTRUCTION AND DECOMMISSIONING PHASE MITIGATION 76
8.1.4 SITE DRAINAGE 77
8.1.5 WORK TO INSTALL CULVERTS CROSSING OF THE LEGARHILL STREAM 77
8.1.6 CONCRETE, CEMENT & GROUT 78
8.1.7 SILT MANAGEMENT 78
8.1.8 DEWATERING / PUMPING AND OVER PUMPING 78
8.1.9 POLLUTION PREVENTION MEASURES 79
8.1.10 STORAGE OF HAZARDOUS MATERIAL 79
8.1.11 OIL STORAGE & REFUELLING 80
8.1.12 SITE COMPOUND 81
8.1.13 MEASURES TO PREVENT THE SPREAD OF NON-NATIVE INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES 82
8.1.14 MITIGATION MEASURES FOR SPOIL DISPOSAL 83
8.1.15 BIRDS 84
8.1.16 MITIGATION BY REMEDIATION 84
8.2 OPERATIONAL PHASE MITIGATION 85
8.2.1 PROTECTION OF BATS 85
8.2.2 PROTECTION OF BIRDS 85
9.0 CUMULATIVE IMPACT ASSESSMENT 86
10.0 RESIDUAL IMPACTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT 88
10.1 CONCLUSION 91
10.2 REFERENCES 91
Appendix 1 Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine, Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: August 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. iv 31/08/2026
Appendix 2 Bird Mitigation and Monitoring Plan RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island. 1 07/07/2025
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA) report provides an assessment of the potential
impacts of the proposed Single Wind Turbine and proposed grid connection route on the flora,
fauna and biodiversity of the site and surrounding area. This assessment has been undertaken
by Doherty Environmental Consultants (DEC) Ltd on behalf of ART Ltd. and examines the
potential ecological impacts of the proposed Single Wind Turbine.
The purpose of this assessment is to:
• identify the habitats of the site
• identify the existing sensitive fauna of the site
• identify the potential impact of the proposed development
• recommend measures to mitigate probable impacts
• identify any residual impacts to the site’s ecology
The scope of the following assessment follows the guidance outlined in the CIEEM’s
Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment v.1.3 (2024); TII Guidelines for Ecological
Assessment of National Road Schemes; and the EPA guidance document Guidelines on the
information to be contained in Environmental Impact Assessment Reports (2022).
The following impact assessment is based upon a review of existing desktop information and
the results of on-site field surveys, details for which are provided below.
1.1 Statement of Authority
The EcIA has been prepared by Mr. Pat Doherty MSc, MCIEEM, of DEC Ltd. Mr. Doherty is
a consultant ecologist with over 20 years’ experience in completing ecological impact
assessment and contributing to Environmental Impact Assessment Reports. He has been
involved in the completion of assessments of multiple wind farm developments in both the
Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland where he has completed detailed habitat and faunal
surveys to inform the assessment process. He has completed focused certified professional
development training in a range of ecological survey techniques and assessment processes.
Training has been completed for National Vegetation Classification (NVC) and Irish
Vegetation Classification (IVC) surveying, bryophyte survey for habitat assessment and
identification, professional bat survey and assessment training, mammal surveying and specific
training for bird surveys for Wind Farm developments. Training has been completed by RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island. 2 07/07/2025
approved training providers such as CIEEM, British Trust for Ornithology and the Field Studies
Council
1.2 Relevant Legislation & Guidance
1.2.1 LEGISLATION
1.2.1.1 EU Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC, European Communities (Natural Habitats) Regulations
1997, European Communities (Birds and Natural Habitats) Regulations 2011
The Habitats Directive provides the basis of protection for Natura 2000 sites, namely Special
Protection Areas (“SPAs”) and Special Areas of Conservation (“SACs”). Article 6 of the EU
Habitats Directive requires that any proposal that may have a significa nt effect on a Natura
2000 site must be subject to an Appropriate Assessment. An Appropriate Assessment is
required in order to ascertain the potential impact of a proposal on the reasons for which the
site is designated, and thereby ascertain the potential for adverse impact on the integrity of the
site. A proposal that may adversely impact the integrity of the site may not be consented except
in the absence of Feasible Alternative Solutions and in the event of Overriding Public Interest.
A Natura Impact Statement has been undertaken for the proposed EIA Development. This
concludes that the proposed EIA Development will not, adversely affect the integrity of any
European Site (Natura 2000 site), either directly, indirectly or cumulatively.
The Habitats Directive also provides for the protection of species listed under Annex IV of the
Directive wherever they occur. These species include otter and all bat species.
The Habitats Directive was transposed into Irish law by the European Communities (Natural
Habitats) Regulations 1997 and subsequently amended in the European Communities (Birds
and Natural Habitats) Regulations 2011. Regulation 42 of the 2011 regulations requires that
any proposal likely to have a significant effect on a European Site, alone or in combination with
other operations or activities, needs to be assessed with respect to its potential impact in the
site’s conservation objectives (an Appropriate Assessment) and that the decision-making
authority should be furnished with a Natura Impact Statement that incorporates a Screening
Assessment and Appropriate Assessment as necessary. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island. 3 07/07/2025
1.2.1.2 Environmental Impact Assessment Directive (2011/92/EU)
European Union Directive 2011/92/EU (“the EIA Directive”) considers the assessment of the
effects of certain public and private projects on the environment. It has been transposed to Irish
legislation by the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended), and the Planning and
Development Regulations (2000 – 2015) (hereafter referred to as the “2011 EIA Regulations”).
The Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) Part X, Section 171A (1) requires that
an EIA is carried out by the competent authority (i.e. the local planning authority or An Bord
Pleanála):
“that shall identify, describe and assess in an appropriate manner, in light of each individual case
and in accordance with Articles 4 to 11 of the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive, the
direct and indirect effects of a proposed development on the following:
(a) human beings, flora and fauna….,”
1.2.1.3 Environmental Impact Assessment Directive (2014/52/EU)
The requirements of the revised EIA Directive (2014/52/EU) (“the Revised EIA Directive”),
which will be incorporated into Irish law, are taken into account by the observance of draft
Revised Guidelines on the information to be contained in Environmental Impact Statements1.
Annex IV of the Revised EIA Directive provides requirements for information to be included
in the EIAR (as referred to in Article 5(1)(f). Additional emphasis has been placed on
‘biodiversity’ in the 2014 EIA Directive (see Section 1: Introduction of this REIS / EIAR for
further details).
1 Environmental Protection Agency. Revised Guidelines on the information to be contained in Environmental Impact Statements. .
Draft, September 2015. Available at: http://www.epa.ie/pubs/consultation/reviewofdrafteisguidelinesadvicenotes/ RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island. 4 07/07/2025
1.2.1.4 EU Birds Directive 79/409/EEC
EU Birds Directive 79/409/EEC ("the Birds Directive”) establishes a system of general protection
for all wild birds throughout the European Union. Annex I of the Birds Directive comprises 175
bird species that are rare, vulnerable to habitat changes or in danger of extinction within the
European Union. Article 4 establishes clearly that wherever those species occur, they should be
the subject of special conservation measures concerning their habitat in order to ensure their
survival and reproduction in the area of distribution. Similar actions should be taken by Member
States regarding migratory species, even if they are not listed in Annex I.
1.2.1.5 Bern and Bonn Convention
The Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (Bern
Convention 1982) exists to conserve all species and their habitats. The Convention on the
Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (Bonn Convention 1979, enacted 1983)
was instigated to protect migrant species across all European boundaries.
1.2.1.6 The Wildlife Act (1976) as amended (2000)
The Wildlife Act 1976 gives protection a wide variety of birds, animals and plants in the
Republic of Ireland. It is unlawful to disturb, injure or damage to their breeding or resting place
wherever these occur without an appropriate licence from National Parks and Wildlife Service
(“NPWS”). All birds, their nests and eggs are protected under law in Ireland through the
Wildlife Act 1976 (as amended in 2000). Wilful destruction of an active nest from the building
stage until the chicks have fledged is an offence. The act also provides a mechanism to give
statutory protection to Natural Heritage Areas (“NHAs”). The amendment in 2000 broadens
the scope of the Wildlife Acts to include most species, including the majority of fish and aquatic
invertebrate species which were excluded from the 1976 Act.
1.2.1.7 Flora (Protection) Order
The Flora (Protection) Order affords protection to listed vascular plants, mosses, liverworts and
stoneworts. It is illegal to cut, uproot or damage the listed species in any way, or to offer them
for sale. This prohibition extends to the taking or sale of seed. In addition, it is illegal to alter,
damage or interfere in any way with their habitats. This protection applies wherever the plants
are found and is not confined to sites designated for nature conservation. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island. 5 07/07/2025
1.2.2 SCHEDULE OF WORKS
DEC Ltd. was commissioned to undertake an Ecological Impact Assessment of the proposed
Single Wind Turbine at Carney’s Island Clones and associated grid connection route. A desktop
survey was undertaken to gather existing baseline information for the proposed development
site and surrounding area.
A range of on-site field surveys were completed to inform the baseline biodiversity conditions
at and surrounding the proposed development site.
Field surveys were completed at the project site to inform this screening report for Appropriate
Assessment. The field surveys included targeted vantage point surveys and winter and breeding
bird season transect surveys.
Habitat surveys were also completed and particularly attention was given to recording the
presence of surface water pathways in the form of watercourses or surface drains .
The vantage point surveys comprised watches from a vantage point that provides a view of the
proposed turbine location and the wider surrounding area. The vantage points were completed
during the 2023 and 2024 breeding season, and the 2023/2024 non-breeding season on the 26th
April 2023; 14th June 2023; 12th October 2024; 7th February 2024; 1st May 2024; 9th May 2024.
A watch of 3.5 hours was completed during each of the vantage point surveys amounting to a
total of 21 hours vantage point surveying of the proposed turbine location and wider
surrounding area.
Subsequent to the termination of each vantage point watch, walked transect surveys were
completed within the fields at and adjacent to the proposed turbine location and access track.
Additional vantage point surveys have been completed during the 2026 breeding season. The
2026 breeding season watches have consisted of monthly vantage point watches between April
and July 2026. Each monthly watch comprised 2 no. 3-hour surveys from the vantage point
along with the completion of the transect survey within the fields at and adjacent to the proposed
turbine location and access track. Particular attention was also given to bird activity at and over
Bishop’s Lough to the south of the vantage point and the proposed development site. The survey
dates and times for the 2026 breeding season are set out in Table 1.1 below. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island. 6 07/07/2025
Table 1.1: 2026 Breeding Season Survey Dates, Times and Conditions
Survey Date Survey Start
Time
Survey Finish Time Surveyor Notes
Observations
04/04/2026 09:15 12:15 DK Overcast with odd
shower, WSW
wind approx 4m/s,
good visibility
04/04/2026 12:35 15:35 DK Overcast with odd
shower, WSW
wind approx 5m/s,
good visibility
22/05/2026 09:05 12:05 DK Overcast, SSW
wind approx 5m/s,
excellent visibility
22/05/2026 12:20 15:20 DK Overcast, SSW
wind approx 5m/s,
excellent visibility
10/06/2026 09:25 12:25 DK Mix of cloud and
sunny spells with
odd shower, W
wind approx 4m/s,
excellent visibility
10/06/2026 12:55 15:55 DK Mix of cloud and
sunny spells with
odd shower, W
wind approx 4m/s,
excellent visibility
23/07/2026 10:40 13:40 DK Overcast, NW
wind approx 3m/s,
good visibility
23/07/2026 14:05 17:05 DK Overcast, NW
wind approx 3m/s,
good visibility
14/08/2026 08:41 11:41 DK Overcast, NW
wind approx 4m/s,
good visibility
14/08/2026 12:30 15:30 DK Overcast, NW
wind approx 4m/s,
good visibility
The location of the vantage point and the bird transects are shown on Figure 2.1 below. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island. 7 07/07/2025
2.0 METHODOLOGY
2.1 Desk Study
A desktop assessment was carried out to collate available information on the ecological baseline
of the proposed land-holding and surrounding area. Consultation was undertaken with site
management as well as relevant statutory and non-statutory agencies. In addition to the above
the following research was also undertaken:
• A review of the National Biodiversity Data Centre (NBDC) to identify the presence or
otherwise of protected species occurring within close proximity to the proposed site .
The area of search for records of rare, threatened or protected comprised the 4 no.
tetrads H52I (in which the proposed development is located); H52D; H52H; and H52C.
In addition a wider search for records of Whooper Swan and Greenland White-fronted
Geese was made for the hectad H52 (in which the proposed development is located)
and H42 to the east of the proposed development.
• A review of the NPWS online database to identify the presence or otherwise of
designated conservation areas (i.e. SPAs, SACs, NHAs etc.)
• A review of Site-Specific Conservation Objectives (SSCO) mapping, published by the
NPWS, for SACs and SPA.
• A review of the online BCI Batlas
• A review of the New Atlas of the British and Irish Flora (Preston et al., 2002)
• A review of the New Atlas of Breeding Birds in Britain and Ireland: 2007 – 2011
(Balmer et al, 2012)
• Review of aerial photography, satellite imagery and historical mapping for the
proposed site
2.2 Site Investigations
2.2.1 HABITAT SURVEYS
Habitat surveys were carried out on the 26th April 2023 and again on the 9th May 2024. Habitat
surveys were carried out to identify, describe, map and evaluate habitats and to verify
information gathered at the desk study stage. The basis of the surveys undertaken on the above
dates was an “Extended” Habitat Survey. This habitat survey was undertaken in accordance
with the Heritage Council Draft Best Practice Guidance for Habitat Survey and Mapping. The
National Vegetation Classification (NVC) User’s Handbook also informed the approach to the
habitat surveys. Habitats were classified using Fossitt’s Guide to Habitats in Ireland (2000) RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island. 8 07/07/2025
which classifies habitats according to a hierarchical framework with Level 1 habitats
representing broad habitat groups, Level 2 representing habitat sub-groups and Level 3
representing individual habitats. The field survey focused on identifying Level 3 habitats.
The DAFOR scale was used to characterise the vegetation within each habitat. This scale refers
to plant species in terms of dominance, abundance, frequency, occasional and rare (DAFOR).
In this report, scientific and common names for higher plants follow those in the Botanical
Society of the British Isles (BSBI) standard list, published on its website www.bsbi.org.uk.
Scientific and common names for bryophytes follow Smith (2004). Scientific and common
names of mammals follow Whilde (1993).
2.2.1.1 Non-volant Mammal Survey
The mammal survey involved walking either side of hedgerows and other field boundaries,
along the Legarhill Stream and through recently felled woodland, recording any field signs of
mammal activity. These field signs, as described in Neal & Cheeseman (1996) and Bang &
Dahlstrom (2006), include:
• mammal breeding and resting places, such as setts, holts, lairs
• pathways
• prints
• faecal deposits
• latrines (and dung pits used as territorial markers)
• feeding signs (snuffle holes)
• hair; and
• scratch marks
During these surveys particular attention was given to search the Legarhill Stream crossed by
the proposed access track for field signs indicating the presence of otters and their breeding
and resting places (i.e. holts and couches).
2.2.2 BIRD SURVEYS
2.2.2.1 Vantage Point Surveys
The methodology adopted for the vantage point surveys was derived from the NatureScot
guidance document Recommended bird survey methods to inform impact assessment of onshore RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island. 9 07/07/2025
wind farms (2025). These guidelines outline specific survey methodologies for undertaking
surveys to assess the potential impact of wind farms to lowland/farmland species. With regard
to smaller scale developments such as Single Wind Turbine projects, the SNH guidelines state:
Smaller developments and even single turbines may also present a potential risk if placed in
areas of high bird sensitivity, particularly on or near SPAs. Survey effort and assessment of the
possible impacts of a proposed wind farm on birds should be in proportion to the scale of the
wind farm and the bird interest in the area. Some small scale developments will either not
require an EIA or, if they are only just over the thresholds, require a limited environmental
assessment. Typically, these very small developments (including ‘domestic’ turbines of 15m or
less) are not considered to be a significant risk to birds, exceptions to this being proposals on
or near designated sites, or where the location is very close to the nest site of a Schedule 1 bird.
Assessment of existing bird data for the area may be all that is needed in many of these cases
and simple mitigation such as relocating the turbine further away from a designated site or a
Schedule 1 bird nest site may be sufficient to overcome any issues without the need for further
survey.
Due to the small scale of the proposed development with only one turbine included, the
NatureScot recommended level of survey (which typically involves 36 hours of vantage point
watching per vantage point per season) for this assessment has been scaled down to reflect the
limited scale of the proposed development.
SNH guidance for surveys at wind farms recommend that field surveys focus on those species
of high nature conservation value for which there is potential for impacts to occur. These target
species tend to be limited to those species of conservation concern, which as a result of their
flight patterns or response behaviour are considered to be susceptible to either displacement
due to wind turbine operation or collision with turbine blades.
Bird surveys involved vantage point surveys and a transect survey through the project site. The
vantage point surveys comprised watches from a vantage point that provides a view of the
proposed turbine location and the wider surrounding area.
As per Section 1.2.2 above the vantage points were completed during the 2023 and 2024
breeding season, and the 2023/2024 non-breeding season amounting to a total of 21 hours RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island. 10 07/07/2025
vantage point surveying of the proposed turbine location and wider surrounding area. The 21
hours of surveying completed during 2023 and 2024 comprised 7 no. hours of surveying during
the non-breeding season and 14 no. hours during the breeding season.
As set out in Table 1.1 further surveys have been completed during the 2026 breeding season,
with a total of 6 hours of survey being completed per month between April and August
(amounting to 30 hours of survey).
The location of the vantage point and the bird transects are shown on Figure 2.1.
RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 11 24/06/2024
RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
Tonregee SWT 1 31/08/2026
2.2.3 BATS
The suitability of the project site to support bats was evaluated by reviewing the bat landscape
favourability model (Lundy et al. 2011) and appraising the habitats occurring within the site or
their potential to support foraging bats. This latter appraisal was completed with reference to
the foraging habitat preferences of bats, as detailed by Collins et al. (2023) and the SNH (2019)
guidance for appraising the habitat risk for bats.
Bat activity surveys were completed during the 2024 bat activity season. One round of bat
activity survey was completed. The activity surveys were based on continuous automatic bat
detector surveys undertaken during the 2024 bat activity season between the 1st May and 11th
9th May over a period of 9 consecutive nights. The automatic bat detector survey was
undertaken using a Song Meter Mini Full Spectrum Ultrasonic Bat Detector. The detector was
positioned at one monitoring station (MS) adjacent to the proposed turbine location along the
edge of the recently felled conifer plantation. The location of the monitoring station is shown
in Figure 2.2. The bat detector was mounted on a pole at a height of 3m.
The Song-Meter was set to record continuously throughout each night of monitoring. Recording
commenced 30 minutes before sunset and terminated 30 minutes after sunrise.
Analysis of bat calls recorded during the activity surveys was undertaken using Kaleidoscope
software.
RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 2 31/08/2026 RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 3 07/07/2025
2.2.4 TERRESTRIAL MAMMALS
The mammal survey involved walking either side of hedgerows and along drainage ditches and
recording any field signs of mammal activity. The mammal survey was completed during the
July habitat survey. These field signs, as described by Neal & Cheeseman and Bang &
Dahlstrom (2006) include:
• Mammal breeding and resting places, such as setts, holts and lairs
• Pathways
• Prints
• Faecal deposits
• Latrines (and dung pits used as territorial markers)
• Feeding signs (snuffle holes)
• Hair and Scratch marks
2.3 Site Evaluation
The nature conservation value of habitats and ecological sites occurring within the proposed
site are based upon an established geographic hierarchy of importance as outlined by the
National Roads Authorities (NRA, 2009). The outline of this geographic hierarchy is used to
determine ecological value in line with the ecological valuation examples provided by the NRA
(see NRA, 2009). The geographic evaluation hierarchy is as follows:
• International Sites (Rating A)
• National Importance (Rating B)
• County Importance (Rating C)
• Local Importance (higher value) (Rating D)
• Local Importance (lower value) (Rating E)
2.3.1 BIRDS
The bird assemblage recorded at the proposed development site is valued with regard to the
ecological valuation examples set out in Guidelines for Assessment of Ecological Impacts of
National Roads Schemes: Revision 2 (2009). RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 4 07/07/2025
The evaluation of the avifauna recorded at the project site during the baseline surveys is also
informed by the approach detailed by Percival (2003). This approach defines the sensitivity of
a species and bird assemblage as the ecological importance and nature conservation interest at
the site being assessed. The ecological importance and nature conservation interest is
determined by a number of factors including:
• whether the species is on Annex 1 of the EC Birds Directive
• whether the area being assessed is subject to any nature conservation designations
• whether the species is particularly ecologically sensitive: this includes larger birds of
prey and rare breeding birds (including divers, common scoter, hen harrier, golden
eagle, red-necked phalarope, roseate tern and chough)
• whether the site contains species at nationally important numbers (>1% of Irish
population)
• whether the site contains species at regionally important numbers (>1% of regional
population, with the region usually taken as the county)
• whether the species is subject to special conservation measures, e.g. as Red or Amber
species on the BirdWatch Ireland’s (Newton et al. 1999) list of Birds of Conservation
Concern.
