ex-ante evaluation of the wales 2007-13 rural … sea.pdf · 1.2. sea steps prior to this report...

Final Report for

National Assembly for Wales

Submitted by

Agra CEAS Consulting

in association with

Collingwood Environmental Planning

Telephone: *44 (0)1233 812181Fax: *44 (0)1233 813309E-mail: [email protected]

www.ceasc.com

Job No2239/BDB/September 2006

ANNEX TO THEEX-ANTE EVALUATION

OF THEWALES 2007-13

RURAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

THE STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENT

STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF THE WALES 2007-13 RDP

i

Contents

S1. NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY............................................................................................................... IX

1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................. 1

1.1. PURPOSE OF THE STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT...................................................................... 11.2. SEA STEPS PRIOR TO THIS REPORT ............................................................................................................... 1

1.2.1. Screening.............................................................................................................................................. 11.2.2. Consultation on the Scoping Report..................................................................................................... 2

2. BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................................... 3

2.1. OBJECTIVES OF THE WALES RURAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2007-13 ............................................................. 32.2. APPROACH.................................................................................................................................................... 4

3. STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY................................................... 7

3.1. OVERVIEW OF THE SEA OF THE RURAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN ..................................................................... 73.2. TIMING ......................................................................................................................................................... 93.3. APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................. 9

3.3.1. Temporal and geographical scale ........................................................................................................ 93.3.2. A strategic approach .......................................................................................................................... 103.3.3. Scoping............................................................................................................................................... 10

4. ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE AND KEY ISSUES ............................................................................... 21

4.1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................... 214.2. BIODIVERSITY ............................................................................................................................................ 21

4.2.1. Current situation and trends .............................................................................................................. 214.2.2. Key issues ........................................................................................................................................... 22

4.3. FISHERIES ................................................................................................................................................... 234.3.1. Current situation and trends .............................................................................................................. 234.3.2. Key issues ........................................................................................................................................... 24

4.4. ANIMAL WELFARE ...................................................................................................................................... 244.4.1. Current situation and trends .............................................................................................................. 244.4.2. Key issues ........................................................................................................................................... 25

4.5. WOODLAND/FOREST MANAGEMENT ........................................................................................................... 254.5.1. Current situation and trends .............................................................................................................. 254.5.2. Key issues ........................................................................................................................................... 27

4.6. POPULATION AND HUMAN HEALTH............................................................................................................. 284.6.1. Current situation and trends .............................................................................................................. 284.6.2. Key issues ........................................................................................................................................... 29

4.7. RURAL-BASED TOURISM ............................................................................................................................. 294.7.1. Current situation and trend................................................................................................................ 294.7.2. Key issues ........................................................................................................................................... 30

4.8. SOIL............................................................................................................................................................ 304.8.1. Current situation and trends .............................................................................................................. 304.8.2. Key issues ........................................................................................................................................... 31

4.9. WATER: QUALITY AND RESOURCES ............................................................................................................ 314.9.1. Current situation and trends .............................................................................................................. 314.9.2. Key issues ........................................................................................................................................... 32

4.10. AIR ........................................................................................................................................................... 32


ii

4.10.1. Current situation and trends ............................................................................................................ 324.10.2. Key issues ......................................................................................................................................... 33

4.11. CLIMATIC FACTORS .................................................................................................................................. 334.11.1. Current situation and trends ............................................................................................................ 334.11.2. Key issues ......................................................................................................................................... 34

4.12. RENEWABLE ENERGY ............................................................................................................................... 354.12.1. Current situation and trends ............................................................................................................ 354.12.2. Key issues ......................................................................................................................................... 35

4.13. MATERIAL ASSETS AND RESOURCE USE.................................................................................................... 364.13.1. Current situation and trends ............................................................................................................ 364.13.2. Key issues ......................................................................................................................................... 36

4.14. TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE ................................................................................................................. 364.14.1. Current situation and trends ............................................................................................................ 364.14.2. Key issues ......................................................................................................................................... 37

4.15. WASTE AND WASTE MANAGEMENT .......................................................................................................... 374.15.1. Current situation and trends ............................................................................................................ 374.15.2. Key issues ......................................................................................................................................... 38