The determination of sensitivity is summarised, as per Percival (2003), in Table 2.2 below:
Table 2.1: Criteria for Ranking Bird Sensitivity
Sensitivity Determining Factor
Very High Species listed as qualifying interests for SPAs and other statutorily
protected nature conservation areas. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 5 07/07/2025
High Species that contribute to the integrity of a SPA but which are not listed as
qualifying interests for which the site is designated.
Ecologically sensitive species including the following:
Red Grouse; hen harrier; and golden eagle.
Species present in nationally important numbers (>1% Irish population).
Medium Species on Annex 1 of the EC Birds Directive
Species present in regionally important numbers (>1% regional (county)
population)
Other species on BirdWatch Ireland’s red list of Birds of Conservation
Concern
Low Any other species of conservation interest, including species of BirdWatch
Ireland’s amber list of Birds of Conservation Concern not cover above.
2.3.2 BATS
The approach outlined by Kepel (2011) to quantifying bat activity has been used to evaluate
the level of bat activity recorded at and surrounding the proposed development site and the
importance of the proposed development site and surrounding area as a foraging resource for
bats.
The Kepel approach is based on assigning the number of bat passes recorded per hour per night
of each monitoring session to an activity category. Kepel has assigned the number of passes
per hour to three activity categories. These activity categories are as follows: RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 6 07/07/2025
• Pipistrelle species and Leisler's bat: Low = <3.5 passes per hour; Moderate = 3.6 – 6.5
passes per hour; High = >6.5 passes per hour.
• All Other Bat species: Low = <4.0 passes per hour; 4.1 to 10 passes per hour; high =
>10 passes per hour.
The median bat pass per hour per night for each species recorded during bat activity surveys
has been used to assign bat activity levels in line with the Kepel approach. Median bat pass per
hour per night is used during this analysis as it is recognised as providing a more accurate
representation of activity, as bat activity levels between nights can be highly variable and thus
the median provides a more reliable value that the mean or maximum (Lintott & Matthews,
2018).
2.3.3 NON-VOLANT MAMMALS
The nature conservation value of non-volant mammal populations recorded during field surveys
has been assigned in accordance with the criteria set out by the TII 2009 guidance document.
2.4 Impact Assessment Methodology
2.4.1 IMPACT MAGNITUDE
Impact magnitude refers to changes in the extent and integrity of an ecological receptor. The
CIEEM (2006) defines integrity of designated conservation areas as “the coherence of the
ecological structure and function across the area that enables it to sustain the complex of habitat
and/or the levels of populations of the species for which it was classified”. For non-designated
sites this can be amended to: “the coherence of ecological structure and function, that enables
it (the site or populations supported by the site) to be maintained in its present condition”. For
the purposes of this assessment the impact magnitude is influenced by the intensity, duration,
frequency and reversibility of a potential impact and is categorised as follows:
• High magnitude impact: that which results in harmful effects to the conservation status
of a site, habitat or species and is likely to threaten the long-term integrity of the system.
• Moderate magnitude impact: that which results in harmful effects to the conservation
status of a site, habitat or species, but does not have an adverse impact on the integrity
of the system. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 7 07/07/2025
• Low magnitude impact: that which has a noticeable effect but is either sufficiently
small or of short duration to cause no harm to the conservation status of the site, habitat
or species.
• Imperceptible: that which has no perceptible impact.
• Positive: that which has a net positive impact for the conservation status of a site,
habitat or species.
2.4.2 IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE
The significance of impacts is determined by evaluating the nature conservation value of the
site, habitat or species concerned together with the magnitude of the impacts affecting the
system. The more ecologically valuable a receptor and the greater the magnitude of the impact,
the higher the significance of that impact is likely to be. Table 2.3 outlines the levels of impact
significance to be used during the assessment of impacts. The probability of an impact
occurring will also be outlined when defining the significance of impacts.
Table 2.2: Impact Significance Matrix
Nature
Conservation
Value
Magnitude of Potential Impact
High Moderate Low Negligible
International (A) Severe Major Moderate Minor
National (B) Severe Major Moderate Minor
County (C) Major Moderate Minor Minor
Local (D) Moderate Minor Minor Imperceptible
Low (E) Minor Imperceptible Imperceptible Imperceptible
2.4.3 IMPACT ASSESSMENT – BIRDS
The sensitivity of a species is defined by evaluating its ecological importance and nature
conservation interest. Species sensitivity is ranked on a scale from very high to low. The criteria
used to rank species sensitivity is outlined in Table 2.4.
Table 2.3: Species Sensitivity RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 8 07/07/2025
Sensitivity Determining Factor
Very High Species listed as qualifying interests for SPA and other statutorily
protected nature conservation areas.
High Species that contribute to the integrity of a SPA, but which are not listed
as qualifying interests for which the site is designated.
Ecologically sensitive species including the following:
Red Grouse, hen harrier and golden eagle.
Species present in nationally important numbers (>1% Irish
population).
Medium Species on Annex 1 of the EC Birds Directive
Species present in regionally important numbers (>1% regional
(county) population)
Other species on BirdWatch Ireland’s Red list of Birds of Conservation
Concern
Low Any other species of conservation interest, including species of
BirdWatch Ireland’s Amber list of Birds of Conservation Concern not
covered above.
2.4.3.1 Impact Magnitude
Once the species/populations in the study area have been evaluated in terms of their sensitivity,
the next step is to determine the magnitude of the possible impacts that may occur on those
species/populations. The impact magnitude is based on the scale of loss or alteration to key
elements/features of the baseline conditions. Impact magnitude is ranked on a five-point scale
from very high to negligible. Table 2.5 outlines the criteria for determining the impact
magnitude of wind farm developments.
Table 2.4: Criteria for Determining The Impact Magnitude
Magnitude Description
Very high Total loss or very major alteration to key elements/ features of the baseline
conditions such that the post development character/ composition/ attributes
will be fundamentally changed and may be lost from the site altogether.
Guide: < 20% of population / habitat remains RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 9 07/07/2025
High Major loss or major alteration to key elements/ features of the baseline (pre -
development) conditions such that post development character/ composition/
attributes will be fundamentally changed.
Guide: 20-80% of population/ habitat lost
Medium Loss or alteration to one or more key elements/features of the baseline
conditions such that post development character/composition/attributes of
baseline will be partially changed.
Guide: 5-20% of population/ habitat lost
Low Minor shift away from baseline conditions. Change arising from the
loss/alteration will be discernible but underlying
character/composition/attributes of baseline condition will be similar to pre-
development circumstances/patterns.
Guide: 1-5% of population/ habitat lost
Negligible Very slight change from baseline condition. Change barely distinguishable,
approximating to the “no change” situation.
Guide: < 1% population/ habitat lost
2.4.3.2 Impact Significance
The determination of impact significance is carried out by assessing together the predicted
magnitude of impact and the sensitivity of the local bird community. Table 2.6 below outlines
the impact significance matrix used for assessing the impact significance of the proposed
development to bird species.
Table 2.5: Impact Significance Matrix for Assessing Impacts to Bird Species
Significance
Sensitivity
Very High High Medium Low
Magnitude
Very High Very high Very high High Medium
High Very high Very high Medium Low
Medium Very high High Low Very low
Low Medium Low Low Very Low
Negligible Low Very Low Very Low Very Low RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 10 07/07/2025
3.0 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The Clones Wind Farm development will include the following:-
• Construction of 1 No. site entrance and any sections of internal access track to facilitate access
to the temporary construction compound;
• Construction of 1 No. temporary construction compound, including fencing site offices,
parking, material laydown and storage areas, etc;
• Upgrading and widening of existing internal tracks to a wind farm road standard and
construction of new wind farm roads, including all excavation, importation, and placement of
stone and associated materials.
• Earthworks and drainage infrastructure associated with construction of new and upgraded
internal access roads, crane hardstand, turbine foundations and substation compound;
• Construction of upgraded and new drainage/watercourse crossings for construction of internal
access roads and underground cables;
• Excavation of turbine bases and associated turbine hardstand areas;
• Construction of wind turbine foundations and hardstands;
• Installation of underground cabling between turbine and substation;
• Construction of the 20kV Substation compound and building;
• Construction of 1.9km of underground cable connection from the wind farm substation to the
existing Clones Substation and all associated remedial/. Reinstatement works to the public road;
• Delivery, installation, and commissioning of the proposed turbine. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 11 07/07/2025
3.1 Key Components
The development proposed by the applicant, is a 1 No. turbine wind farm in the townland of
Clones and all associated infrastructure including a connection to the National Electricity Grid.
The proposed development will consist of the following elements:
• Construction and operation of 1No. wind turbine, with an overall tip height of up to 143.8m;
• Construction of a crane hardstanding area for the wind turbine erection;
• Approximately 1.1km of new internal access road;
• An on-site 20kV electrical substation;
• Underground electrical and communications cabling connecting the turbine to the site
substation;
• Approximately 1.9 kilometres of underground cabling connecting the 20kv wind farm
substation to the existing
• Clones Substation;
• 1 No. site entrance onto the R183 regional road;
• 1 No. temporary on-site construction compound;
• Associated surface water management systems;
• All associated ancillary infrastructure and preparatory works.
The proposed project will have a lifespan of 35-years. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 12 07/07/2025
3.2 Wind Turbine
The proposed wind turbines will be a Nordex N133 on a 78m tower and will have a maximum
tip height of 143.8m. A drawing of the proposed wind turbine is shown on Drawing No. 22790-
200 & 201.
The turbines installed on the site will be the conventional three-bladed, tubular tower model
with horizontal axis. The rotor blades are bolted to the central rotor hub, which is connected to
the nacelle. The nacelle contains the following turbine components:-
• Generator
• Electrical components
• Aviation lighting to Irish Aviation Authority (IAA) specifications.
The entire nacelle and rotor are designed to rotate, or ‘yaw’, in order to face the prevailing
wind. A wind vane located on the nacelle of the turbine controls the yaw mechanism. A control
unit is typically located at the base of the turbine and an internal lift or ladder leads up to the
nacelle where the shaft, generator and gearbox are located.
The turbine tower is a conical steel tube with multiple layer paint finish. Towers comprise a
steel ring at the base of the tower which is assembled on top of the concrete foundations. The
tower will be delivered to site in three sections. The base of the tower is approximately 4.3m in
diameter, tapering to approximately 3.2m where it is attached to the nacelle. The tower is
accessed by a galvanised steel hatch door, which will be kept locked except during
maintenance.
The blades of the turbines are typically made of fibreglass or carbon fibre reinforced polyester
and are aerodynamically shaped to improve efficiency and lower noise production.
The turbines are multi-ply coated to protect against corrosion. It is proposed that the turbines
will be of an off-white or light grey colour to blend into the sky background RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 13 07/07/2025
3.3 Turbine hardstand
The crane Hardstand will be constructed to accommodate and support the Wind Turbine
components, cranes and other plant during delivery and Turbine erection. Hardstands will also
be used for maintenance activities while the Wind Turbines are in operation.
The dimension of a single Hardstand is circa 91 metres in length and 35 metres in width. There
will also be smaller temporary stoned areas constructed to store the Wind Turbine parts and
components prior to erection, these will be removed, and the areas reinstated on completion of
the Wind Turbine erection. See Planning Drawing 22790-202 for details on the Hardstand.
The crane Hardstands will be constructed to support the significant loads imposed by the
outriggers of the main lifting crane during the Wind Turbine installation process on site.
Hardstand construction will include the following:-
1. The excavation process will involve hydraulic excavators moving excavated material to on-site
repository areas using articulated dumper trucks or tractor and trailers.
2. Topsoil will be excavated in the presence of the Archaeologist and removed to the temporary
topsoil repository area for use in the permanent reinstatement works.
3. The Hardstand formation will be formed by excavating subsoil to a suitable bearing stratum in
accordance with the requirements of the Design Engineer.
4. The Hardstand will be constructed using imported stone aggregate rolled in layers and tested in
accordance with the requirements of the Design Engineer.
5. Temporary set down areas will be created at each crane Hardstand to store Wind Turbine
components such as the rotor hub assembly, turbine blades, turbine towers, and nacelle. These
areas will be made of compacted stone aggregate, these will be removed and the areas reinstated
on completion of the Wind Turbine deliveries.
6. Plate bearing tests will be conducted on the completed Hardstand surface to verify if the
Hardstand bearing strengths meet the crane outrigger load requirements. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 14 07/07/2025
7. The main crane outrigger areas are subjected to the highest levels of stress and as such strict
minimum requirements are put in place to ensure safety during the works. This includes but is
not limited to:
a. Surface Evenness of equal or less than 0.25% slope.
b. Minimum Bearing Capacity of 220kN/m2.
3.4 Substation
It is proposed to construct a 20kV electricity Substation within the site boundary as shown on
Drawing No. 22790-102. This Substation will provide a connection to the national grid via an
underground 20kV transmission cable connection.
The construction and electrical components of the on-site Substation will be to ESB, Electrical
Designer and Wind Turbine Supplier specifications.
The Substation compound will have an area of approximately 225m2 and will include one
Substation building and electrical components. The Substation and compound will be
surrounded by stockproof fencing.
Prior to construction beginning, interception drains will be placed uphill from the planned
Substation area to catch any current overland water flows and direct them downhill to minimise
water contact with the construction site. The clean water will be rel eased through a level
spreader downhill from the construction site, flowing over the current vegetation.
The construction will include the following:-
1. The Substation compound's area will be outlined using ranging rods or wooden posts.
2. Perimeter drains will be installed or upgraded to collect surface water run-off from the
Substation compound. This will involve the installation of check dams, silt traps and level
spreaders to manage surface run-off effectively.
3. Topsoil will be stripped and carefully stockpiled for future landscaping use. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 15 07/07/2025
4. Subsoil will be excavated and retained on site by incorporated it into the perimeter of the
compound area.
5. The Substation compound will be formed by constructing compacted layers of suitable
hardcore;
6. The foundations for both Substation buildings will be excavated down to the level indicated by
the designer and appropriately shuttered;
7. Steel reinforcement will be laid in place and concrete foundations will be poured;
8. The Substation building will be constructed on top of the concrete foundations.
9. Construction of underground cable ducts and trenches within the Substation compound will be
carried out;
10. On completion of the ground works the area will be re-topsoiled and landscaped;
11. Stockproof fencing and gates will be installed around the compound perimeter on completion
of the landscaping works.
3.5 Grid Connection
The turbine will connect directly to the national electrical grid network at the approved
substation. The grid connection route is included as part of this planning application and is
assessed as part of the Planning and Environmental Report. The grid connection is via circa
1.9km of underground 20kV electrical cabling connecting to Clones 38kV Substation in the
townland of Clones, County Monaghan. The majority of the grid connection will be constructed
in public road verges and footpaths.
3.6 Turbine Delivery Route
The components for the Wind Turbines will be delivered by cargo ships to the Port of
Waterford, which is also known as Belview Port, and is actually located in County Kilkenny.
The components for the Wind Turbine will be delivered in separate loads, some of which are RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 16 07/07/2025
abnormal in terms of their width and length. The components will be transported from Belview
to the site along the motorway, national, regional and local road network.
Several junction locations along the national road and both bends and junctions on the regional
road network require temporary works to accommodate these deliveries of Wind Turbine
components to the site, as well as construction works at the site access on the R183. These
works will include the temporary alterations at locations on the N54 and the R183.
This will include the temporary hardstanding’s, making signposts, lighting columns and kerbs
demountable / hinged, utility diversions, minor drainage works (i.e. temporary relocated
interceptor ditches) hedgerow / vegetation cutting for oversail.
At construction stage a transportation plan will be prepared by the Wind Turbine component
delivery company. Permits for moving the abnormal loads on the public roads to the Wind Farm
site will be obtained from An Garda Síochána and the applicable local authorities on the
selected haulage route.
The selected haulage route is detailed below:
• Starting at Belview Port;
• Turn Left, then the next right onto the N29;
• Merge onto the N29;
• At the Slieverue Roundabout, exit to stay on N29 going Northbound;
• At the Luffany Roundabout, exit onto the N25, Waterford City Bypass;
• Continue onto the N25;
• After 6km take the third exit onto the N9, continue to Quarry Roundabout, exiting onto the M9
going Northbound;
• Merge onto the M7; RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 17 07/07/2025
• Merge onto the M50 via slip road to Northbound/Dublin Port Toll Road;
• At junction 6, take the N3 exit;
• Exit the N3 at junction 4 onto the M3;
• Continue straight through roundabout onto the N3;
• Turn right onto the R165;
• Continue onto the L2011;
• Slight right onto the L2010;
• Turn right onto the R212;
• Turn right onto Abbey Street;
• Turn right onto Analore Street;
• Continue on the R183;
• Take third left turn into the site entrance
3.7 Site Drainage
Clean water cut-off drainage will be installed up-hill or up-stream around the perimeter of the
proposed work areas as part of the Enabling Works. This drainage “cuts-off” existing drainage
runs from entering the proposed work areas thus reducing site surface water run-off, prevent
soil erosion, and protect the water quality downstream. This drainage will be temporary and
on completion of the site works it will be removed or altered and incorporated into the
permanent works drainage.
Permanent drainage will be constructed during construction of the Access Roads, Hardstands,
Turbine Foundations, Substation. While construction works are being carried out, this drainage RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 18 07/07/2025
tends to pick-up a suspended solids – and is often known as “dirty water”. During the
construction stage, this dirty water drainage is directed to a number of sediment control
measures such as check dams and settlement ponds. The permanent drainage during the
construction stage is therefore often referred to “dirty water cut-off drainage”.
Plate 3.1 below shows a typical check dam arrangement. The site's proposed drainage system
is detailed in Planning Drawings 22729-130 to 22729-134, provided under separate cover with
the planning application documentation.
Plate 3.1: Check Dam
The drainage design will incorporate the following:-
1. Check dams strategically positioned at regular intervals along all drains to slow down flow,
encourage settlement, prevent scour and ditch erosion, and prevent silt from reaching adjoining
drainage channels.
2. Low gradient drains will be installed. These slow down the flow rate in the drains, which
decreases soil and subsoil erosion and reduces the amount of water entering watercourses. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 19 07/07/2025
3. Existing drains will be preserved where applicable.
4. Regular buffered outfalls will be installed. These are composed of several minor drains
branching from the main drain and terminating by spreading out into the nearby vegetation
through tapered drains. The drain will have hardcore material to capture suspended sediment.
5. Construction site runoff will be redirected into settlement ponds to encourage sediment
deposition and decrease hydraulic loading by lowering flow velocities, enabling sediment to
settle. The settlement ponds are structured as a three-stage tiered pond system. The settlement
pond system design for the site is outlined in Planning Drawing 22729-102 & 103.
6. Water from the settlement ponds will flow into the sediment traps for additional cleaning
through a sequence of graded gravel filters.
7. Drainage ditch outfalls from silt traps will release water periodically to imitate natural
hydrology, promoting percolation and reducing hydraulic loadings at discharge sites. The
drainage ditches will discharge onto the ground by spreading out over the surrounding
vegetation through tapered drains.
8. The Access Roads will be graded to ensure that all runoff is channelled towards the dirty water
drains. A small embankment will be built between the road and clean water drains to prevent
runoff from the road from entering the clean water system.
9. Where possible the natural vegetative barrier will not be disturbed. Protective barriers and
fences will be installed to prevent access to protected areas.
10. All drainage and silt control measures will be regularly inspected during the construction works
to ensure they are performing correctly. When necessary, silt will be cleaned out from silt
control measures and disposed of on site, initially by stockpiling to allow drying out, and then
incorporating into groundwork finishing works.
Plate 3.2 below shows a typical check dam arrangement with several dams strategically
positioned at regular intervals along an open drain. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 20 07/07/2025
Plate 3.2: Multiple Check Dams as Silt Control Measure
3.7.1 WATERCOURSE / DRAINAGE CROSSINGS
As part of the upgrade to the existing road and new road construction there will be one drain
and stream surface water drainage crossing. This will include the construction of new drainage
crossings.
The sizing, layout and works methodology of drainage crossings will be agreed with Monaghan
Co. Co. and, where required, with the OPW, prior to construction.
In general drainage crossings will be constructed of concrete precast concrete or High-Density
Polyethylene (HDPE) pipes and will cater for a minimum 1 in 100-year return rainfall event
with an additional 30% allowance for climate change.
• The invert of the pipe will be submerged approximately 1/4 of its diameter below the original
drainage bed. Where natural gradients allow, a nominal back fall in the pipe will be incorporated
to prevent scour and promote the settling of natural material along the invert of the pipe RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 21 07/07/2025
3.8 Proposed Construction Schedule
It is anticipated that the overall construction of the development will take approximately 10-12
months from starting on-site to final commissioning of the Wind Turbine.
All vegetation clearance that is required for the construction works will be carried outside the
bird breeding season, which runs from the 1st of March to the 31st of August. To comply with
this requirement a section of the initial Civil Engineering Works may be carried out as advance
enabling works in the months from September to February.
Error! Reference source not found. below details the works in a number of key phases, some
of these phases will run in parallel.
Table 3.1: Proposed Development Construction Stage Duration and Phasing
Phase Activity
Phase 1 Site Preparation, Pre-construction activities, Site entrance
Construction
Phase 2 Access Road Construction + Drainage Plan
Implementation
Phase 3 Crane Hardstand Construction
Phase 4 Turbine Foundation Construction
Phase 5 Substation Construction RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 22 07/07/2025
Phase 6 Internal Trenching and Ducting
Phase 7 Turbine Delivery
Phase 8 Turbine Erection
Phase 9 Grid Connection Construction
Phase
10
Wind Farm Commissioning
3.9 Waste Generated during Construction
The wastes likely to be generated during the construction phase will include the following:
• Excavated material from road cuts and foundations. The material will be stored in a
centralised area to minimise environmental impact and will be used on-site for
hardstanding and embankments;
• Cut-offs from building material. This material will be taken off-site for re-use,
recycling, or taken to a licensed landfill facility;
• Domestic type waste by contractors. This material will be collected on-site, stored in
an enclosed skip and disposed of at a licensed landfill facility
3.10 Material & Disposal of Excavated Material
Where necessary, excavated soil material will be stored, out of the path of trafficking
machinery. Where the topsoil layer must be temporarily held in the spoil storage areas, the
contractor will divide the storage areas to ensure that the topsoil layer is not mixed with the
underlying soils. This will facilitate adequate site reinstatement and ensure re-vegetation of the
land occurs as quickly as possible. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 23 07/07/2025
Site inspections indicate that the soil conditions at the site will facilitate material being
stockpiled to a height of no greater than 2.0m. Depending on geotechnical considerations, the
maximum gradient of side slopes in the spoil storage areas should be 30-40 degrees to ensure
safe storage of materials and reduce the overall erosion potential at the site. The top of the soil
mound is to be profiled gently to facilitate surface water and therefore prevent ponding and
saturation of the soil. All stockpiling will be temporary and subject to receipt of planning
permission for this application, specific site locations for stockpiling will be determined by the
appointed site engineer and will form part of a Construction Management Plan for the entire
development.
Drainage channels at the uphill side will intercept clean water runoff and will be directed away
from the spoil storage areas to prevent sedimentation. Runoff from the storage areas will pass
through a sediment basin to ensure suspended particles are settled out.
The vegetated top soil layer (300-500mm depth typically) removed from the surface will be
side-cast where feasible and used to resurface ground adjacent to road edges, the turbine base
and other disturbed areas to assist in the recovery vegetation. Re-seeding of the areas will also
be carried out at this stage providing it is the appropriate time of year. Re -instatement will be
carried out as soon as possible after excavation to ensure vegetation recovers without delay.
This will ensure that, as well as restoring the natural environment, the erosion potential for the
soil will be minimised thus reducing the risk of sediment entering watercourses.
The majority of the excavated material (typically clay) underlying the topsoil will be brought
to storage areas. At certain locations along the access road it may be possible to side cast this
material adjacent to the road and place topsoil over it. The topsoil will be graded to reflect the
surrounding landscape. The maximum depth of any side cast material will be 500mm.
In an effort to reduce the storage time of excavated material, a sequential ('rolling') extraction
restoration programme will be employed where feasible i.e. where topsoil and overburden from
one location can be used for the restoration of the previous location.
3.11 Construction Traffic
As with any construction development project, the transport of materials onto the site will give
rise to increased traffic. It is considered that the proximity of the site to the regional route R691, RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 24 07/07/2025
(the primary access road to the site) will reduce the degree of traffic impact that would
otherwise be associated with third class or minor roads.
Public perception of the construction phase will be influenced primarily from the impact of
traffic movements. The degree of traffic disturbance caused by the construction phase of a wind
farm depends on the number of turbines (in this instance a single wind turbine), the associated
civil engineering requirements and the length of the construction period.
The traffic movements to be expected will involve:
• Vehicles bringing concrete (for foundations) to the site;
• Articulated vehicles bringing turbine components to the site;
• Private vehicles of those employed on site for the construction phase; and
• Cranes to erect the turbine.
The largest number of traffic movements will be with the delivery of concrete to the site for
construction of the turbine foundations. In order to assist with logistics for delivery of turbines
the selection of final delivery times and routes will be subject to detailed consultation with the
Planning Authority and the Garda Siochána. The site has good accessibility with close
proximity to a National Road. This will greatly assist the logistics of delivering components on
site, compared to more remote and inaccessible locations.
Once the turbine is in operation, traffic movements to and from the sight will be very light,
probably averaging one visit a week by a light commercial vehicle or car. The potential need
to replace machine components may generate heavier commercial vehicle movements, but
these are likely to be infrequent.
Subject to receipt of planning permission of this application a detailed Traffic Management
Plan will be completed and will form part of the Construction Management Plan.
. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 25 07/07/2025
4.0 RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT
4.1 Overview
The project site is located in the townlands of Carney’s Island, approximately 1.7km to the east
of Clones. The proposed turbine within a farmed landscape with improved agricultural
grassland being the dominant land cover occurring at and surrounding the project. An area of
recently felled conifer plantation occurs within the project site at the northern end of the turbine
hardstand.
The proposed grid connection route runs along the R183 and connects the proposed turbine
location to the existing substation at Clones.
4.2 Designated Nature Conservation Areas
The nearest European Site to the project site is the Kilroosky Lough Cluster SAC (Site Code:
001786), which is located approximately 1.5km to the northwest of the project site. There are
no pathways connecting the project site to this SAC.
The nearest SPA to the project site is the Slaibh Beagh SPA, located approximately 13km to
the north/northeast of the project site.
Lough Oughter and Associated Loughs SAC is located approximately 20km downstream of
the project site. The Finn River drains into this SAC and as such there is a hydrological pathway
connecting the project site to this SAC.
Kilroosky Lough Cluster SAC is designated for it role in supporting the following Annex 1
habitat and Annex 2 species:
Hard oligo-mesotrophic waters with benthic vegetation of Chara spp. [3140]
Calcareous fens with Cladium mariscus and species of the Caricion davallianae [7210]
Alkaline fens [7230]
Austropotamobius pallipes (White-clawed Crayfish) [1092].
Lough Oughter And Associated Loughs SAC is designated for it role in supporting the
following Annex 1 habitat and Annex 2 species: RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 26 07/07/2025
Natural eutrophic lakes with Magnopotamion or Hydrocharition - type vegetation [3150]
Bog woodland [91D0]
Lutra lutra (Otter) [1355]
Slieve Beagh SPA is designated for it role in supporting a breeding population of hen harrier.
No NHAs occur in the wider area surrounding the project site. Kilroosky Lough Cluster SAC
is also listed as a pNHA. The next nearest pNHA to the project site is the Lisabuck Lough
pNHA. This pNHA is not connected to the project site via any pathways. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 27 07/07/2025
RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 28 31/08/2026
4.3 Terrestrial Habitats
4.3.1 HABITATS OCCURRING UNDER THE FOOTPRINT OF THE PROPOSED TURBINE
& ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE
The dominant habitat occurring within the footprint of the proposed turbine location is conifer
plantation with remnant linear sections of cutover/degraded bog occurring along unplanted fire
breaks. The Fossitt Level 3 habitats occurring at the turbine location and along the proposed
access road are outlined in Table 4.1 below. A habitat map showing the extent and distribution
of these habitats is presented as Figure 4.2.
Table 4.1: Habitats Occurring Under and in the Immediate Vicinity the Footprint of the
Proposed Wind Turbine
Habitat Description Project Infrastructure
Deposition
Stream –
Legarhill
Stream
The Legarhill Stream is representative of a first order depositing
stream. It is a slow flowing glide stream flowing a path of low
gradient through the project site. The stream displays signs of
enrichment with abundant macrophytes, dominated by Apium
nodiflorum occurring along the channel. Macroinvertebrate
searches identified EPA Class C species, such as Gammurus and
Class C caddis fly species as dominant. Owing to the moderate
water quality status of the stream and the absence of suitable
spawning and nursery habitat, the section of the stream occurring
in the vicinity of the project site is of limited fisheries value.
The proposed access
track will corss the
Legarhill Stream twice
within the wind turbine
site, with one existing
crossing to be used and
one new crossing to be
provided via a piped
culvert.
Improved
agricultural
grassland
(GA1)
Improved agricultural grassland dominates the land cover to the
east of the project along the section of the access track approaching
the substation and surrounding the substation itself. This habitat is
nutrient enriched and intensively managed for cattle grazing and
silage. Species indicative of high nutrient conditions in the habitat
were noted throughout the land holding. These species include an
abundance of Lolium perenne, Holcus lanatus, Alopecurus
pratensis, Ranunculus repens, R. acris, Trifolium repens, Trifolium
pratense, Cirsium arvense, Cirsium vulgare and Urtica dioica.
Stands of Juncus effusus occur within the improved agricultural
grassland sward indicating the peaty and poor drained soils that
underly this habitat.
The proposed turbine
hardstand, substation,
access track to substation
and the internal
underground cables. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 29 31/08/2026
Habitat Description Project Infrastructure
Overall, the improved agricultural grassland is species-poor and
widespread on a local to national scale. This habitat plays a limited
function in supporting wildlife although it does provide foraging
and dispersal habitat for badgers and can support a limited range of
invertebrates.
Recently
felled conifer
plantation
(WS5)
This habitat consists of stand of commercially planted Sitka Spruce
that have been recently felled for harvest. The ground flora within
this habitat is representative of pioneering and ruderal species
commonly associated with recently disturbed ground.
No element of the project
footprint occurs within
this habitat.
Hedgerow
(WL1)
Hedgerows (WL1) occur within the project site and form the
boundary around agricultural fields. Hawthorn (Crataegus
monogyna) is the dominant species. Gorse (Ulex europaeus) and
bramble (Rubus fruticosus agg.) were also present. Occasional Ash
(Fraxinus excelsior) was seen in hedgerows across the site.
Along with Alnus glutinosa, Acer pseudoplatanus, Salix aurita and
Salix cinerea.
Approximately 125m of
hedgerow occurs within
the footprint of the
project.
Buildings and
artificial
surfaces
(BL3)
An existing access track runs through the redline boundary of the
proposed wind turbine site and sections of this are used for the
proposed access track. A former homestead now in ruin is located a
short distance to the southeast of the proposed turbine location.
Proposed access track.
RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
DEC Ltd. 30 31/08/2026
RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 31 31/08/2026
4.4 Fauna
4.4.1 NON-VOLANT MAMMALS
4.4.1.1 Otters
Otters (Lutra lutra) and their holts and couches are protected under the EU Habitats Directive
as well as under the Wildlife Act (as amended) 1976. Otters holts and couches are generally
established along riverbanks and these mammals are rarely found far away from aquatic
habitats.
There are no records held by the National Biodiversity Data Centre for otters within the area of
search at and surrounding the proposed development.
The Legarhill Stream was searched for field signs indicating the presence of otters. No field
signs were recorded. The Legarhill Stream is considered to be of limited fisheries value and
this in turn is likely to limit the reliance of otters on this watercourse for foraging.
4.4.1.2 Badgers
Badgers (Meles meles) and their resting place i.e. setts, are protected under the Wildlife Act
1976 (as amended). Setts are generally found in woodland, scrub and along hedgerows in free
draining areas where soil is dry and not subject to flooding. Mire habitats, such as blanket bog
and heaths, are generally considered to be unsuitable habitat for supporting badger setts due to
the high moisture content associated with peat substrates.
The National Biodiversity Data Centre holds records for the presence of badgers within the four
tetrads that comprise the area of search of baseline records.
No signs of badgers were found during field surveys within and adjacent to the project site.
4.4.1.3 Irish Hare
The Irish hare is found in many different habitats including unimproved, semi-improved and
improved grassland, upland habitats such as heather-dominated heaths and bogs and in coastal
habitats including sand-dunes. They also tend to occur on modified grassland habitats such as
golf courses and airfields (Fairley, 2001; Dingerkus & Montgomery, 1997). The Irish hare is
protected under Annex IV of the EU Habitats Directive and the Wildlife Act 1976 (as
amended). RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 32 31/08/2026
The National Biodiversity Data Centre does not hold any records for the presence of Irish Hare
within the 4 no. tetrads that make up the area of search for baseline records.
No signs of Irish Hare were found during field surveys at and surrounding the project site.
4.4.1.4 Other Mammals
There was no evidence recorded during field surveys suggesting the presence or otherwise of
pine marten or red squirrels (Sciurus vulgaris) and the limited occurrence of woodland habitat
surrounding the proposed development leaves these lands unsuitable for supporting red
squirrels or pine marten.
The National Biodiversity Data Centre holds records for the presence of Irish Stoat and Pine
Marten in the area of search at and surrounding the proposed development.
Other mammals that are likely to occur in the general area include fox (Vulpa vulpa), rabbit
(Oryctolagus cuniculus), hedgehog (Erinaceus europaeus), wood mouse (Apodemus
sylvaticus), brown rat (Rattus norvegicus), and pygmy shrew (Sorex minutus). Foxes are likely
to hunt widely across the surrounding hinterland.
4.4.2 BATS
NBDC & Batlas Records
The National Biodiversity Data Centre holds records for the presence of Common pipistrelle;
Soprano pipistrelle; Daubenton’s bat; and Soprano pipistrelle in the area of search at and
surrounding the proposed development.
Habitat Classification
A review of the bat landscapes published by Lundy et al. (2011) indicates that the proposed
wind turbine site does not overlap with core areas for bats occurring in Ireland. The habitat
suitability for all bats in the area surrounding the proposed turbine scores a rating of 33.22,
indicating a medium-high sensitivity for bats. The landscape surrounding the proposed wind
turbine site is comprised of open and exposed fields with a well-established hedgerow network
occurring at and in the surrounding landscape. High value foraging habitat for bats occur to the
south of the proposed turbine location at Bishops Lough and at Altartate Lough and the
surrounding wetland habitat. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 33 31/08/2026
Bat Roost Inspection Survey
The ruined structure to the southeast of the proposed turbine location is of low potential to
support bats. The structure is now comprised of a remain gable wall and stone rubble along
former side walls. Mature cedar and sycamore trees occur surrounding the ruin. These trees did
not support preferred roost features for bats and are considered to be of low roost potential for
bats.
Bat Activity Survey
The results of the bat activity monitoring completed at the proposed turbine location are detailed
in Table 4.2 below. Approximately 72 hours of bat monitoring was completed at the proposed
turbine location.
The location of the monitoring point is shown on Figure 2.2 above. A minimum of four species
of bats were recorded during monitoring. These include a Myotis species, Leisler's bat,
Common pipistrelle and Soprano pipistrelle.
Table 4.2: Results of Bat Activity Monitoring adjacent to the proposed turbine location
Date MYOSPP NYCLEI PIPPIP PIPPYG PLEAUR Total/Night
20240501 0 148 116 435 0 699
20240502 0 305 63 265 0 633
20240503 0 327 287 176 0 790
20240504 0 160 208 149 0 517
20240505 3 267 420 198 0 888
20240506 0 106 246 106 0 458
20240507 0 209 140 74 0 423
20240508 0 206 232 22 0 460
20240509 0 1 17 2 0 20
Total/Species 3 1729 1729 1427 0 4888
A total of 4,888 bat passes were recorded in the vicinity of the proposed turbine location during
monitoring.
The dominant species recorded during monitoring was Common pipistrelle and Leisler's bat,
followed by Soprano pipistrelle Myotis species were recorded at very low levels during the
monitoring session whilst no activity for Nathusius pipistrelle or brown long-eared bat was
recorded. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 34 31/08/2026
There are varying methods to quantity bat activity recorded during automatic static monitoring.
Matthews et al. (2016) provided an arbitrary threshold for levels of low, medium and high bat
activity. Kepel (2011) used the bat passes recorded per hour as a metric against which activity
levels can be assigned. The Mammal Society established EcoBat, an online database that
compares bat activity recorded at a monitoring point against all other bat activity held by the
database for the surrounding area. However the EcoBat application tool is currently unavailable
for use to analyse bat data recorded during automatic monitoring sessions . As such the bat
activity recorded on site has been categorised in line with the method described by Kepel
(2011). Kepel (2011) assigned bat activity based on bat passes per hour as follows:
Pipistrelle species and Leisler's bat: Low = <3.5 passes; Moderate = 3.6 – 6.5; High = >6.5
All Other Bat species: Low = <4.0 passes per hour; 4.1 to 10 passes per hour; high = >10 passes
per hour.
The overall median nightly bat activity levels, as per Kepel (2011) recorded for each taxa during
the monitoring survey are provided in Table 4.3 below. As can be seen on Table 4.3 bat activity
for Common pipistrelle was high, whilst activity for all other species was low.
Table 4.3: Bat Activity Categorisation
Species Median Bat
Pass/Hour Activity Category
Common pipistrelle 26 High
Soprano pipistrelle 18.62 High
Leisler's bat 25.75 High
Myotis species 0 Low
Brown long-eared bat 0 Low
RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 35 31/08/2026
4.4.3 BIRDS
4.4.3.1 Existing Records
The 4 no. tetrads comprising the area of search at and surrounding the proposed development
was searched for the presence of sensitive bird species2. Table 4.1 lists the bird species for
which records are held in this area of search. As can be seen on Table 4.1 the majority of records
held for sensitive bird species in the area of search are from The Second Atlas of Breeding
Birds in Britain and Ireland: 1988-1991.
Table 4.3: National Biodiversity Data Centre Records for Sensitive Bird Species within
the Area of Search
Species name Date of last
record
Sensitivity
Barn Owl (Tyto alba) 31/12/2011 Raptor; Red List
Black-headed Gull (Chroicocephalus
ridibundus)
31/07/1991 Waterbird; Amber
List
Goldcrest (Regulus regulus) 31/07/1991 Amber List
Grey Heron (Ardea cinerea) 31/07/1991 Waterbird
Grey Wagtail (Motacilla cinerea) 31/07/1991 Red List
House Martin (Delichon urbicum) 31/07/1991 Amber List
Kestrel (Falco tinnunculus) 31/07/1991 Raptor; Red List
Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) 31/07/1991 Waterbird; Amber
List
Meadow Pipit (Anthus pratensis) 31/07/1991 Red List
Mute Swan (Cygnus olor) 31/07/1991 Waterbird; Amber
List
Skylark (Alauda arvensis) 31/07/1991 Amber List
Spotted Flycatcher (Muscicapa striata) 31/07/1991 Amber List
Starling (Sturnus vulgaris) 07/06/2018 Amber List
Swallow (Hirundo rustica) 21/08/2021 Amber List
Swift (Apus apus) 07/06/2018 Red List
Willow Warbler (Phylloscopus trochilus) 31/07/1991 Amber List
No records are held by the National Biodiversity Data Centre for the presence of Whooper
Swan or Greenland White-fronted Geese within the 4 tetrads at and surrounding the proposed
2 See Section 2.3.1 bullet criteria defining sensitive bird species RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 36 31/08/2026
development. The National Biodiversity Data Centre does hold records for the presence of
Whooper Swan in the wider area with the hectad H52 and H42. A total of 12 records are held
for Whooper Swan within the hectad H52. The nearest identifiable location for a Whooper
Swan record within the H52 is at Annagose Lough, approximately 6km to the east of the
proposed development. Other locations for which records are held include Carlougharoe
Lough; Lough Feagh & Drumate; Cois Darragh, Newblis; and Annaghmakerrig Lough
A total of 4 records are held for Whooper Swan within the hectad H42, with the nearest
identifiable location for a Whooper Swan record within this hectad being located near the River
Finn, approximately 8.5km to the southwest.