4.16. CULTURAL HERITAGE AND LANDSCAPE.................................................................................................... 384.16.1. Current situation and trends ............................................................................................................ 384.16.2. Key issues ......................................................................................................................................... 38

4.17. INTER-RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE ABOVE FACTORS.............................................................................. 39

5. THE STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK............................................. 41

5.1. STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OBJECTIVES ........................................................................... 415.2. CAUSAL CHAIN ANALYSIS........................................................................................................................... 465.3. SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA ............................................................................................................................. 47

6. TESTING THE COMPATIBILITY OF THE PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL OBJECTIVES......... 49

6.1. PURPOSE OF TESTING THE COMPATIBILITY OF THE OBJECTIVES .................................................................. 496.2. OBJECTIVES OF THE RDP ........................................................................................................................... 496.3. COMPATIBILITY OF THE PLAN OBJECTIVES AND SEA OBJECTIVES.............................................................. 50

6.3.1. Overall comments............................................................................................................................... 546.3.2. Potentially conflicting objectives and recommendations ................................................................... 54

7. ASSESSMENT OF ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES TO THE RDP...................................................... 57

7.1. SELECTION OF ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS ....................................................................................................... 577.1.1. Axis 1.................................................................................................................................................. 587.1.2. Axis 2.................................................................................................................................................. 587.1.3. Axis 3.................................................................................................................................................. 597.1.4. Axis 4.................................................................................................................................................. 59

7.2. ASSESSMENT OF ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS .................................................................................................... 597.2.1. Option 1: the do-minimum option ...................................................................................................... 607.2.2. Option 2: The continuation option ..................................................................................................... 617.2.3. Option 3: the draft Plan ..................................................................................................................... 61

7.3. CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................................................. 63

8. ASSESSMENT OF THE PROPOSED RDP................................................................................................. 65

8.1. INTRODUCTION TO THE ASSESSMENT.......................................................................................................... 658.2. THE ASSESSMENT ....................................................................................................................................... 65


iii

8.3. KEY IMPACTS OF THE DRAFT RDP AND PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES ............................................... 878.3.1. Key areas where adverse cumulative effects are possible.................................................................. 878.3.2. Proposed mitigation measures ........................................................................................................... 88

9. MONITORING PROPOSALS ...................................................................................................................... 91

9.1. MONITORING IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT ........................................................................................ 919.2. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER ASSESSMENTS............................................................................................... 93


v

Abbreviations used in this Appendix

ACOS Advisory Committee on Organic Standards

AHWS Animal Health and Welfare Strategy

AONB Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

AWNPA Association of Welsh National Park Authorities

BADC British Atmospheric Data Centre

BAP Biodiversity Action Plan

BBNP Brecon Beacons National Park

BGS British Geological Survey

BRC Biological Research Centre

BSE Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy

BTO British Trust for Ornithology

BWW Better Woodlands for Wales

CEFAS Centre for Environment Fisheries and Aquaculture Science

CADW Heritage Division of the Welsh Assembly Government

CAP Common Agricultural Policy

CCW Countryside Council for Wales

CEAS Agra CEAS Consulting Ltd

CEH Centre for Ecology and Hydrology

CIC Community Interest Company

CPRE Campaign to Protect Rural England

CPRW Campaign for the Protection of Rural Wales

CSM Common Standards Monitoring

DfT Department for Transport

Defra Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

DoE Department of the Environment (Northern Ireland)