No records are held by the National Biodiversity Data Centre for the presence of Greenland
White-fronted Geese within the hectad H52 and H42.
IWeBS site occurring in the wider area surrounding the proposed development are listed below
in Table 4.4 and the Whooper Swan count records for these sites from 2013/2014 to 2022/2023
are listed, along with the distance of each site from the proposed development. There are no
records for the presence of Greenland White-fronted Geese at the IWeBS subsites listed below
that occur in the wider surrounding area.
Table 4.4: Whooper Swan Count Records for IWeBS Site in the Wider Surrounding Area
(NAC = No Annual Count completed)
IWEBS
Site
Distance 13/14 14/15 15/16 16/17 17/18 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 22/23 Mean
Finn/Lacky
Catchment
5km 0 156* 0 0 153 150 NAC 0 0 67 54.25
Annagose
Lough
6km NAC NAC 4 NAC NAC NAC NAC NAC NAC 13 13
Carlougharoe
Lough
6km NAC NAC NAC NAC NAC 11 NAC NAC NAC 11 RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 37 31/08/2026
Loughs
Feagh &
Drumate
7.5km NAC NAC 8 NAC NAC NAC NAC NAC - NAC 8
*Sourced from Lewis et al. (2019)
The IWeBS counts show that of the above sites, the Finn/Lacky catchment has supported the
highest numbers of Whooper Swan over the 10 year period 13/14 to 22/23. However, based on
the count results Whooper Swan reliance on this site was variable with this species being absent
during 6 of the 9 annual IWeBs surveys completed at this site. When recorded during the other
3 years the peak count for this site exceeded the threshold (i.e. 150) for a site of national
importance for Whooper Swan. The mean peak count of 54.25 over the 10 year period falls
well below the national importance threshold.
In addition to the above baseline information, further baseline data was gathered from a review
of bird studies completed in support of wind energy development planning applications in the
wider surrounding area. Two no. wind energy development applications have been identified
within a c. 10km radius of the proposed development. These comprise Drumlins Park Wind
Farm, located c. 6.4km from the proposed development, and Connolly Meats Single Wind
Turbine, located c. 11km from the proposed development.
Detailed bird surveys were completed for the Drumlins Park Wind Farm , including census
surveys for 16 no. lakes in the vicinity of the Wind Farm. The surveys were completed over 3
no. non-breeding seasons comprising 2016/2017; 2017/2018; and 2018/2019. The Drumlins
Park Wind Farm was not observed to be located within a regular flight path for Whooper Swan
and the wider surrounding area was not identified as an area supporting large numbers of
Whooper Swan. Whooper Swan were found to be absent from the majority of lakes surveyed
as part of the baseline surveys, with this species only being observed at Annagose Lough (total
of 60 recorded), as well as two other lakes.
Surveys for the Connolly Meats Single Wind Turbine comprised 1 no. vantage point watch of
a duration of 1.5 hours. No Whooper Swans were recorded during the baseline survey
completed for this turbine. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 38 31/08/2026
4.4.3.2 Bird Watch Ireland Bird Sensitivity Mapping
The project site is not an important area for sensitive bird species (i.e. species listed as Red and
Amber on the Birds of Conservation Concern in Ireland) and has not been identified by
BirdWatch Ireland as being located within a sensitive bird area for wind energy development.
The BirdWatch Ireland Sensitivity Mapping for the surrounding area has identified it to be of
low sensitivity.
4.4.3.3 Field Survey Results
A total of 29 bird species were recorded during the bird surveys completed for the proposed
development between 2023, 2024 and 2026.
A total of 7 no. target species were recorded during vantage point surveys. The species observed
comprise: Buzzard; Lesser Black-backed Gull, Grey Heron; Herring Gull; Greylag Goose;
Mallard; and Mute Swan. The number of flight lines identified for each of the above species
was low throughout the 51 hours of vantage point monitoring completed for the proposed
development to date. The number of flight lines associated with each species to date are as
follows:
Buzzard – 7 flights recorded, 6 of an individual and 1 of a group of 3 birds
Lesser Black-backed Gull – 1 flight recorded of 1 individual
Grey Heron – 2 flights recorded, both of individual birds
Herring Gull – 2 flights recorded, both of individual birds
Greylag Coose – 1 flight recorded of a flock of 3 birds
Mallard – 3 flights recorded, 2 of individual birds and one of a pair
Mute Swan – 1 flight recorded of a pair of swans.
Other bird species recorded during vantage point surveys, transect surveys comprise: Blackbird;
Blue Tit; Chaffinch; Chiffchaff; Goldcrest; Great Tit; Hood Crow; House Martin; Jackdaw; RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 39 31/08/2026
Linnet; Magpie; Meadow Pipit; Pied Wagtail; Robin; Rook; Starling; Skylark; Wood Pigeon;
Wren; and Wood Pigeon.
Waterbird species recorded during census surveys of Bishop’s Lough to the south of the
proposed turbine location comprised: Coot; Great Crested Grebe; Grey Heron; Herring Gull;
Lesser Black-backed Gull; Mallard; and Mute Swan.
The current conservation status of the 29 species recorded, as per the Birds of Conservation
Concern in Ireland (2021 – 2026) (Gilbert et al., 2021) are as follows:
• 1 no. Red-listed species, Birds of high Conservation Concern: Meadow Pipit
• 11 no. Amber-Listed species, Birds of Medium Conservation concern: Coot; Goldcrest;
Great Crested Grebe; Greylag Goose; Herring Gull; House Martin; Lesser Black-
backed Gull; Mallard; Mute Swan; Starling; Skylark
• 17 no. Green-list species, Birds of Low Conservation Concern: all remaining species
observed are of low conservation concern.
4.4.4 HERPETOFAUNA
No records for the presence of herpetofauna are held by the National Biodiversity Data Centre
for the area of search at and surrounding the proposed development.
No frogs, Common Lizards nor Smooth Newt were observed during the site surveys.
4.4.5 INVERTEBRATES
No previous records for rare, threatened or protected invertebrates have been recorded at or in
the vicinity of the proposed development. No such invertebrate species were observed during
field surveys.
4.5 Aquatic Fauna
4.5.1 FISH
The water quality of the Legarhill Stream flowing through the project site is perturbed as a
result of excessive nutrient inputs and limits the fisheries value of this river. The River Finn
downstream is similarly affected by nutrient inputs. This river was formerly considered to be RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 40 31/08/2026
one of the best brown trout fisheries in Ulster, but chronic pollution over years destroyed this
status. Previous IFI fisheries surveys along the River Finn have recorded a total of 9 fish
species. Gudgeon was the most abundant species, followed by roach, brown trout, perch, pike,
European eel, stone loach, three-spined stickleback, and juvenile lamprey.
5.0 SITE EVALUATION
5.1 Designated Conservation Areas
The European Sites occurring in the wider surrounding area are of international importance
(Rating A).
5.2 Habitats
No rare or protected flora species were recorded during the current habitat surveys within or
adjacent to the footprint of the proposed wind turbine site.
The improved agricultural grassland and buildings and artificial surfaces occurring within the
project site are considered to be of low value (Rating E).
The hedgerows occurring within the project site are of local importance (higher value) (Rating
D).
The Legarhill Stream is local importance (higher value) (Rating D).
5.3 Fauna
5.3.1 NON-VOLANT MAMMALS
The lands occurring and in surrounding the proposed turbine and development footprint are not
considered to play an important role in supporting significant populations of mammals. No
evidence of non-volant mammals breeding or resting places were identified during field surveys
and no field signs indicating the presence of protected non-volant mammals species were noted
during the surveys. Based upon the findings of the field surveys the site is of low value (Rating
E) for non-volant mammals.
5.3.2 BATS
In line with Kepel’s approach to quantifying bat activity, very low levels of bat activity for all
species was recorded at and in the vicinity of the proposed turbine location. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 41 31/08/2026
The presence of Common pipistrelle, Soprano pipistrelle and Leisler's bat foraging at high
levels surrounding the proposed turbine location is not unexpected. These species are
widespread and commonly occurring throughout the country and are “commonly encountered
during bat surveys” (NPWS, 2019). These species are also “very general in their habitat
preference, foraging in woodland, riparian habitats and parkland, along linear features in
farmland, and in towns and cities” (NPWS, 2019). The national population of these three
species is increasing and no existing pressures or threats to the conservation status of this
species at a national level have been identified. Overall the future prospects for this species in
terms of range, population and habitat are ‘Good’ (NPWS, 2019).
In light of the above, the absence of any roosting opportunities within the vicinity of the
proposed turbine location and the high median levels of activity for these species recorded
during monitoring the project site is considered to be representative of a site of local importance
(higher value) (Rating D) for Common pipistrelle, Soprano pipistrelle and Leisler's bat.
5.3.3 BIRDS
For the purposes of the impact assessment the bird species identified as representing key
sensitive receptors to be assessed further for potential impacts are identified in Table 5.1. The
identification of key sensitive receptors and the associated sensitivity assigned follows the
criteria outlined in Section 2.3.1 above. Only bird species that have been included as target
species or that have been identified during the baseline description above that fall under the
criteria defining bird sensitivity are included for consideration as Key Ornithological Receptors.
Table 5.1: Key Ornithological Receptors
Species name Sensitivity KOR Rationale
Barn Owl Raptor; Red List Historically recorded in the area of search
Black-headed Gull Waterbird; Amber List Historically recorded in the area of search
Buzzard Raptor Recorded during field surveys.
Goldcrest Amber List Historically recorded in the area of search.
Recorded during field surveys.
Great Crested
Grebe
Amber List; Waterbird Recorded during field surveys.
Greenland White-
fronted Geese
Waterbird, Amber List No historical records in the area of search.
Identified by NPWS as sensitive species
Grey Heron Waterbird Historically recorded in the area of search.
Recorded during field surveys.
Grey Wagtail Red List Historically recorded in the area of search
Herring Gull Amber List Recorded during field surveys. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 42 31/08/2026
House Martin Amber List Historically recorded in the area of search.
Recorded during field surveys.
Kestrel Raptor; Red List Historically recorded in the area of search
Lesser Black-
backed Gull
Waterbird; Amber List Recorded during field surveys.
Mallard Waterbird; Amber List Historically recorded in the area of search.
Recorded during field surveys.
Meadow Pipit Red List Historically recorded in the area of search.
Recorded during field surveys.
Mute Swan Waterbird; Amber List Historically recorded in the area of search.
Recorded during field surveys.
Skylark Amber List Historically recorded in the area of search.
Recorded during field surveys.
Spotted Flycatcher Amber List Historically recorded in the area of search
Starling Amber List Historically recorded in the area of search.
Recorded during field surveys.
Swallow Amber List Historically recorded in the area of search.
Recorded during field surveys.
Swift Red List Historically recorded in the area of search
Willow Warbler Amber List Historically recorded in the area of search
Whooper Swan Waterbird; Amber List Identified by NPWS as sensitive species
5.3.4 AQUATIC FAUNA
The Legarhill Stream is considered to be of limited fisheries value and is of Local importance
(lower value) (Rating E) for aquatic fauna.
6.0 DO NOTHING IMPACT
In the absence of the proposed development the available land-holding and the footprint of the
proposed development will continue to be used for conifer plantation.
7.0 POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT
Potential impacts associated with the proposed development will arise during both the
construction and operation phases. The installation of the wind turbine and associated
infrastructure such as hard standing, access road and a grid connection route will result in direct
and permanent habitat loss under the footprint of the development. A further temporary loss of
habitat associated with areas for construction work will arise during the construction phase.
However, with the employment of best practice construction methods, this will be limited and
will be closely associated with the development footprint. Sections 7.1 and 7.2 describe the
impacts associated with habitat loss, severance/fragmentation and disturbance that may arise RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 43 31/08/2026
during the construction and operation of the proposed development. It is anticipated that direct
impacts associated with the loss of habitats will generally be restricted to the construction phase.
7.1 Construction Phase
The activities associated with the construction phase that will have the potential to affect
habitats and species include:
• The excavation of soils and sub-soils at the turbine-base location and hardstand area
• The upgrade and/or construction of an access road
• The construction of a 20 KV substation
• The construction of a cable duct from the turbine to the substation.
• The operation of heavy plant and machinery
• The management of excavated areas, excavated soil and construction materials stored
onsite.
7.1.1 IMPACTS TO DESIGNATED NATURE CONSERVATION AREAS
The Screening Report for Appropriate Assessment provided with this application examines the
potential impact of the proposed development to European Sites (i.e. SAC and SPAs). No
NHAs or pNHAs are connected to the project and there will be no potential for the project to
result in impacts to such sites in the wider surrounding area.
7.1.2 CONSTRUCTION PHASE IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED TURBINE TO HABITATS
Direct habitat loss during the construction stage of the proposed development will be confined
to areas occurring under the footprint of the turbine location, hardstand, access road, cable
trenches and substation. Table 7.1 outlines the extent of habitat loss for each habitat occurring
within the available land-holding, along with the elements of the development that will result
in habitat loss and the significance of the impacts of such habitat loss.
Other potential indirect impacts to habitats within and surrounding the proposed site are
outlined in Table 7.2. Note that specific details with regard to impact to the Lough Oughter And
Associated Loughs SAC and overlapping conservation areas are provided in the Screening
Report for Appropriate Assessment. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 44 31/08/2026
Table 7.1: Direct Habitat Loss resulting from the Infrastructural Elements of the Proposed Development
Habitats Element or Wind
Farm
Infrastructure
Feature
Responsible for
Habitat Loss
Approximate
Area of Habitat
Loss (m²) to the
Proposed
Development Site
Significance of Habitat Loss
Improved agricultural
grassland
Turbine Base; Hard-
stand; Access track;
Substation; Cable
trenches
12000 The project will result in the loss of approximately 12000m2 of improved agricultural
grassland. This represents a negligible fraction of the area of improved agricultural
grassland occurring in the surrounding area (i.e. <1% of the area of improved agricultural
grassland). Furthermore the improved agricultural grassland to be lost to the footprint are
representative of habitat of Local importance (lower value) (Rating E).
The loss of a negligible area of improved agricultural grassland to the proposed
development footprint will represent a negligible magnitude impact. A negligible
magnitude impact to this habitat of local ecological value (Rating E) will result in an
impact of imperceptible significance.
Buildings and artificial
surfaces
Access track 157 A discrete area of existing buildings and artificial surfaces occurs under the footprint of
the project. The project will result in the retention of this habitat type at the location and
as such will be representative of a neutral effect. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 45 31/08/2026
Hedgerow Site Entrance Sight
Lines
125m Approximately 125m of hedgerow will be removed to provide site access site and the
proposed turbine hardstand. The removal of a discrete area of hedgerow, which is of local
value, will represent and impact of low magnitude and an effect of minor significance.
Hedgerow Bat Buffer mitigation
measures
215m As part of the mitigation measures for bats a buffer will be implemented around the
proposed turbine that will require the removal of all hedgerow habitat within the buffer.
The buffer will extend for 87 m around the turbine hub. This will amount to circa 240 of
hedgerow habitat within the buffer area that will be required to be removed.
RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 46 31/08/2026
Table 7.2: Significance of Indirect Impacts to Habitats Arising from the Different Elements of the Proposed Development
Element Details Potential Impact Receptors Affected Value Potential Significance
of Impact without
mitigation
Access track and
construction vehicle
movements
During the initial stages
of the construction
phase vehicles will
have to cross over
grassland and peatland
habitats
Removal of surface vegetation, till and
peatland overburden along access roads.
Slippage of materials to drainage ditches and
conveyance downstream to watercourses.
Drainage ditch and
Legarhill Stream and
River Finn
downstream and
associated aquatic
fauna
D Short to long-term; minor
to moderate negative
impacts
RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 47 31/08/2026
Element Details Potential Impact Receptors Affected Value Potential Significance
of Impact without
mitigation
Minor disturbance impacts to fauna occurring
in the vicinity of the access road and cable
trench.
Fauna E, D; Minor, temporary negative
impact RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 48 31/08/2026
Element Details Potential Impact Receptors Affected Value Potential Significance
of Impact without
mitigation
Excavations and the
installation of a
turbine foundation,
access track
foundation, hardstand
and a substation
foundation.
Excavations will be
undertaken at the
turbine base.
Foundations for the
turbine have to be
founded on rockhead,
which requires the
excavation of peat soils
and mineral soils where
present. Once
Sediment pollution and associated
hydrological impacts to surface watercourses.
It is noted that standard best practice
measures will be implemented during the
construction phase of the project and with
such measures in place the potential for the
loss of suspended solids to receiving
watercourses will be low and not significant.
Legarhill Stream and
River Finn and aquatic
fauna
D
Short to long-term; minor
to moderate negative
impacts
RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 49 31/08/2026
Element Details Potential Impact Receptors Affected Value Potential Significance
of Impact without
mitigation
excavation is complete,
the turbine is generally
secured by a piled or
rock anchored
platform. While
reinstatement of
vegetation post
construction will
reduce the area of hard
standing to that
occupied by the turbine
platform, the area of
ground required for
base excavation will
include an area for
crane hard-stand.
Oil and chemical contamination of surface
waterbodies from machinery and materials
associated with excavations and the
installation of the turbine foundation. The
discharge of such contaminants to surface
waterbodies will have the potential to
negatively affect water quality and protected
fauna associated with the waterbodies
downstream of the proposed site.
It is noted that standard best practice
measures will be implemented during the
construction phase of the project and with
such measures in place the potential for the
loss of such materials to receiving
watercourses will be low and not significant.
Legarhill Stream and
River Finn and aquatic
fauna
D
Short to long-term; minor
to moderate negative
impacts
RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 50 31/08/2026
Element Details Potential Impact Receptors Affected Value Potential Significance
of Impact without
mitigation
Minor disturbance impacts to fauna occurring
in the vicinity of the turbines and hardstand
location.
Fauna E, D; Minor, temporary negative
impact RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 51 31/08/2026
Element Details Potential Impact Receptors Affected Value Potential Significance
of Impact without
mitigation
Site Access road and
Cable Trenches
A site access track is
necessary to access the
turbine location as well
as the substation and
control building. The
access road is also
required during
construction, turbine
delivery and for
ongoing operation and
maintenance of the
wind farm.
A cable trench will
also be developed and
incorporate excavation
work.
Limited potential for indirect impacts given
the absence of watercourses in the vicinity of
these habitats.
Fauna E, D; Minor, temporary negative
impact RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 52 31/08/2026
7.1.3 CONSTRUCTION PHASE IMPACTS TO FAUNA
Potential negative impacts to otters and aquatic fauna of the Legarhill Stream and River Finn
have been considered in Table 7.2 above.
7.1.3.1 Badgers
No breeding sites or resting places of protected terrestrial non-volant mammals such as badgers
were noted within or immediately adjacent to the project site. As such the construction phase
of the project will not have the potential to result in significant disturbance to non-volant
terrestrial mammals.
7.1.3.2 Bats
The construction phase of the proposed development will not result in the loss of, or disturbance
to any structures with the potential to support roosting bats. No trees with potential to support
roosting bats will be felled as a result of the construction phase.
The proposed wind turbine development will result in the loss of discrete areas of hedgerow
that will be negligible in the context of the mapped area and wider surrounding area of such
habitats. As such the project will not result in a perceptible change to the availability of potential
bat foraging habitat.