DTI Department of Trade and Industry

EA Environment Agency

EAW Environment Agency Wales

EC European Commission

EfW Energy from Waste

ENCAMS Keep Britain Tidy Campaign

ER Environmental Report

ESA Environmentally Sensitive Area

EU European Union

FC Forestry Commission

FSC Forest Stewardship Council

GAEC Good Agricultural Environmental Condition

GHG Green House Gas

GIS Geographical Information Systems

GMO Genetically Modified Organisms

GQA General Quality Assessment

Ha Hectares

HGV Heavy Goods Vehicle

ICT Information and Communications Technology

ITE Institute of Terrestrial Ecology

JNCC Joint Nature Conservation Committee

LAG Local Action Group


vi

LBAP Local Biodiversity Action Plan

LDS Local Development Strategy

LGV Light Goods Vehicle

MtC Megatonnes of Carbon

NAW National Assembly of Wales

NBN National Biodiversity Network

NPA National Park Authority

NIWT National Inventory of Woodland and Trees

NNR National Nature Reserve

NSI National Soil Inventory

NUTS Nomenclature of Units for Territorial Statistics

ODPM Office of the Deputy Prime Minister

ONS Office of National Statistics

PDO Protected Designation of Origin

PGI Protected Geographical Indication

PLANED Pembrokeshire Local Action Network for Enterprise & Development

PM10 Particles with a diameter of less than 10µg – a hundredth of a millimetre

POSPS Priority and Other Specific Polluting Substances

RAW Ramblers Association Wales

RDP Rural Development Plan

RSPB Royal Society for the Protection of Birds

RSPCA Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

SAC Special Area of Conservation

SE Scottish Executive

SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment

SME Small to Medium Enterprise

SNPA Snowdonia National Part Authority

SPA Special Protection Area

SR Scoping Report

SSLRC The Soil Survey and Land Research Centre

SSSI Site of Special Scientific Interest

SWOT Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats

TAN Technical Advice Note

UK APMN UK Air Pollution Monitoring Network

UKEDI UK Environmental Data Index

WAG Welsh Assembly Government

WDA Welsh Development Agency

WFD Water Framework Directive

WRF Wales Rural Forum


vii

Components that make up the environmental report

This Environmental Report incorporates the requirements in the Environmental Assessment of Plansand Programmes (Wales) Regulations 2004 (Welsh Instrument 2004 No. 1656 (W.170)) whichimplements the requirements of the European Directive 2001/42/EC, known as the SEA Directive.The place or places in the Environmental Report where the components which are required inrelation to Regulation 12 and Schedule 2 are sign-posted in Table 1.1.

Table 1.1: Location of required components

Information to be included in an EnvironmentalReport under the SEA Regulations (Regulation 12and Schedule 2)

Relevant sections in this Environmental Report

1. An outline of the contents, main objectives of the plan,and of its relationship with other relevant plans andprogrammes;

Chapter 2; Chapter 3 (section 3.3)

2. The relevant aspects of the current state of theenvironment and the likely evolution thereof withoutimplementation of the plan;

Chapter 4; Chapter 7 (evolution without the plan);Appendix 3

3. The environmental characteristics of areas likely to besignificantly affected;

Chapter 4; Appendix 3

4. Any existing environmental problems which arerelevant to the plan including, in particular, thoserelating to any areas of a particular environmentalimportance, such as areas designated pursuant toDirectives 79/409/EEC and 92/43/EEC;

Chapter 4

5. The environmental protection objectives, established atinternational, Community or Member State level,which are relevant to the plan and the way thoseobjectives and any environmental considerations havebeen taken into account during its preparation;

Chapter 3 (Section 3.3.3; Table 1)

6. The likely significant effects on the environment,including short, medium and long-term effects,permanent and temporary effects, positive and negativeeffects, and secondary, cumulative and synergisticeffects, on issues such as: biodiversity; population;human health; fauna; flora; soil; water; air; climaticfactors; material assets; cultural heritage includingarchitectural and archaeological heritage; landscape; theinterrelationship between the above factors;

Chapters 7 and 8 (also Chapter 4 on interactions);Appendix 4 (causal chains)

7. The measures envisaged to prevent, reduce and as fullyas possible offset any significant adverse effects on theenvironment of implementing the plan;

Chapter 8 (section 8.3)

8. An outline of the reasons for selecting the alternativesdealt with, and a description of how the assessmentwas undertaken including any difficulties (such astechnical deficiencies or lack of know-how)encountered in compiling the required information;

Chapter 7 (Selection of alternatives); Chapters 1and 3 (3.1-3.3) (Methodology, difficulties); Chapter 5 (SEA framework);Appendix 4 (causal chains)

9. A description of measures envisaged concerning Chapter 9


viii

monitoring in accordance with Regulation 17;

10. A non-technical summary of the information providedunder paragraphs 1 to 9.

At the beginning and as a stand-alone document.