Therefore, the potential for negative impacts to bat species as a result of the loss of these
habitats or disturbance during the construction phase is considered to be negligible to minor
and insignificant.
7.1.3.3 Birds
7.1.3.3.1 Effects of Habitat Loss for Raptor Species
Three no. raptor species, namely Barn Owl, Buzzard and Kestrel have been identified as key
ornithological receptors.
Approximately 1.2 ha of improved agricultural grassland will be permanently or temporarily
removed/modified to accommodate the turbine foundation, hardstanding, access and associated
infrastructure.
Improved agricultural grassland is capable of providing foraging opportunities for Buzzard and
Kestrel, particularly where short swards facilitate detection and capture of small mammals and RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 53 31/08/2026
other prey. Barn Owl may also hunt over agricultural grassland; however, intensively managed
homogeneous grassland generally provides poorer foraging habitat than rough grassland, rank
field margins, hedgerows and other structurally diverse edge habitat. BirdWatch Ireland
identifies prey-rich rough grassland, unmanaged field margins, hedgerows and woodland edges
among the more important Barn Owl foraging habitats. As such the improved agricultural
grassland at and surrounding the proposed development is not considered to provide optimum
foraging habitat for barn owl.
The loss of 1.2 ha represents a small area in the context of the extensive agricultural landscape
surrounding the site. Similar grassland habitat is widespread locally and the development would
not be expected to materially reduce the availability of foraging resources at the scale of the
home range of Buzzard, Kestrel or Barn Owl.
For Buzzard and Kestrel, the effect is therefore considered to represent a small-scale reduction
in potential foraging habitat, while for Barn Owl the affected improved grassland is likely to be
of relatively limited value compared with structurally more diverse habitats.
The magnitude of effect is assessed as Low/Negligible, resulting in a Minor Adverse effect at
most, which is not significant at the local population level.
Approximately 340 m of hedgerow will be removed. The hedgerow habitat to be removed has
the potential to provide:
• perching opportunities for Buzzard and Kestrel;
• habitat for small mammals and other prey;
• sheltered or prey-rich hunting edges;
• potential movement/foraging corridors for Barn Owl; and
• where sufficiently mature trees occur, potential nesting opportunities for Buzzard or
Kestrel.
Hedgerows and associated unmanaged grassy margins are specifically recognised as important
components of Barn Owl foraging habitat in Ireland (Lusby & O’Clery, 2014).
The removal of 340m of hedgerow will consequently result in some localised reduction in
potential foraging and prey-producing edge habitat. However, no active raptor nest has been
identified within the area proposed for removal or within the immediate turbine vicinity, and RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 54 31/08/2026
the affected hedgerow represents only a proportion of the wider hedgerow network within the
surrounding agricultural landscape.
Provided that hedgerow loss is restricted to the minimum necessary and replacement hedgerow
planting is incorporated into the development, the effect would be spatially limited and capable
of being compensated over time.
For Buzzard and Kestrel, the magnitude of habitat-loss effect is assessed as Low, corresponding
to a Minor Adverse effect, which would not be significant at the local population level.
For Barn Owl, greater precaution is appropriate because the species is Red -listed and relies
disproportionately on suitable linear and edge habitats within intensively farmed landscapes.
Nevertheless, in the absence of a breeding site and given the relatively limited extent of
hedgerow removal, the effect is considered Minor Adverse at the local scale and not significant,
subject to appropriate habitat reinstatement/enhancement.
7.1.3.3.2 Effects of Disturbance/Displacement for Raptor Species
Construction activities will involve the movement and operation of machinery, vegetation
clearance, groundworks, excavation, turbine foundation construction, delivery of turbine
components, erection works and increased human presence. These activities will generate
temporary noise, visual disturbance and vehicle movements which have the potential to cause
birds to avoid the immediate construction area.
The ecological consequences of such disturbance depend substantially upon whether birds are
breeding. Disturbance affecting an occupied raptor nest can result in temporary nest
abandonment, reduced provisioning rates, breeding failure or, in severe circumstances,
abandonment of a territory. Conversely, non-breeding birds disturbed from an individual
foraging location are generally capable of moving to alternative areas within their wider home
range.
No Buzzard, Kestrel or Barn Owl breeding sites were recorded within approximately 500 m of
the proposed turbine location during the baseline surveys. On the basis of the available baseline
information, the construction works are therefore not predicted to result in disturbance of an
established breeding site. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 55 31/08/2026
Buzzards and Kestrel occurring within the surrounding area may occasionally forage over or
pass through the construction site. During periods of intensive activity, individuals may
temporarily avoid the immediate construction footprint.
Given the extensive availability of agricultural land surrounding the development, displaced
birds would have considerable alternative foraging habitat available. Construction activity will
also be temporary and spatially concentrated.
In the absence of an occupied nest within the construction zone of influence,
disturbance/displacement of Buzzard is predicted to be of Low magnitude, short-term and
reversible, resulting in a Minor Adverse effect which is not significant.
Barn Owl warrants somewhat different consideration because it is primarily
crepuscular/nocturnal, while all construction activity will occur during daylight hours.
Consequently, there is likely to be limited temporal overlap between the periods of greatest
construction activity and peak Barn Owl foraging activity. As such given the absence of an
occupied nest or important roost at or surrounding the proposed development,
disturbance/displacement during construction is assessed as Low magnitude, short-term and
reversible, resulting in a Minor Adverse effect which is not significant.
7.1.3.3.3 Effects of Habitat Loss for Waterbird Species
The waterbird assemblage recorded during baseline surveys and/or identified from historical
records comprises Great Crested Grebe, Coot, Lesser Black-backed Gull, Herring Gull, Black-
headed Gull, Mute Swan, Grey Heron and Mallard.
Great Crested Grebe and Coot were restricted to Bishop's Lough during the baseline surveys
and were not recorded using the proposed development footprint. As such the magnitude of
direct habitat loss for Great Crested Grebe and Coot is therefore assessed as Negligible,
resulting in a Negligible effect which is Not Significant.
Lesser Black-backed Gull, Herring Gull and Black-headed Gull are comparatively mobile and
opportunistic species capable of exploiting a broad range of terrestrial and aquatic feeding
habitats.
Agricultural grassland can provide feeding opportunities, particularly following mowing,
grazing, cultivation or other activities that increase the accessibility of soil invertebrates and RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 56 31/08/2026
other prey. Consequently, the 1.2 ha of improved agricultural grassland to be affected represents
potential foraging habitat for these species.
However, the affected area is very small in the context of the extensive improved agricultural
landscape surrounding the site. There is no evidence from the baseline surveys that the
development footprint represents a regular feeding concentration, important roosting location
or other key resource for any of the three gull species. As such the magnitude of habitat-loss
effect is therefore assessed as Negligible to Low, resulting in a Negligible to Minor Adverse
effect which is Not Significant.
7.1.3.3.4 Effects of Disturbance/Displacement for Waterbird Species
Table 7.3 below provides an assessment of the construction phase disturbance and displacement
effects for waterbirds.
Table 7.3: Assessment of Construction phase Disturbance and Displacement Effects to
Waterbirds
Receptor Assessment of Construction-Phase Disturbance /
Displacement
Magnitude /
Significance
Gulls –
Lesser Black-
backed Gull,
Herring Gull
and Black-
headed Gull
Construction activity, including machinery movements,
earthworks and increased human presence, may result in
temporary avoidance of the immediate works area and
adjoining agricultural fields. Gulls are highly mobile and
able to exploit alternative feeding areas, which are extensive
within the surrounding agricultural landscape. No important
gull breeding colony, roost or concentrated feeding area has
been identified within or immediately adjoining the
construction footprint. Any displacement is therefore
expected to be temporary, highly localised and readily
reversible following completion of works.
Negligible–
Low
magnitude;
Imperceptible
to Minor
Adverse, Not
Significant.
Great Crested
Grebe and
Coot
Both species were recorded exclusively at Bishop's Lough
during baseline surveys and were not recorded using the
development footprint. Construction will not occur within
the lake or result in direct loss of aquatic habitat. Noise,
machinery movements and other construction activity could
potentially result in temporary disturbance where perceptible
from Bishop's Lough; however, substantial displacement
from the lake is considered unlikely given the separation of
the works from the aquatic habitat. Construction access and
unnecessary activity towards the lake should be avoided.
Low
magnitude,
temporary and
reversible;
Minor
Adverse at
most, Not
Significant. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 57 31/08/2026
Grey Heron Construction activity may temporarily displace individual
Grey Herons from feeding areas close to active works.
However, Grey Heron is highly mobile and capable of
exploiting numerous alternative feeding locations within the
wider landscape. No heronry or important feeding
concentration has been identified within the construction
zone of influence. Any displacement is therefore expected to
involve occasional individuals and to be temporary and
highly localised.
Negligible–
Low
magnitude;
Minor
Adverse at
most, Not
Significant.
Mallard Construction noise, vehicle movements and increased human
activity could result in temporary disturbance of Mallard
using nearby habitats, including potentially Bishop's Lough.
However, no direct works will occur within aquatic habitat
and no important Mallard breeding, feeding or roosting
concentration has been identified within the construction
footprint. Any avoidance response is expected to be
temporary and reversible, with suitable alternative habitat
remaining available.
Low
magnitude,
temporary and
reversible;
Minor
Adverse at
most, Not
Significant.
Mute Swan Construction activity has the potential to cause temporary
disturbance where Mute Swan occurs at Bishop's Lough or
within surrounding agricultural habitats. No important
feeding area, breeding site or regular movement corridor has
been identified within the construction footprint. No aquatic
habitat will be directly affected and extensive alternative
terrestrial habitat remains available. Subject to minimising
unnecessary construction activity towards Bishop's Lough,
any displacement is expected to be temporary, spatially
restricted and reversible following completion of
construction.
Low
magnitude,
temporary and
reversible;
Minor
Adverse, Not
Significant.
7.1.3.3.5 Effects of Habitat loss for Whooper Swan & Greenland White-fronted Geese
In their submission to Monaghan County Council with the NPWS have identified Whooper
Swan as a key ornithological receptor in relation to the proposed single-turbine development.
The NPWS submission specifically notes that Bishop's Lough is identified in the Monaghan
County Development Plan as a site of biodiversity importance at county scale and may provide
suitable habitat for intermittent use by Whooper Swan during the lifetime of any planning
consent. The NPWS also reference Greenland White-fronted Geese in their submission with
respect to assessment of potential impact arising from the proposed development. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 58 31/08/2026
This potential future use is therefore considered explicitly and precautionarily, notwithstanding
the absence of evidence that Whooper Swan or Greenland White-fronted Geese currently make
regular use of either the proposed development site or Bishop's Lough.
Whooper Swan and Greenland White-fronted Geese are listed on Annex I of the EU Birds
Directive and are Amber-listed under the Birds of Conservation Concern in Ireland. Ireland
supports internationally important wintering populations for both species. NPWS notes that
significant proportions of the biogeographic population winter in Ireland, with birds using
wetlands for feeding and secure roosting.
Both species are also relevant to agricultural habitats. For instance the 2020 International Swan
Census found that 74% of Whooper Swans recorded in Ireland were feeding on improved or
rough grassland, demonstrating that agricultural grassland can constitute an important winter
feeding resource.
Notwithstanding the above it is noted that:
no Whooper Swan or Greenland White-fronted Geese records have been identified within
approximately c. 2 km of the proposed turbine from the historical records reviewed;
the nearest identified historical location, for Whooper Swan, is the Finn/Lacky Catchment I-
WeBS site, approximately 5 km northeast of the proposed development (i.e. at the limit of the
core foraging range for overwintering Whooper Swan (Scottish Natural Heritage, 2016);
no record of a historical used site by Greenland White-fronted Geese is held by National
Biodiversity Data Centre or IWeBs for the surrounding area;
Whooper Swan was not recorded during the baseline bird surveys at the proposed development
site or Bishop's Lough;
Whooper Swan counts at IWeBS sites in the wider surrounding area have generally recorded
low numbers of Whooper Swans in recent years (see Table 4.4 above), with all recording 10
year mean count abundance well below the threshold for national importance; and
The wider area to the east of the proposed development, surrounding the Drumlins Park Wind
Farm was not identified as an area of high Whooper Swan activity. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 59 31/08/2026
In view of the above there is currently no evidence of regular feeding, roosting or flight activity
by Whooper Swan or Greenland White-fronted Geese at the development site or Bishop's
Lough. However, absence of records close to the proposed turbine does not mean that Whooper
Swan or Greenland White-fronted Geese could never occur there. The NBDC distribution
dataset confirms that Whooper Swan is widely distributed in Ireland, whilst on the basis of the
ecology of wd and Greenland White-fronted Geese suitable habitat in the form of improved
agricultural grassland in close proximity to a lake waterbody (i.e. Bishop’s Lough) is present
at and in the immediate vicinity of the proposed development. .
Accordingly, the assessment distinguishes between current use at the site, established by a
review of existing records and published baseline data and field survey results in 23/24 and
April 2026, and potential intermittent future use, particularly of Bishop's Lough, as raised by
NPWS.
Of the habitats directly affected, the loss of improved agricultural grassland is of relevance to
Whooper Swan and Greenland White-fronted Geese. The loss of approximately 1.2 ha of
improved agricultural grassland will result in the removal of potentially suitable Whooper Swan
and Greenland White-fronted Geese foraging habitat during the construction phase and for the
operation phase of the proposed development. However, on the basis that there are:
• no records of Whooper Swan or Greenland White-fronted Geese using the development
footprint,
• the absence of existing records for both species within approximately 2 km
• the presence of the nearest known Whooper Swan roosting location at the limit of the
core foraging range for Whooper Swan; and
• the miniscule proportion of the extensive agricultural grassland to be lost to the
proposed development in the context of the wider landscape;
the magnitude of direct habitat loss is assessed as Low/Negligible and the effect of habitat loss
as a result of the proposed development to Whooper Swan will be Not Signficant.
With respect to Bishop’s Lough it is noted that no part of Bishop's Lough will be directly
removed or modified by the development and provided construction runoff, sediment and
pollutants are prevented from entering the lake or hydrologically connected features, no direct
or indirect loss of potential Whooper Swan wetland habitat is predicted.
7.1.3.3.6 Effects of Disturbance/Displacement for Whooper Swans & Greenland White-fronted
Geese RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 60 31/08/2026
Table 7.4 below provides an assessment of the construction phase disturbance and displacement
effects for Whooper Swans and Greenland White-fronted Geese .
Table 7.4: Assessment of Construction phase Disturbance/Displacement to Whooper
Swan
Receptor Assessment of Construction-Phase Disturbance /
Displacement
Magnitude /
Significance
Whooper
Swan &
Greenland
White-
fronted Geese
Whooper Swan or Greenland White-fronted Geese was not
recorded during baseline surveys, and no historical records
have been identified within approximately 2 km of the
proposed turbine. The nearest identified occurrence is the
Finn/Lacky Catchment I-WeBS site, approximately 5 km
northeast and the limit of the 5km core foraging range of
Whooper Swan. No Greenland White-fronted Geese have
been recorded at this location. There is therefore no evidence
that the development footprint, surrounding agricultural
lands or Bishop's Lough currently support a regularly
occurring feeding or roosting flock of either Whooper Swan
or Greenland White-fronted Geese. Nevertheless, NPWS has
identified Bishop's Lough as potentially suitable for
intermittent Whooper Swan use during the lifetime of the
development, and the possibility of occasional use during
construction is therefore recognised on a precautionary basis.
Construction noise, machinery movements and increased
human activity could temporarily displace birds should they
occur at Bishop's Lough or within agricultural habitat close
to the works. No aquatic habitat at Bishop's Lough will be
directly affected, and extensive alternative agricultural
feeding habitat occurs within the surrounding landscape.
Any disturbance would therefore be expected to be
temporary, spatially restricted and reversible. Precautionary
monitoring of Bishop's Lough during winter construction, as
part of the Bird Monitoring and Management Plan (see
Appendix 2), together with an adaptive response where
construction is observed to cause repeated alert behaviour,
flushing or abandonment of a feeding/resting area, will
further reduce potential effects.
Low magnitude,
temporary and
reversible; Minor
Adverse, Not
Significant.
7.1.3.4 Aquatic Fauna
Earthworks associated with the construction phase of the project will necessitate the denuding
of surfaces. In the absence of appropriate mitigation measures such activities will have the RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 61 31/08/2026
potential to generate silt-laden runoff from the works area and for this runoff to be discharged
via existing preferential surface water flow pathways and drainage channels crossed by the
project. As part of the project one new crossing of the Legarhill Stream will be required.
During the construction phase standard best practice measures will be implemented on site to
eliminate the loss of contaminated surface water from construction areas to the surrounding
aquatic environment. This in turn will minimise the potential for the project to result in negative
effects to aquatic fauna.
7.2 Operational Phase
7.2.1 IMPACTS TO DESIGNATED NATURE CONSERVATION AREAS DURING THE
OPERATION PHASE
Refer to the Screening Report for Appropriate Assessment for an examination of potential
impacts to designated nature conservation areas.
7.2.2 OPERATION PHASE IMPACTS TO HABITATS
The operation phase of the proposed development will not cause additional significant or
adverse direct impacts to the quality or functionality of the habitats occurring within the
proposed development area.
7.2.3 OPERATION PHASE IMPACTS TO TERRESTRIAL FAUNA
7.2.3.1 Non-volant Mammals
No effects to protected non-volant mammals are predicted during the operation phase of the
proposed wind farm. As no field signs indicating the presence of such species were noted within
or adjacent to the proposed development footprint during field surveys and due to the limited
human presence for maintenance works during daylight hours, outside the period of peak
badger activity, no significant effects are predicted to affect badgers during the operation of the
proposed wind farm.
7.2.3.2 Bats
Potential effects to the local bat population include the following: RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 62 31/08/2026
• Effects on bat roosts
• Direct habitat loss
• Displacement and barrier effects
• Fatalities resulting from collision and barotraumas
Effects on Bat Roosts
No structures with potential to function as bat roosts occur within 200m of the turbine location.
No trees with potential to support bat roosts occur within a 200m radius of the turbine location.
Due to the absence of a potential roosting opportunities in the vicinity of the proposed turbine
location, there will be no direct or indirect impacts to bat roosts.
Direct Habitat Loss
As outlined in Section 7.1.3.2 the potential for negative impacts to bat species as a result of the
loss of these habitats or disturbance during the construction phase is considered to be negligible
to minor and insignificant.
Displacement & Disruption of Foraging Sites
The potential for displacement of bats from foraging habitats due to their avoidance of wind
turbines is still poorly understood and is likely to result in species-specific behavioural
responses. A number of studies have shown that bats avoid foraging in areas in the immediate
vicinity of turbines (Bach 2002). Other studies have shown that pipistrelle species become
habituated to the presence of turbines and are in general not displaced from foraging habitats
located adjacent to wind turbines (Bach & Rahmael, 2004).
In light of the presence of suitable bat habitat in the wider area surrounding the proposed
turbine, the potential for the turbine to result in displacement/disruption to bat foraging is
predicted to represent an impact of low magnitude and minor significance for the local bat
populations occurring in the wider surrounding area.
Potential Bat Fatalities
Research in Europe, Australia and North America has shown that the operation of wind turbines
can resulted in bat fatalities. The research suggests that peak casualties occur during migration
(Kunz et al. 2007; Rodrigues et al., 2008) and within extensive forested areas (Brinkmann &
Schauer-Weisshahn, 2006). Fatalities at wind farm sites can result from collision with the
turbine and turbine blades and barotraumas (i.e. damage to lungs caused by rapid or excessive
pressure changes in the vortices of moving turbine blades). Baerwald et al. (2008) suggested RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 63 31/08/2026
that barotrauma may be the overriding cause of bat mortality at wind farm sites. More recent
research has questioned this contention with Grodsky et al (2011) concluding that bat fatalities
at wind turbine sites are not exclusively or predominantly a result of barotrauma, but a
combination of both barotrauma and direct collision. More recently the results of forensic
pathology examination of bat corpses at wind farm sites by Rollins et al (2012) goes further in
questioning the predominance of barotrauma at wind farm sites. This research “strongly
suggests that traumatic injury, due to collision, is the major cause of bat mortality at wind farms
and, at best barotrauma is a minor etiology”.
With continued research, the understanding of bat fatalities at wind farm site is evolving. While
it is widely acknowledged that there is a lack of evidence with regard to collision/mortality at
operational wind turbines in Britain and Ireland, it is considered likely that such risks exist due
to the presence of the same species that have been shown to experience fatalities at wind farm
sites in Europe.
In addition to the absence of such evidence, no specific interim guidance is available in Ireland
to support the assessment of wind turbine impacts to bats. Due to the lack of national guidance
this report refers to Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH, 2019), Natural England’s Technical
Information Notes (TIN) 051 and 059 and other recent developments in the research of potential
risks posed by operational wind turbines to bats.
The NE TIN 059 guidance document facilitates an assessment of the potential impacts of a
single wind turbine to bats by identifying:
• The sensitivity of individual bats of different species to mortality based on flight
characteristics and habitat preference etc. and
• The degree of risk to bat populations base on the relative size of the populations of each
species.
The Natural England TINs provide recommendations for avoiding impacts to foraging bats.
This guidance recommends that a 50m buffer should be established between the rotor swept
area of the turbine and the nearest vegetation corridor. The application of a 50m buffer is
considered to minimise potential impacts to bats.
Further risk assessment guidance has also been provided by the Bat Conservation Trust (BCT)
in their guidance document Bat Surveys: Good Practice Guidelines (2012 & 2016). This
guidance sets out a number of factors (see Table 30.1 of the BCT 2012 guidelines) which aim
to establish the potential risk to bat species based on the features associated with a proposed RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 64 31/08/2026
site and proposed scheme. With reference to both Table 30.1 of the BCT guidelines and the
assessment criteria outlined in the NE TIN 051 Guidelines, the criteria used to establish the
fatality risk posed by the proposed turbine to bat species are as follows:
• Habitat quality surrounding the proposed development
• Presence of bat roosts that may be affected by the proposed development
• Habitat loss and/or displacement;
• Levels of bat activity recorded; and
• Sensitivity of species at the individual and population level to wind turbines
Habitat Quality Surrounding the Proposed Development
High value bat foraging habitat in the form of hedgerow occur in the vicinity of the proposed
turbine location and the wider surrounding area. High value habitat occurs to the south of the
proposed turbine location at lake and wetland habitats. The clearance of this vegetation will not
significantly alter the habitat quality of foraging bats in the surrounding area.
The Natural England guideline for a minimum buffer distance of 50m from the rotor swept area
to the nearest example of structured habitat will be implemented as part of the proposed
development and this buffer will decrease the risk to bat species.
Presence of Bat Roosts that may be Affected by the Proposed Development
See Section title ‘Effects of Bat Roosts’ in the early paragraphs of 7.2.3.1 above.
Habitat Loss And/Or Displacement
See Section titled ‘Displacement & Disruption of Foraging Sites’ above.
Levels of Bat Activity Recorded
High levels of bat activity have been recorded for Common pipistrelle, Soprano pipistrelle and
Leisler's bat at the proposed turbine location.
Sensitivity of Bat Species to Wind Turbines
The sensitivity of each of these species to turbines is outlined in the SNH Guidance document
(2019). Table 7.3 outlines the sensitivity of bats at the individual species level to wind turbines
(Source: SNH, 2019).
Table 7.5: Species Likely to be at Risk from Wind Turbines
Low Risk Medium Risk High Risk RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 65 31/08/2026
Myotis species Leisler’s bat
Long-eared bats Nathusius pipistrelle
Horseshoe bats Common pipistrelle
Soprano pipistrelle
Pipistrelles
Common, Soprano pipistrelle and Leisler's bat have been classified by the SNH Guidance
document as a species at high risk of turbine collision. Based on the assessment of habitats
occurring in the vicinity of the proposed turbine and the high levels of activity recorded for
Common pipistrelle, Soprano pipistrelle and Leisler's bat at the proposed turbine location, there
is, in the absence of appropriate mitigation measures, for this species to interact with the
proposed turbine. However the implementation of the recommended 50m buffer distance
between the rotor swept area and the nearest structured vegetation will ensure that the
probability of interactions will be reduced to a low risk. A low probability of interaction will
limit the risk of fatality to individual pipistrelles to a low risk level.
Considering the status of these species within the wider geographical context it is unlikely that
the turbine will have the potential to negatively affect these species at a
local/county/regional/national level.
Myotis species, Lesser Horseshoe Bats & Brown Long-eared Bats
Myotis species, lesser horseshoe bats and Brown long-eared bat species have been classified
by the SNH guidance as species at low risk of turbine impacts. Based on the fidelity of these
species to vegetated corridors and woodland edge and their low risk classification; the absence
of such habitat features at and immediately surrounding the proposed turbine location; the very
low to near absent levels of Myotis species bat activity recorded during monitoring at the
proposed turbine location; and the absence of lesser horseshoe bats and brown long-eared bat
during monitoring, it is considered that the probability of these species interacting with the
proposed turbine will be low. The implementation of the recommended 50m buffer distance
between the rotor swept area and the nearest vegetated feature will also ensure that the
probability of interactions remains low. A low probability of interaction will limit the risk of
fatality to individual Myotis species and Brown long-eared bats to a low risk level.
Summary of Potential Risk to Bat Species
Tables 7.4 to 7.5 provide a summary of the potential risks posed by the proposed wind turbine
to bat species. Each table summarises the risks to bats by presenting the results of each criteria
used during the impact assessment. An overall risk is then derived from the results of each of
these criteria. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 66 31/08/2026
Table 7.6: Overall Risk to Pipistrelle Species & Leisler's bat
Risk Assessment Criteria Result
Habitat Quality High
Bat Roosts Low
Habitat Loss and/or Displacement Low
Sensitivity Low
Activity level High
Overall Individual Risk Moderate
Overall Population Risk Low
Table 7.7: Overall Risk to Myotis & Brown Long-eared Bats
Risk Assessment Criteria Result
Habitat Quality High
Bat Roosts Low
Habitat Loss and/or displacement Low
Sensitivity at Individual level Low
Sensitivity at Population level Low
Activity level Low
Overall Individual Risk Low
Overall Population Risk Low
7.2.3.3 Birds
Operating wind farms have the potential to affect birds through:
• Collision with wind turbines
• Reduction in habitat extent as a result of displacement
7.2.3.3.1 Collision with Raptor Species
The raptor assemblage considered comprises Buzzard (Buteo buteo), Kestrel (Falco
tinnunculus) and Barn Owl (Tyto alba).
No evidence of breeding by any of these species was identified at or within approximately 500
m of the proposed turbine. Consequently, there is no evidence that the turbine is situated RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 67 31/08/2026
immediately adjacent to a regularly occupied nest from which repeated commuting flights
would be expected.
Of the three species identified as key ornithological receptors, Buzzard was only raptor
observed in flight within 500m of the proposed turbine location. At the proposed site, however,
there is no evidence of a nest within approximately 500 m or of the turbine location constituting
a concentrated Buzzard flight corridor. Any use of the site is therefore expected to comprise
occasional passage, soaring or foraging activity within a substantially larger home range.
The presence of only one rotor further reduces the overall likelihood of collision. On the
available evidence, the probability of individual Buzzards colliding with the turbine rotor is
considered low, although occasional flights at collision-risk height cannot be excluded. The
predicted collision effect on Buzzard is therefore assessed as low magnitude and minor adverse
at most, and is Not Significant at the local population level.
Kestrels frequently hunt by hovering, generally at relatively low altitude, although commuting,
territorial and longer-distance flights may occur at greater elevations. Consequently, not all
Kestrel activity recorded near a turbine translates directly into rotor-swept-zone exposure.
No Kestrel nest or flight activity was identified within approximately 500m of the proposed
turbine location and there is no evidence that the proposed turbine is positioned immediately
adjacent to a breeding territory centre or repeatedly used foraging area or commuting route.
The surrounding habitats may provide some hunting opportunities, but these habitats are
widespread locally. There is no indication from the baseline information supplied that activity
is concentrated around the proposed rotor location.
Collision mortality cannot be completely excluded, particularly because even occasional loss
of an adult from a declining population is undesirable. Nevertheless, given:
• the single-turbine nature of the development;
• absence of a nearby breeding site;
• the absence of flight activity during c. 51 hours of baseline vantage point monitoring;
and
• availability of extensive alternative hunting habitat, RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 68 31/08/2026
the predicted collision effect is assessed as low magnitude and minor adverse and Not
Significant.
Barn Owl differs substantially from Buzzard and Kestrel in flight ecology. Barn Owls generally
hunt at relatively low height above fields, field margins and hedgerows. Much typical hunting
activity is therefore likely to occur beneath the rotor-swept zone of the proposed turbine. This
substantially limits collision exposure where turbines have appreciable lower blade clearance.
No Barn Owl nest or regular roost was identified within the immediate turbine vicinity. There
is therefore no evidence that birds would undertake repeated approach/departure flights around
the turbine associated with an occupied breeding site.
The principal theoretical collision pathway would arise from higher commuting flights or
movements between hunting areas rather than normal low-level quartering flight. Given the
expected predominantly low flight height, absence of a nearby nest or roost, and the presence
of a single turbine, collision risk is considered low to very low. The operational collision effect
is therefore assessed as minor adverse at most and Not Significant.
7.2.3.3.2 Collision with Waterbird Species
The waterbird assemblage comprises Great Crested Grebe, Coot, Lesser Black-backed Gull,
Herring Gull, Black-headed Gull, Mute Swan, Grey Heron and Mallard.
Great Crested Grebe and Coot
Great Crested Grebe and Coot were recorded only at Bishop's Lough and were not recorded
undertaking flights through the turbine site. Both species are principally associated with open
water. Great Crested Grebes in particular spend substantial periods on water and are not
typically characterised by frequent terrestrial commuting between feeding sites. Coot likewise
generally remains closely associated with wetland habitats. No flight activity for either species
was observed during the 51 hours of vantage point watching completed to date. The baseline
evidence therefore identifies no functional flight connection between Bishop's Lough and the
proposed turbine location for either species. Collision exposure is consequently considered very
low, with no evidence that either species regularly enters the rotor-risk volume. The predicted
collision effect on Great Crested Grebe and Coot is therefore imperceptible to minor adverse
and Not Significant. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 69 31/08/2026
Lesser Black-backed Gull, Herring Gull & Black-headed Gull
All three species of gull may occur at rotor-risk height while commuting between feeding,
resting and roosting areas. However, the ecological significance of collision risk depends
primarily upon site-specific flight frequency.
There is no evidence provided that the turbine is situated:
• on a major gull commuting corridor;
• close to a large gull breeding colony;
• adjacent to a significant communal roost;
• close to a concentrated foraging site routinely attracting large numbers of gulls; or
• within an area supporting high repeated gull flights.
Accordingly, while occasional rotor-zone flights and therefore occasional collision cannot be
excluded, exposure is expected to be relatively low. In addition NatureScot guidance notes that
high levels of turbine avoidance are associated with gull species. As such the the operational
collision effect to gulls is assessed as low magnitude, minor adverse and Not Significant,
provided baseline VP data do not demonstrate materially greater rotor-risk-height activity than
indicated by the qualitative baseline description.
Grey Heron
Grey Heron regularly commutes between wetlands, breeding sites and feeding areas, and flights
may occur at heights intersecting turbine rotors. However, no heronry has been identified within
the immediate vicinity and there is no evidence that the proposed turbine lies on a regularly
used route between a heronry and Bishop's Lough or another major feeding resource. Grey
Herons are also highly mobile and generally occur at relatively low density rather than in large
commuting flocks. Accordingly, flight activity within the rotor swept area are expected to be
rare. Collision risk is assessed as low, representing a minor adverse effect at most and Not
Significant.
Mallard
Mallard can undertake regular flights between wetlands and terrestrial feeding locations,
particularly around dawn and dusk. Such movements can potentially occur at rotor-risk height. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 70 31/08/2026
At this site, however, there is no evidence of repeated Mallard flight lines through the proposed
turbine position or of the turbine lying between an important roost and regular feeding area.
Given the single turbine and absence of an identified regular flight corridor, predicted collision
risk is low. The operational effect is assessed as minor adverse at most and Not Significant.
Mute Swan
Swans have relatively high wing loading and lower manoeuvrability than many smaller bird
species, resulting in sensitivity to collision within operating turbines. However, empirical
evidence also indicates that swans exhibit high avoidance of wind turbines , with NatureScot
guidance noting a 99.5% avoidance rate for swans in onshore collision risk modelling. Mute
Swan has been recorded in the study area, but no regular flight lines through the proposed
turbine site have been observed during baseline monitoring. On current evidence, regular flights
through the rotor swept area have not been observed and accordingly, the operational collision
effect on Mute Swan is assessed as low magnitude, minor adverse and Not Significant.
Whooper Swan & Greenland White-fronted Geese
NPWS has specifically identified Bishop's Lough as potentially suitable for intermittent
Whooper Swan use during the lifetime of the operation phase of the proposed turbine and also
reference Greenland White-fronted Geese with respect to potential impacts that could arise as
a result of the proposed development.
It is therefore appropriate to adopt a precautionary assessment even though the baseline
evidence indicates no current regular use.
Against that sensitivity, the available site-specific evidence is important:
• Whooper Swan and Greenland White-fronted Geese have not been recorded during
baseline surveys;
• there are no known records within approximately 2 km of the proposed turbine for
either species;
• there is no evidence of Whooper Swan or Greenland White-fronted Geese using
Bishop's Lough during the baseline survey period;
• there is no evidence of a regular feeding flock of either species using agricultural fields
around the turbine; RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 71 31/08/2026
• there is no demonstrated Whooper Swan or Greenland White-fronted Geese flight line
through the turbine location; and
• the nearest known location identified through the desk study is the Finn/Lacky
Catchment I-WeBS site approximately 5 km northeast, with all other IWeBS sites
where Whooper Swan have been identified occurring to the east of the proposed turbine
location such that the proposed turbine location is not situated on a potential direct line
flight pathway between these known IWeBS sites.
Should Whooper Swan or Greenland White-fronted Geese begin using Bishop's Lough during
the operational life of the development, collision risk would depend primarily upon where the
birds subsequently forage and the routes they use between feeding and roosting sites.
The presence of birds on Bishop's Lough would not automatically equate to turbine collision
exposure. For collision to occur, birds would need to:
1. leave or approach Bishop's Lough on a trajectory intersecting the turbine;
2. pass horizontally through the rotor-swept footprint; and
3. do so at rotor-risk height while the rotor was operating.
It is further noted that NatureScot's guidance recommends a 99.5% avoidance rate for swans
and a 99.8% avoidance rate for geese, reflecting evidence that the great majority of potential
rotor encounters are avoided. Nevertheless, this high avoidance rate does not mean risk is absent
where repeated Whooper Swan or Greenland White-fronted Geese flights cross a turbine.
However based on the above, the likelihood of Whooper Swan or Greenland White-fronted
Geese collision is considered very low to low representing a low magnitude and minor adverse
effect that is Not Significant.
Notwithstanding this assessment it is noted that the NPWS concern relates explicitly to the
lifetime of the development, which introduces an uncertainty regarding future use of the lake
that requires consideration. If Bishop's Lough becomes a regularly used winter roost/resting
location, and particularly if birds establish a repeated flight corridor between Bishop's Lough
and feeding areas that crosses the proposed turbine, the collision-risk assessment is likely to
change. As such whilst the current collision risk to Whooper Swan and Greenland White-
fronted Geese is assessed as Low and Not Significant, given the Annex I status of these species,
established occurrence of Whooper Swan within the wider Finn/Lacky Catchment and the
specific NPWS concern regarding potential intermittent future use of Bishop's Lough, a
precautionary operational monitoring and adaptive mitigation regime is required. This is
provided as Appendix 2: Bird Monitoring and Management Plan to this EcIA. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 72 31/08/2026
7.2.3.3.3 Collision with Passerines
Passerines identified as key ornithological receptors occurring in the landholding area are not
considered to be at risk of collision with the operating wind farm as their flight heights are
generally well below the lowest point of a rotating turbine blade. The risk of collision is
assessed as being of negligible magnitude and negligible significance.
7.2.3.4 Operation Phase Displacement Effects
Operational displacement may arise where the presence and movement of turbine blades,
maintenance activity or associated infrastructure causes birds to avoid otherwise suitable
habitat. Given the single-turbine nature of the development, any displacement effect would be
expected to be substantially more spatially restricted than for a multi -turbine wind farm. The
assessment also takes account of the site-specific baseline described above, including the
absence of identified raptor breeding sites within 500m, the restriction of Great Crested Grebe
and Coot to Bishop's Lough, and the absence of recorded Whooper Swan and Greenland White-
fronted Geese within 2 km. Table 7.8 below provides an assessment of the operation phase
displacement effects that could arise as a result of the proposed development to key
ornithological receptors
Table 7.8: Assessment of Operation phase Displacement Effects
Receptor Assessment of Operational Displacement Impact Significance
Raptors –
Buzzard,
Kestrel and
Barn Owl
Operation may result in localised avoidance of habitat
immediately surrounding the turbine. However, no
breeding sites were identified within 500m and
extensive alternative foraging habitat occurs in the
surrounding agricultural landscape. Buzzard and Kestrel
may continue to forage within the wider area, while
Barn Owl typically hunts at low level along field
margins and hedgerows. Any loss of functional habitat
through avoidance is expected to represent a very small
proportion of available foraging habitat and is not
predicted to affect territory occupancy or breeding
productivity.
Low magnitude; Minor
Adverse, Not
Significant. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 73 31/08/2026
Gulls –
Lesser
Black-
backed,
Herring and
Black-
headed Gull
Gulls are highly mobile and generally exhibit
considerable flexibility in their use of terrestrial feeding
areas. The turbine may cause localised avoidance or
modification of flight paths, but extensive alternative
agricultural feeding habitat is available. No important
breeding colony, roost or concentrated feeding area has
been identified at the turbine site. Material displacement
is therefore unlikely.
Negligible–Low
magnitude;
Imperceptible to Minor
Adverse, Not
Significant.
Great
Crested
Grebe and
Coot
Both species were restricted to Bishop's Lough during
baseline surveys and were not recorded using the
turbine site or undertaking regular flights through it. As
the turbine will not result in loss or physical alteration
of the lake, operational displacement from their
principal habitat is considered unlikely. Any indirect
response to a single turbine situated outside the wetland
is expected to be limited.
Negligible magnitude;
Imperceptible effect, Not
Significant.
Grey Heron Grey Heron is highly mobile and capable of using
numerous feeding areas. Individuals may modify flight
paths or avoid the immediate turbine vicinity, but no
heronry or important feeding concentration has been
identified at the site. Any displacement would affect
only a small proportion of the extensive habitat
available within the wider landscape.
Low magnitude; Minor
Adverse at most, Not
Significant.
Mallard Mallard may move between Bishop's Lough, other
wetlands and terrestrial feeding areas. No regular
Mallard flight corridor through the turbine location has
been identified. Localised avoidance of the turbine is
possible but would not prevent continued use of
Bishop's Lough or materially reduce the availability of
suitable wetland or feeding habitat.
Low magnitude; Minor
Adverse at most, Not
Significant.
Mute Swan Mute Swan may exhibit avoidance of the operating
turbine and could alter flight routes between wetland
and terrestrial habitats. However, no regular flight
corridor through the turbine location has been identified
and operation will not directly affect Bishop's Lough.
Given the single-turbine configuration, any barrier or
displacement effect is expected to be spatially limited
and unlikely to materially affect access to feeding or
resting habitat.
Low magnitude; Minor
Adverse, Not
Significant. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 74 31/08/2026
Passerines The passerines identified as key ornithological receptors
represent the most common and abundant group of
species occurring within the vicinity of the proposed
turbine. Previous studies have shown that breeding
passerines are not significantly disturbed by turbines. For
instance Thomas (1999) studied the effects of 10 wind
farms in England and Wales on a range of bird species
and observed no significant disturbance to breeding
passerines (Thomas, 1999). Ketzenberg et al. (2002) also
showed no effects on number or spatial distribution of
skylark within 1km of a wind farm and noted that some
species of waders were more abundant in the vicinity of
wind turbines when compared to pre-installation due to
changes in land management. This study also highlights
the potential for habitat quality to outweigh potential
negative displacement effects associated with turbines.