ix

S1. Non-technical summary

The Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of the Wales Rural Development Plan (RDP) 2007-13has been carried out by Collingwood Environmental Planning (CEP), in association with Agra CEASConsulting and on behalf of the Welsh Assembly Government (The Assembly), in accordance withthe requirements of the EC SEA Directive (2001/42/EC) and the Environmental Assessment of Plansand Programmes (Wales) Regulations 2004 (Welsh Instrument 2004 No. 1656 (W.170)). It has beenundertaken alongside the development of the Wales RDP and seeks to ensure that the RDPcontributes positively to the high level of environmental protection now expected of EU fundingprogrammes. The SEA seeks to ensure that likely significant effects on the environment ofimplementing the Rural Development Plan (RDP), and of reasonable alternatives, are identified,described, evaluated and taken into account before the plan is adopted.

This Chapter forms the Non-Technical Summary of the Environmental Report (ER) required underthe SEA Directive. Both documents can be downloaded from the internet athttp://www.countryside.wales.gov.uk.

S1.1. The Wales Rural Development Plan 2007-13

The Wales RDP for the period 2007-13 will operate under the Rural Development Regulation(Council Regulation (EC) 1698/2005) which offers a new strategic approach to rural developmentand focuses on three core objectives: (1) increasing the competitiveness of the agricultural andforestry sector through support for restructuring; (2) enhancing the environment and countrysidethrough support for land management; and (3) enhancing the quality of life in rural areas andpromoting the diversification of economic activities through measures targeting the farm sector andother rural actors. For each core objective, key actions are suggested across four Operational Axes:

Axis 1: Improving the competitiveness of the farming and forestry sector.Axis 2: Improving the environment and the countryside.Axis 3: Quality of life in rural areas and diversification of the rural economy.Axis 4: The LEADER approach (based on local development strategies and action groups

supporting action under the other Axes).

S1.2. Strategic Environmental Assessment

Following a review of relevant policies, plans and programmes and associated objectives, and takinginto account the priority areas (Biodiversity, Water Quality, Soil Protection and Climate Change)identified by the European Commission, SEA objectives were developed under the following themes:

• biodiversity;

• water;

• soil;

• air;


x

• climatic factors (including energy);

• population and human health and well-being;

• animal welfare;

• waste;

• cultural heritage and landscape; and,

• land-use planning.

An initial list of draft “headline” SEA objectives was drawn up to reflect society’s aspirations for theWelsh environment. These were accompanied by a number of associated sub-objectives. The draftSEA objectives and sub-objectives were reviewed during a scoping meeting held in Cardiff inDecember 2005 with members of the RDP planning team and the environmental authorities. Thesewere subsequently developed and amended following further consultation on the Scoping Report(January – March 2006).

Given the strategic nature of the RDP it was considered more appropriate to focus thisEnvironmental Review (ER) on the state of the existing environment (baseline) via the process ofdeveloping SEA objectives. The use of the SEA objectives provided an appropriate means of focusingon the baseline information that is most relevant to the nature and scale of the plan. Thus, as theSEA objectives have been developed, so have relevant indicators (means of measuring progresstowards the objectives). Available datasets have then been examined for data to provide thenecessary indicator information.

The ER provides a detailed description of the current baseline, key issues and environmentalproblems, reflecting the themes selected for the SEA objectives. Key environmental issues for Walesinclude, inter alia: halting the loss of biodiversity; pollution discharges from all sources to watercourses; climate change; air quality; and landscape change. The RDP offers an opportunity to addressmany of these issues.

S1.3. Potential conflicts between the RDP objectives and the SEA objectives

A total of six areas of possible conflicts have been identified. These relate to two of the RDPobjectives under Axis 2 and one under Axis 3:

• Under Axis 2, the RDP objective “to contribute to the Gothenberg target of halting loss ofbiodiversity by 2010” could conflict with the SEA objective “to protect and improve the health andwellbeing of the population”. This is because the SEA objective includes a sub-objective to increaseaccess and recreation, which could detract from biodiversity. This possible conflict could beavoided if the access and recreation is located and managed to avoid impacts on biodiversity.