Other studies from Spain have shown that passerine
numbers are not negatively affected following wind farm
construction (De Lucas et al. 2005) and further evidence
comes from a study of winter farmland birds at two wind
farm sites in East Anglia (Devereux et al. 2008). This
study looked at four functional groups (seed-eaters,
corvids, gamebirds and larks) and quantified distribution
in five 150m distance bands from turbines (0-150m to
600-750m) as well as examining the closest distance
band in more detail to see if there was a difference in
distribution between 0- 75m and 75-150m from turbines.
The authors found no evidence to suggest that the
distribution of wintering farmland birds (with the single
exception of pheasant) was affected by wind turbines.
Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) also recognizes the low
risk posed by wind turbines to passerines in the guidance
document Bird Survey Methods for Assessing Impact of
Onshore Wind Farms on Birds (2005 & 2014).
Negligible magnitude;
Imperceptible effect, Not
Significant. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 75 31/08/2026
Whooper
Swan &
Greenland
White-
fronted
Geese
No Whooper Swan or Greenland White-fronted Geese
were recorded during baseline surveys and no historical
records have been identified within approximately 2 km;
the nearest identified occurrence is the Finn/Lacky
Catchment I-WeBS site approximately 5 km northeast.
There is therefore no evidence of an existing feeding
area, roost or regular flight corridor for either species at
the turbine site. However, NPWS has identified the
potential for intermittent future use of Bishop's Lough
during the operational lifetime. Should such use
develop, birds may avoid the immediate turbine vicinity
or modify flight routes between the lake and feeding
areas. Given that only a single turbine is proposed, such
avoidance would be unlikely to create a substantive
barrier to movement or prevent access to Bishop's
Lough or surrounding agricultural habitat. Targeted
operational monitoring and adaptive mitigation
proposed within the Bird Monitoring and Management
Plan will address uncertainty regarding future use.
Current baseline: Low
magnitude; Minor
Adverse, Not
Significant. With
monitoring/adaptive
mitigation, residual
effect remains Not
Significant.
7.2.3.5 Operation Phase Impacts to Aquatic Fauna
Given the separation distance between the proposed turbine hardstand and the Legarhill Stream
the operation phase of the turbine will no pose a risk of contaminated surface water runoff to
the Legarhill Stream.
8.0 MITIGIATION MEASURES
8.1 Construction Phase Mitigation
8.1.1 MITIGATION BY AVOIDANCE
The design of the project has sought to avoid significant negative effects to habitats by
minimising the extent of loss of habitats to the footprint of the proposed development and siting
the infrastructure elements of the proposed development in habitats of low nature conservation
value. The positioning of the turbine to the west of the landholding within an area of industrial
cutover bog has minimised the potential for habitat loss as we ll as disturbance to adjacent
habitats and fauna occurring in the landholding.
8.1.2 MITIGATION BY REDUCTION
Habitat disturbance during construction work will be confined strictly to within the direct land-
take of the proposed wind turbine and associated infrastructure, in accordance with the outlined
mitigation measures. A project ecologist will be appointed for the construction phase and the RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 76 31/08/2026
project ecologist will meet with the contractor on site to identify and mark out the required
work area.
The construction footprint will be kept to a minimum and an impermeable barrier will be
installed around the construction area for the turbine base to ensure no surface runoff to surface
watercourses. The area of vegetation removal will be kept to a minimum to reduce the exposure
of bare soil and peat and the risk of sediment runoff and peat desiccation.
An approximate 125m of hedgerow habitat will be removed in order to provide for the proposed
turbine hardstand and the access track. An additional 215m of hedgerow habitat will be
removed as part of the bat buffer mitigation measure. The loss of this hedgerow habitat will be
compensated for by providing a broadleaved hedgerow along the length of the access track
from the site entrance to the substation. This will provide for new replacement hedgerow habitat
either side of sections of the access track that will at minimum exceed the 340m plus 100% (i.e.
the provision of a minimum length of 680m of replacement hedgerow habitat. This will result
in a net increase in the extent of this habitat occurring at and in the vicinity of the project site.
It is noted that all new replacement hedgerow will be positioned outside the 50m bat buffer of
the rotor swept area of the turbine.
8.1.2.1 Water Quality & Aquatic Fauna
8.1.3 CONSTRUCTION AND DECOMMISSIONING PHASE MITIGATION
• All site personnel will be made aware of their environmental responsibilities at the site.
• Requirements for contractors will include contingency plans to deal with spillages, should
they occur.
• Land disturbance will be kept to minimum and disturbed areas will be stabilised as soon
as possible.
• Soil/peat excavation should be undertaken during dry periods whenever possible.
• Site visits by a Design Engineer will be agreed in advance and will be undertaken at various
stages of the construction process to ensure that the proposed SuDS scheme is being
constructed in line with the design.
• An Environmental Manager will also be appointed who will have responsibility for
ensuring attenuation measures are appropriately maintained.
RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 77 31/08/2026
A minimum 10m construction phase pollution prevention buffer zone (setback) will be applied
to the watercourses that flow through (and adjacent to) the project. This will be applied at all
location except where the proposed access track will cross the Legarhill Stream.
Impositions placed on lands within the buffer zone include no unnecessary construction
activities that have the potential to release pollutants such as re-fuelling activities, plant
maintenance, spoil heaps, materials/fuels/lubricants storage. The following will therefore apply
to the area within the buffer zone:
• No stripping/removal of vegetation;
• No spoil deposition or stockpiling of excavated material; and
• No storage or use of chemicals, fuels, or other lubricants.
Buffer zones described above comply with (or exceed) published guidance for works in
comparable circumstances.
8.1.4 SITE DRAINAGE
Site drainage will be implemented as per the details set out in Section 3.7 above. The
implementation of this drainage design will eliminate the risk of pollution to the Legarhill
Stream and the surrounding surface water environment during the construction phase of the
project.
8.1.5 WORK TO INSTALL CULVERTS CROSSING OF THE LEGARHILL STREAM
Work will be cogniscant of weather conditions and planned to coincide with periods of dry
channels or low flows. while works in the water are “live”, if conditions require then the channel
will be dammed at a point upstream of the work and overpumped downs tream of the work.
Permanent culverts and the single drainage channel diversion shall be constructed from
downstream to upstream to ensure a dry working environment. Upon completion of culvert
installation, water shall be permitted to pass from the upstream extent of the existing
watercourse through the culvert. Downstream in-channel filtration check dams shall be installed
and renewed as necessary in order to trap sediment until any residual washout of sediment from
the exposed excavation has stabilised to a normal (pre-construction) level. Temporary scour
protection measures will be placed at and downstream of any pumped outlet.
Geotextile silt fences shall be installed adjacent to the live watercourses in order to filter
contaminated runoff that may be caused by plant movement associated with the diversion. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 78 31/08/2026
If conditions require, in-channel geotextile check dams will also be installed within the channel
downstream of the works.
After completion, any temporary scour protection or silt barriers will be removed
8.1.6 CONCRETE, CEMENT & GROUT
Concrete, cement and grout are highly alkaline and corrosive and can have a detrimental impact
on watercourses. To minimise any impact:
• A “record of assessment for low-risk concrete washout discharges” will be completed
to assess the risk to receptors based upon site location and volume of concrete washout
that will be generated;
• Concrete lorries will wash down in designated areas e.g. lined with an impermeable
sheet to prevent ground contamination; and,
• Any concrete or cement mixing will be sited on an impermeable area, at least 10 m
away from a watercourse or surface water drain.
8.1.7 SILT MANAGEMENT
• Water containing silt, or any other contaminating material will not be released directly
to a watercourse or surface water drain. Silty run-off will be routed either overland or
to a suitably designed and sited settlement pond/filter channel. The settlement pond
will be inspected daily;
• Any temporary stockpiling of materials will be prevented from eroding by rainwater or
surface water run-off; and,
• Effluent from wheel washers (if required) and plant washing facilities will be contained
for proper treatment and disposal.
8.1.8 DEWATERING / PUMPING AND OVER PUMPING
• Excavations that cannot be drained via gravity will require dewatering and pumping
out of collected rainwater and/or groundwater during construction. All de-watering will
be passed through suitable treatment such as a settlement pond or a mechanical
settlement unit for settling suspended materials.
• Water from excavations will not be pumped directly to watercourses. Where there is a
requirement for over pumping, pumped discharge will be via erosion protection and
over suitable vegetation outside of the buffer zone prior to re-entry to the watercourse. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 79 31/08/2026
8.1.9 POLLUTION PREVENTION MEASURES
The primary source of potentially contributing pollution will be from vehicle, plant and
equipment accessing and exiting the site. To prevent pollution of the downstream watercourses
(which flow into the designated Dalgan River section of the Lough Corrib SAC), the following
measures will be employed:
• All work will be carried out in line with GPP 5 “Works and maintenance in or near
water” in order to ensure best practice with regard to the protection of water quality;
• Concrete lorries will wash down in designated areas e.g. lined with an impermeable
sheet to prevent ground contamination;
• Any concrete or cement mixing will be sited on an impermeable area, at least 10 m
away from a watercourse or surface water drain;
• Construction plant will be operated in accordance with the manufacturer’s written
recommendations;
• Vehicle, plant and equipment maintenance records will be kept on site and these will
be made available to the employer’s representative upon request;
• Plant to be refuelled in a designated area, on an impermeable base away from drains or
watercourses;
• Integrally bunded mobile fuel bowsers are to be used;
• Drip trays are to be installed under static plant;
• A spill kit with sand, earth or commercial products for containment of spillages is to
be present during the installation of the headwalls;
• Incident response training to be provided to staff and contractors in the event of a
spillage; and
• Liaison with EPA and OPW to take place prior to the commencement of works.
8.1.10 STORAGE OF HAZARDOUS MATERIAL
The Pollution Prevention Guidelines: - GPP26 Safe storage of Drums and Intermediate Bulk
Containers (IBCs) will be complied with on this project. COSHH Risk Assessments will be
completed for all hazardous chemicals brought onto site.
Flammable liquids e.g. petrol, paints and solvents will be stored in secure stores clearly marked
with appropriate warning signs.
Storage for hazardous substances will be as per the suppliers’ recommendations and will be
sited away from sensitive areas of the site. Additionally, the storage area will provide
containment in the event of a spillage. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 80 31/08/2026
8.1.11 OIL STORAGE & REFUELLING
Oil is one of the most common pollutants. Spilt oil can pollute streams, rivers and groundwater
supplies which can be used for drinking water.
Types of oil to be potentially found on site include:
• Petrol;
• Diesel;
• Lubricating and hydraulic oils;
• Synthetic and mineral oils;
• Biodegradable and;
• Waste oils.
Oil will be stored in dedicated areas in the temporary construction compound. These areas will
be specifically designed and constructed to be safe and secure. All reasonable measures will be
put in place to secure fuel tanks from vandalism.
In all cases, storing oil in high-risk locations such as the following, will be avoided:
• Where there is a risk of damage by impact or collision e.g. from site traffic;
• Within 50 m of a spring, well or borehole;
• Within 10 m of a watercourse, ditch or drainage channel; and,
• Where spilt oil could enter open drains or soak into unmade ground where it can pollute
groundwater.
If storing more than 200 litres of oil, a secondary containment system shall be provided. The
capacity of the secondary containment system will be either 110% of the largest drum or 25%
of the total volume stored (whichever is greater). Additionally, all ancillary equipment will be
kept contained within the bund. Any open oil storage areas will be covered in order to prevent
rainwater collecting.
All oil storage areas, containers and secondary containers will be frequently inspected and
checked for signs of damage, corrosion, bulging, leaks or unauthorised use and interference.
Any required maintenance, defects or faults will be repaired immediately.
A designated refuelling area will be established for the project. This area will consist of an
impermeable surface, situated well away from any watercourse. Signage will be erected to RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 81 31/08/2026
indicate the location of the refuelling area and an oil spill kit will also be at hand at this area.
All fuel deliveries to site will be supervised by a designated individual.
A drip tray, or other secondary containment solution, will be used during refuelling, to prevent
oil from spilling onto the ground. Where mobile fuelling is necessary, all bowsers will carry an
emergency spill kit. All oil containers (including mobile browsers) will be returned to the
designated storage area after use.
A dedicated person will be appointed and trained for the purpose of refuelling on site. An
‘appointed persons poster’ will be completed and displayed on site. The operative will also be
trained in the use of spill kits. In the absence of the primary appointed person for fuelling,
refuelling duties will be delegated to secondary appointed persons. These persons will be
trained in the storage and use of fuel and oils. They will also have been trained in the use of
spill kits. Refuelling must be carried out by a trained operative.
8.1.12 SITE COMPOUND
The temporary construction and decommissioning phase site compounds will be installed over
an impermeable barrier. Either existing areas of concrete apron that occur adjacent to the
proposed development footprint will be used or else the foundation of alternative area will be
lined with an impermeable membrane prior to the installation of the site compound. This will
ensure that surface water draining from the site compound is prevented from draining to ground.
Surface water arising from the site compound will be directed to perimeter drains which will
bound the compound. The perimeter drains will be fitted with regularly spaced check dams in
the form of straw bales and/or stone filter dams. The perimeter drain will convey surface water
runoff to a buffered outfall that will discharge waters over peat vegetation. The existing peat
overburden along with the prior treatment along the drains will provide for effective treatment
of the surface water runoff prior to draining to ground.
The site compound will be used to store potentially polluting materials. All potentially polluting
materials such as hydrocarbons, oils and other chemical solutions required for the construction
phase will be stored in a securely bunded containers within a bunded area.
Cement and cement-based products will also be stored in a securely bunded area. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 82 31/08/2026
8.1.13 MEASURES TO PREVENT THE SPREAD OF NON-NATIVE INVASIVE PLANT
SPECIES
8.1.13.1 Best Practice & Biosecurity
The following additional measures will be implemented as standard best practice approach to
construction works on site. These measures will be put in place with the aim of avoiding the
introduction of other non-native invasive plant species during the construction and
decommissioning phase of the project. The potential for importation or introduction of non-
native plant species (such as Japanese Knotweed, Himalayan Balsam, etc.) can arise during
construction works on development sites. Section 49 of the European Communities (Birds and
Natural Habitats) Regulations 2011 prohibits the introduction and dispersal of invasive alien
species (particularly plant species) listed on Part 1 (third column) of the ‘Third Schedule’.
All construction at the project site will have due regard to the relevant biosecurity measures
outlined below:
• All plant machinery will be restricted from disturbing known colonies of invasive
species.
• All plant machinery will avoid unnecessary crossings to adjoining lands.
Good site hygiene will be employed to prevent the introduction and spread of problematic
invasive alien plant species (i.e. Japanese Knotweed (Lesser Knotweed), Himalayan Balsam
(Impatiens glandulifera), Himalayan Knotweed (Persicaria wallichii), etc.) by thoroughly
inspecting and washing vehicles prior to entering the works area.
The biosecurity measures outlined above are in line with best practice guidelines issued by the
National Roads Authority (NRA, 2010) – The Management of Noxious Weeds and Non-native
Invasive Plant Species on National Roads and broadly based on the Environment Agency’s
(2013) – The Knotweed Code of Practice: Managing Japanese Knotweed on Development Sites
(Version 3, amended in 2013, accessed on the Environment Agency’s website on the 11th of
July 2016).
In addition to the above, measures for the prevention and spread of Crayfish plague, as detailed
under SI 354/2018, the European Union (Invasive Alien Species) (Freshwater Crayfish)
Regulations 2018 will be adhered with throughout all construction works and activities. With
regard to such measures the simplest is to implement routine cleaning and drying of equipment RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 83 31/08/2026
once leaving a river, and before using it again. This is especially important as it is known that
the crayfish plague organism can be carried on wet equipment to new sites. The ‘Check, Clean
and Dry’ protocol is an effective barrier.
8.1.14 MITIGATION MEASURES FOR SPOIL DISPOSAL
Spoil will be generated during excavations for foundations at turbines and along new access
roads.
Minimisation of the production of this spoil will be treated as a high priority, but it is nevertheless
expected that peat will be excavated during site works.
Spoil types will be treated separately. Glacial soils and peat will be separated during excavation
and these two types of spoil will be disposed of generally as follows:
A Glacial soils will be deposited directly on top of other glacial soils. This will require the
removal of peat where present to facilitate the process.
B Peat can be disposed of either on top of glacial soils, on top of inactive peat or on top of
the “Acrotelm” where the “Top Mat” has been removed.
1. Glacial spoil disposal will take place within a 100m radius of each structure.
2. It is intended that spoil movements will be minimised by disposing of the material within
or immediately adjacent to the construction footprint of the structure from whence it was
excavated.
3. Preparation of the Spoil Disposal site will involve the removal of the “Top Mat” which
will be transplanted to an area of inactive bog and maintained for re-use during restoration
operations.
4. Spoil will be deposited, in layers of 0.50m and will not exceed a total thickness of 1.50m.
5. Spoil will only be deposited on slopes of < 10 degrees to the horizontal and greater than
10m from the top of a cutting. The exact location of such areas will be determined on
consultation with the geotechnical specialist.
6. A Peat Stability Register will record the location of each Spoil Disposal Site used and
regular weekly assessment will be made by the construction manager or other suitably
qualified individual.
7. Once disposal is complete the disposal sites will be re-vegetated with the “Top Mat”
removed at the commencement of disposal operations. Upon commencement of the RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 84 31/08/2026
restoration phase guidance from a suitably qualified ecologist will be sought to provide a
suitable methodology and programme of maintenance for the restored areas.
8.1.15 BIRDS
The following mitigation measures will be implemented to minimise potential impacts to bird
species:
• Construction activity such as vegetation stripping will be timed to commence prior to
the start of the breeding bird season, which includes the months of March to August
inclusive.
• A Project Ecologist will be appointed for the duration of construction works to advise
the contractor and will visit as necessary when works are in progress to ensure that all
mitigation measures are adhered to. The Project Ecologist will be responsible for
completing pre-construction transect/walkover surveys over the proposed development
site to ensure that disturbance to breeding birds (such as skylarks) is avoided.
• The Project Ecologist will be responsible for undertaking ongoing ornithological
monitoring during periods of the construction phase that overlap with the breeding bird
season. The ornithological monitoring will focus on identifying the presence of
sensitive bird species at the proposed development site. In the event that sensitive bird
species are identified as nesting at or within a 500m buffer zone of the construction
footprint, the timing of works will be scheduled to minimise disturbance to nests and/or
an appropriate buffer distance between the works and any nest site will be implemented.
8.1.16 MITIGATION BY REMEDIATION
When excavating the access road, peat material will be removed and stored separately. This
peat will be stored in designated areas and reinstated along the edges of the completed access
road on completion of construction. The surface of this peat will be seeded with heathland
species such as Calluna vulgaris, Erica tetralix, Myrica gale etc. that are typical of the
surrounding peatland habitats.
All spoil material excavated during the construction phase will be reinstated following the
completion of the construction phase of the proposed development. Suitable temporary storage
areas will be identified in advance in association with the site contractors. The Project Ecologist
will review any suggested storage areas for possible ecological interests.
RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 85 31/08/2026
8.2 Operational Phase Mitigation
8.2.1 PROTECTION OF BATS
The Natural England guidance (2014) and NatureScot (2021) recommends that potential
collision to bats from wind turbine developments can be minimised by siting the proposed
turbines so that all parts of the turbine rotor swept area are over 50 m from the nearest vegetated
feature. The location of the proposed turbine will satisfy this recommendation with no vegetated
features occurring within 50 m of a turbine rotor diameter. To this end a “bat buffer” area will
be implemented around turbine such that the buffer area will remain free of suitable foraging
habitat, consisting of conifer plantation edge and scrub. This will require the clearance of
conifer plantation within a 87m radius of the turbine hub.
The implementation of this buffer will increase the total extent of hedgerow clearance to a total
length of 340m.
In order to avoid the potential for future interactions between the proposed turbine and local
bat populations all structures associated with the project (i.e. the substation building) will be
built in a manner to ensure no roosting opportunities are present to bats. Also, no structured
vegetation will be permitted to establish at these locations during the operational phase of the
turbine.
In order to avoid the potential for collision with the rotating turbine during the operation phase
and the potential for population effects to local bat populations as a result of collision fatality a
Bat Monitoring and Management Plan will be implemented for the operation phase of the
proposed development. This Plan, provided as Appendix 1 sets out the operation phase
monitoring required to establish bat activity at the proposed turbine, identify any ongoing risks
to bats as a result of the operation of the turbine and prescribes adaptive mitigation measures
that will be implemented to avoid fatalities and effects to the local bat populations.
8.2.2 PROTECTION OF BIRDS
In order to avoid the potential for collision with the rotating turbine during the operation phase
and the potential for population effects to local bird populations, including Whooper Swan and
Greenland White-fronted Geese, as a result of collision fatality a Bird Monitoring and
Management Plan will be implemented for the operation phase of the proposed development.
This Plan, provided as Appendix 2 sets out the operation phase monitoring required to establish RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 86 31/08/2026
bird activity at the proposed turbine, identify any ongoing risks to birds as a result of the
operation of the turbine and prescribes adaptive mitigation measures that will be implemented
to avoid fatalities and effects to the local bird populations.
9.0 CUMULATIVE IMPACT ASSESSMENT
The potential for cumulative ecological effects has been considered with other existing,
permitted and reasonably foreseeable developments. The review focused on wind energy
developments within 20 km of the proposed turbine and residential development within 2 km.
These distances provide a proportionate study area for a single-turbine project and encompass
the principal potential pathways of cumulative habitat loss, construction disturbance, bird
collision and displacement, and bat collision risk. The review was based on the national
Planning Application Points dataset, Monaghan County Council's online planning portal and
published project information available during August 2026.
The developments with the greatest potential for interaction are summarised in Table 9.1.
Drumlins Park Wind Farm is the only operational multi-turbine wind farm identified within the
20 km study area. The consented Dundrumman turbine is also included on a precautionary
basis. No additional wind energy project was identified within the study area that would
materially alter the cumulative assessment.
Table 9.1: Developments Considered in the Cumulative Assessment
Development and status Potential cumulative
interaction
Assessment
Drumlins Park Wind Farm
(refs. 19/486 and 21/136):
approximately 6.0 km;
eight turbines.
Possible combined bird
collision, barrier and
displacement effects; bat
collision risk; habitat loss
and disturbance.
The projects are geographically separated
and share no footprint or direct
hydrological pathway. No regular
movement by a sensitive bird population
was recorded through the proposed rotor-
swept area. One additional turbine
represents a small incremental risk,
controlled through the bird and bat RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 87 31/08/2026
monitoring plans. Low magnitude; Minor
Adverse at most; Not Significant.
Dundrumman single
turbine (ref. 25/60469):
approximately 11.8 km;
850 kW; conditionally
permitted in 2025.
Possible combined bird
collision/displacement and
bat collision risk.
The substantial separation and small scale
of both projects limit interaction. No
shared flight corridor, roost, breeding site
or bat commuting feature was identified.
Negligible to Low magnitude;
Imperceptible to Minor Adverse; Not
Significant.
Residential development
within 2 km, principally a
bungalow at Tanderagee
(ref. 25/60318;
approximately 1.1 km) and
16 units at 98 Avenue,
Clones (ref. 25/60444;
approximately 2.0 km),
plus dispersed minor
domestic works.
Localised habitat loss,
clearance, disturbance,
lighting, drainage effects and
traffic.
The schemes are spatially separate and
largely associated with existing settlement
or individual rural sites. They do not
overlap the project footprint, Bishops
Lough or the Legarhill Stream crossing.
Routine domestic works provide no
material combined pathway. Negligible to
Low magnitude; Imperceptible to Minor
Adverse; Not Significant.
In relation to habitats and non-volant fauna, the proposed development will result in only small
and discrete losses of predominantly improved agricultural grassland and localised hedgerow
removal. These losses will not combine with the spatially separate wind-energy and residential
developments to fragment or reduce any ecological resource of county or greater importance.
Construction effects will be temporary and geographically localised; a material temporal
interaction is unlikely and would, in any event, be controlled through the mitigation measures
set out in this EcIA.
For birds, Drumlins Park provides the principal potential cumulative pathway because it adds
eight operating turbines to the wider landscape. Nevertheless, the proposed development is a
single turbine approximately 6 km away, the baseline surveys recorded no regular use of its
rotor-swept area by a population of a key sensitive species, and no evidence was identified of
a regular Whooper Swan or Greenland White-fronted Geese flight corridor connecting Bishops RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 88 31/08/2026
Lough with wetlands across either wind-energy development. The uncertainty associated with
intermittent future use of Bishops Lough by Whooper Swan or Greenland White-fronted Geese
is addressed through the Bird Monitoring and Mitigation Plan (see Appendix 2), including
targeted monitoring, adaptive management and shutdown-on-demand. Consequently, the
proposed development will not have the potential combine with the Drumlins Park Wind Farm
or any other wind energy development in the wider surrounding area to result in a significant
contribution to cumulative collision mortality, barrier effects or displacement.
For bats, the separation between turbine projects, the low population-level risk identified for
the proposed development, maintenance of the recommended turbine-to-feature buffer and
implementation of the Bat Monitoring and Management Plan will provide effective safeguards
such that no significant cumulative collision or displacement effect is predicted.
Overall, taking account of the scale and separation of the identified developments, the
ecological baseline, the absence of a shared sensitive ecological receptor or functional corridor
likely to be materially affected, and the mitigation and adaptive moni toring commitments,
cumulative effects are assessed as Low magnitude at most, Minor Adverse and Not Significant.
No significant cumulative residual effect on biodiversity is predicted.
10.0 RESIDUAL IMPACTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT
There will be a permanent loss of a discrete area of improved agricultural grassland. The loss
of small areas of these habitats will not adversely affect the conservation status of the
surrounding ecological resource. Disturbance to fauna will be short-term and will not result in
significant impacts. Table 9.1 summarises the residual impacts of the proposed development to
the receiving biodiversity.
Table 9.1: Residual Impacts of the Proposed Development
Habitat Potential
Impact
Mitigation Residual Impact
Habitats Loss of a
discrete areas
of habitats
Minimise habitat
loss
No significant residual impact
predicted RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 89 31/08/2026
Habitat Potential
Impact
Mitigation Residual Impact
within the
footprint of
the proposed
development.
Non-volant Minor as only
discrete areas
of semi-
natural
habitat will
be lost to the
footprint of
the project.
Minimise duration
of disturbance.
No significant residual impact
predicted
Bats Risk of
collision with
turbine
blades
resulting in
fatalities,
particularly
with respect
to Common
pipistrelle
which was
found to be
active at high
levels in the
vicinity of the
proposed
Implement the
Natural England
guidelines to
ensure adverse
impacts to bat are
reduced
The risk of fatalities is reduced
further by adhering to the NE 50m
buffer distance. A residual risk to
individual bats will remain, however
in light of the low levels of activity
recorded at the site it is unlikely that
the wind turbine will pose a
significant risk to the conservation
status of bat populations. A low
residual risk of collision and bat
fatalities is predicted for the project.
Implementation of the Bat
Monitoring and Management Plan
will provide for adaptive mitigation to
protect bats from collision and
population mortality effects RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 90 31/08/2026
Habitat Potential
Impact
Mitigation Residual Impact
turbine
location.
throughout the operation phase of the
proposed turbine.
Birds Short-term
disturbance
Minimise duration
of construction
phase to minimise
associated short-
term disturbance to
birds.
Clear vegetation
during the non-
breeding bird
season to avoid
disturbance to bird
nest sites.
No significant residual impact
predicted.
Operation
phase
collision risk
Undertaken
monitoring during
the operation
phase. The results
of monitoring will
inform the
operation phase of
the wind turbine.
Implementation of the Bird
Monitoring and Management Plan
will provide for adaptive mitigation to
protect birds from collision and
population mortality effects
throughout the operation phase of the
proposed turbine.
RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 91 31/08/2026
10.1 Conclusion
The proposed Single Wind Turbine at Carney’s Island is not subject to any statutory nature
conservation designations. The footprint of the project is dominated by habitats of low nature
conservation value. The proposed development site is connected to the Lough Oughter And
Associated Loughs SAC via hydrological pathways. The hydrological pathway will not
function as an impact pathway and there will be no risk of likely significant effects to this or
any other European Sites.
A comprehensive approach to the management of surface water drainage will be implemented
from the outset as part of the project. The surface water management measures to be
implemented are representative of best practice construction methods that aim to avoid
contamination of the aquaitc environment. The implementation of such measures will minimise
to an insignificant level the likelihood of any event occurring that could impact on the water
quality of watercourses at and downstream of the proposed site.
A range of mitigation measures have been outlined for the proposed development. These
measures include the implementation of comprehensive Bat and Bird Monitoring and
Management Plans (see Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 to this EcIA) and with the implementation
of these measures the proposed development will not have the potential to result in significant
negative residual impacts to habitats or fauna occurring at and in the wider area surrounding
the proposed development site.
10.2 References
Arnett, E.B. et al (2008). Patterns of bat fatalities at wind energy facilities in North America.
Journal of Wildlife Management. 71: pp. 61 – 78.
Bach, L. (2002). Auswirkungen von Windenergieanlagen auf das Verhalten und die
Raumnutzungen von Fledermausen am Beispiel des Windparks “Hohe Geest” Midlum -
Endbericht, unpublished report for Instituts für angewandte Biologie Freiburg/Niederelbe.
46pp.
Bach, L. & Rahmal, (2004). Summary of Wind Farm impacts on bats. Bremer Beitrage fur
Naturkunde und Naturschutz. 7: pp. 245 – 252.
Baerwald, E.F., D’Amours, G.H., Klug, B.J. & Barclay, R.M.R. (2008). Barotrauma is a
significant cause of bat fatalities at wind turbines. Current Biology. 18(6): 695 – 696. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 92 31/08/2026
Bang, P. & Dahlstrom, P. (2006). Animal Tracks and Signs. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
Bat Conservation Trust (2007). Bat Surveys – good Practice Guidelines. Bat Conservation
Trust, London.
Bat Conservation Trust (2011). Bat Surveys – Good Practice Guidelines. 2nd Edition: Surveying
for Onshore Windfarms – Consultation Draft.
Blake, D., Hutson, A.M., Racey, P.A., Rydell, J. & Speakman, J.R. (1994). Use of lamplit roads
by foraging bats in Southern England. Journal of Zoology, London. 34: 453 – 462.
Bridgham, S.D., Pastor, J., Janssens, J. A., Chapin, C. & Malterer, T. J (1996). Multiple limiting
gradients in peatlands: a call for a new paradigm. Wetlands. Vol. 16(1): pp. 45 – 65.
Brinkmann, R. & Schauer-Weisshahn, H. (2006). Untersuchungen zu möglichen betriebs-
bedingten Auswirkungen von Windkraftanlagen auf Fledermäusse im Regierungsbe- zirk
Freiburg. Regierunspräsidium Freiburg, Stiftung Naturschutzfonds Baden- Würtemberg,
Grundelfingen.
Byrne, A.W., Sleeman, P., O’Keefe, J., Davenport, J. (2012). The ecology of the European
Badger (Meles meles) in Ireland: A review. Biology and Envrionment: Proceedings of the
Royal Irish Academy. Vol. 112B(1). Royal Irish Academy.
Campbell, E., Foy, B., 2008. Lough Melvin Catchment Management Plan. INTERREG
Programme: p. 252. http://www.fisheriesireland.ie/fisheries-research-1/49-loughmelvin-
cachment-management-plan-executive-summary-1/file.
Cordeiro, A, M Mascarenhas and H Costa (2013). Long term survey of wind farms impacts on
Common Kestrel’s populations and definition of an appropriate mitigation plan. In Book of
Abstracts: Conference on wind power and environmental impacts (CWE), Naturvårdsverket
Rapport 6546 p. 47. Stockholm, Sweden.
de Lucas, M., Janss, G., Whitfield, D.P., Ferrer, M. (2008). Collision fatality of raptors in wind
farms does not depend on raptor abundance. Journal of Applied Ecology. Vol 45: p. 1695 –
1703. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 93 31/08/2026
Dingerkus, S.K. & Montgomery, W.I. (2002). A review of the status and decline in abundance
of Irish Hare (Lepus timidus hibernicus) in Northern Ireland. Mammal Review. Vol. 32: pp. 1
– 11.
Douglas, D.J.T., Bellamy, P.E. & Pearce-Higgins, J.W. (2011) Changes in the abundance and
distribution of upland breeding birds at an operational wind farm. Bird Study, 58, 37–43.
Evans Ogden, Lesley J., "Collision Course: The Hazards of Lighted Structures and Windows
to Migrating Birds" (1996). Fatal Light Awareness Program (FLAP). Paper 3.
Fairley, J. (2001). A basket of weasels. Private Publication.
Forrest, J., Robinson, C., Hommel, C. and Craib, J. 2011. Flight activity and breeding success
of hen harrier at Paul’s Hill Wind Farm in North East Scotland. Natural Power Conference
Paper.
Grodsky SM, Behr MJ, Gendler A, et al. Investigating the causes of death for wind turbine -
associated bat fatalities. J Mammal. 2011;92:917–925.
Hayes, J.P. (2000). Assumptions and practical considerations in the design and interpretation
of echolocation-monitoring studies. Acta Chiropterologica 2(2): p225-236. ·
Heritage Council (2000). A Guide to Habitats in Ireland. The Heritage Council, Kilkenny.
Heritage Council (2010). Best practice guidance for Habitat Survey and Mapping.
Prepublication Draft. The Heritage Council, Kilkenny.
Horn J.W., Arnett E.B., Kunz T.H. (2008). Behavioural responses of bats to operating wind
turbines. Journal of Wildlife Management. 72(1): 123 – 132.
Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (2006). Guidelines for Ecological
Assessment in the United Kingdom.
Kepel, A., Ciechanowski, M., Jaros, R. (2011). How to assess the potential impact of wind
turbines on bats using bat activity surveys? A case study from Poland, XII European Bat
Research Symposium, August 22-26, 2011, Vilinusm Lithuania. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 94 31/08/2026
Ketzenberg, C., Exo, K.-M., Reichenbach, M., & Castor, M. (2002) Einfluss von
Windkraftanlagen auf brütende Wiesenvögel. Natur und Landschaft 77: 144-153.
Kunz, T., Arnett, E., Erickson, W.P., Hoar, A.R., Johnson, G.D., Larkin, R.P., Strickland, D.,
Thresher, R.W., Tuttle, M.D. (2007). Ecological impacts of wind energy development on bats:
questions, research needs, and hypothesis. Frontiers in Ecology and Environment. Vol 5(6): p.
315 – 324.
Langston, R & Pullan J. (2003). Windfarms & Birds. RSPB
Lewis, L. J., Burke, B., Fitzgerald, N., Tierney, T. D. & Kelly, S. (2019) Irish Wetland Bird
Survey: Waterbird Status and Distribution 2009/10-2015/16. Irish Wildlife Manuals, No. 106.
National Parks and Wildlife Service, Department of Culture, Heritage and the Gaeltacht,
Ireland.
Lintott, P., & Mathews, F. (2018). Reviewing the evidence on mitigation strategies for bats in
buildings informing best-practice for policy makers and practitioners.
Lundy, M.G., Aughney, T., Montgomery, W.I., & Roche, N., (2011) Landscape conservation
for Irish bats & species specific roosting characteristics. Bat Conservation Ireland.
Lusby, J. & O’Clery, M. (2014). Barn Owls in Ireland: Information on the ecology of Barn
Owls and their conservation in Ireland. BirdWatch Ireland.
Marnell, F. (2002). The distribution and habitat of common lizard Lacerta vivipara Jacquin, in
Ireland. Bulletin of the Irish Biogeographical Society. Vol 28: pp. 75 – 82.
Matthews, F., Richardson, S., Lintott, P. & Hosken, D. (2016). Understanding the risk to
european protected species (Bats) at Onshore Wind Turbine sites to inform risk management.
final report. University of Exeter.
Mitchell- Jones T & Carlin C. (2009). Bats and onshore wind turbines: Interim guidance.
Technical Information Note 051. Natural England, Sheffield, England.
Moorkens, E.A. & Killeen, D. (2009). Mapping of the Distribution of Margaritifera
margaritifera in the River Deel (Moy Catchment), Co. Galway. National Parks and Wildlife
Service, Department of Environment, Heritage & Local Government, Dublin, Ireland. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 95 31/08/2026
Neal, E., & Cheeseman, C. (1996). ‘Badgers’. Poyser Natural History, London.
Ogden, E. L. J. (1996). "Collision Course: The Hazards of Lighted Structures and Windows to
Migrating Birds". Fatal Light Awareness Program (FLAP). Paper 3.
Pearce-Higgins, J., Stephen L., Douse, A., Langston, R. (2012). Greater impacts of wind farms
on bird populations during construction than subsequent operation: results of a multi-site and
multi-species analysis. Journal of Applied Ecology. Vol 49: p 386 – 394.
Percival S. (2003). Birds and Wind Farms in Ireland: A review of potential issues and impact
assessment.
Reynolds, J.D. (1998) Conservation management of the white-clawed crayfish,
Austropotamobius pallipes. Part 1. Irish Wildlife Manuals, No. 1.
Racey, Speakman & Swift (1987). Reproductive adaptations of heterothermic bats at the
northern borders of their distribution. South African Journal of Science. 83: 635 – 638.
Rodrigues L., Bach L., Dubourg-Savage M.-J., Goodwin J. & Harbusch C. (2008). Guidelines
for consideration of bats in wind farm projects. EUROBATS Publication Series No. 3 (English
version). UNEP/EUROBATS Secretariat, Bonn, Germany, 51 pp.
Rollins, K.E., Meyerholz, D. K., Johnson, G. D., Capparella, A. P. and Loew, S. S. (2012). A
Forensic Investigation Into the Etiology of Bat Mortality at a Wind Farm: Barotrauma or
Traumatic Injury? Veterinary Pathology. Vol. 49: p. 362.
Russ J.M. & Montgomery W.I. (2002). Habitat associations of bats in Northern Ireland:
Implications for Conservation. Biological Conservation. 108: 49 – 58.
Russ J.M., Briffa M., Montgomery W.I. (2003). Seasonal patterns in activity and habitat use by
bats (Pipistrellus spp. And Nyctalus leisleri) in Northern Ireland, determined using a driven
transect. Journal of Zoology. London. 259: 289 – 299.
Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) (2009). Monitoring the Impact of Onshore Wind Farms on
Birds. Scottish Natural Heritage. RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 96 31/08/2026
Steinborn, V.H. & Reichenback, M. (2011). Kiebitz und Wind kraftanlagen - Ergebnisse aus
einer siebenjährigen Studie imsüdlichen Ostfriesland. Nat.sch. Landschaftspl. 43: 261-270
Szewczak, J.M. and Arnett, E.B (2006) Ultrasound Emissions from Wind Turbines as A
Potential Attractant to Bats: A Preliminary Investigation. Report prepared for Bat Conservation
International.
Tierney, D & O’Boyle, S (2016). Water Quality in 2016: An Indicators Report. EPA.
Verboom B. & Huitema H. (1997). The importance of linear landscape elements for the
Pipistrellus pipistrellus and the serotine bat Eptesicus serotinus. Landscape Ecology. 12(2):
117 – 125.
Verboom B. & Spoelstra K. (1999). Effects of food abundance and wind on the use of tree lines
by an insectivorus bat, Pipistrellus pipistrellus. Canadian Journal of Zoology. 77: 1393 – 1401.
Walsh, A.L. & Harris, S. (1996). Foraging habitat preferences of vespertilionid bats in Britain.
Journal of Applied Ecology 33: 508-518.
Whilde, A (1993). Irish Red Data Book 2: Vertebrates. Threatened Mammals, Birds,
Amphibians, and Fish in Ireland. Published by HMSO.
RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 97 31/08/2026
Appendix 1
Appendix 1 Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan enclosed separately. Document Reference: Clones
SWT Bat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan.
RECEIVED: 04/09/2026
Client: ART Generation Ltd.
Project Title: Single Wind Turbine Carney’s Island
Document Title: EcIA
Date: Aug. 2026
Document Issue: Final
SWT Carney’s Island 98 31/08/2026
Appendix 2
Appendix 2 Bird Mitigation and Monitoring Plan enclosed separately. Document Reference: Clones
SWT Bird Mitigation and Monitoring Plan.
RECEIVED: 04/09/2026