• Under Axis 2, the RDP objective “to contribute to public use, enjoyment and understanding of thecountryside” could also conflict with the SEA objective “to maintain and enhance biodiversity” forthe same reason as above and also with the SEA objective “to improve air quality” as it is likely thatany additional public use of the countryside will involve additional car journeys and therefore


xi

emissions to air. Increasing the use of the countryside should still be promoted for its widerbenefits, but steps are needed to minimise additional emissions. Measures could be consideredto promote walking, cycling and the use of public transport to access the countryside and ruralareas.

• Under Axis 3, the RDP objective “to help to raise economic activity rates” could conflict with (atleast) three of the SEA objectives: “to improve air quality”; “to reduce contribution to climate change”;and “to maximise the efficient use of resources”. This is because it is considered likely from pastevidence that increasing economic actively will result in an increased use of motor vehicles withconsequential increases in air pollution and carbon dioxide emissions and the generation of wasteand use of natural resources.

S1.4. Assessment of alternative options

Three strategic alternative options were assessed:

• a do-minimum option (Option 1);

• a continuation of existing measures option (Option 2); and,

• the draft RDP as proposed by The Assembly (Option 3).

There is no realistic “zero” or “do-nothing” option with respect to the RDP since The Assemblyhas existing on-going commitments, for example delivering certain agri-environment schemes. Thedo-nothing option (i.e. no schemes under each Axis) was therefore rejected as not feasible giventhese on-going contractual commitments.

The three options above were therefore assessed against the broad headline SEA objectives, takinginto account the relevant sub-objectives. The outcome of the assessment of alternatives shows thatthe draft plan as proposed is the best of the three options with respect to environmental effects.The other options both involve lower levels of investment, especially in agri-environment schemesunder Axis 2. Consequently, fewer farm holdings would enter existing schemes and some newschemes could not go ahead. Overall, this would be likely to result in fewer environmental benefits.

S1.5. Key impacts of the draft RDP and proposed mitigation measures

Many aspects of the RDP are generally very positive, resulting from its strong environmental focusand the overall objectives, particularly of the agri-environment schemes. However, there are somekey areas where there is considerable uncertainty, and where there is potential for negative effects.The assessment raises concerns over the cumulative effects from relatively small scale negativeimpacts arising from multiple schemes across a range of the SEA objectives. Here, furtherspecification of the schemes will be necessary to ensure that suitable environmental conditions are inplace to mitigate the potential for damaging effects.


xii

S1.5.1. Key areas where adverse cumulative effects are possible

The following areas were identified where cumulative effects are possible as a result of multipleschemes:

• Biodiversity: from Axes 1 and 3 schemes in particular, as a result of development ofinfrastructure and greater economic activity in agriculture and forestry.

• Water: potential for cumulative effects on discharges, water quality and quantity from forestryand tourism activity in particular.

• Soil: tourism activities funded under Axis 3 have the potential for locally small scale cumulativeeffects on soil erosion and soil processes.

• Air quality: potential for cumulative effects from locally small scale emissions to air fromincreased transport.

• Climate change: potential for small scale contributions to carbon dioxide emissions fromincreased economic activity, transport and tourism.

• Land use planning: multiple schemes may have negative or possible negative effects acrossmany schemes, Axes 1 and 3, but also Axis 2 resulting particularly in land take and impacts onwider environmental, visual and cultural amenity.

S1.5.2. Proposed mitigation measures

Mitigation measures are likely to be needed in relation to the following schemes taking into accountthe potential for uncertainty, negative effects and/or for potential cumulative effects as discussedabove.

Axis 1:

• Training and information provision: the extent of implementation of the advice is critical toits outcome. While the RDP requires monitoring against a range of output and result indicators,the way in which participants respond to such advice may be rather more subtle and incapable ofdetection by the usual indicators. It is not, for example, just whether farmers enter into foodquality schemes. The nature of the food quality scheme, and the way individual farmersimplement the scheme, may make a significant difference to the overall environmental effectsthey have.

• Modernisation of agricultural holdings: the environmental benefits likely to accrue frommodernisation will depend to a significant extent on how support is targeted. ‘Clean-up’ ofpoorly managed farm holdings is likely to result in the greatest environmental outcome possible,but farmers with such holdings may be least likely to apply for support. Mechanisms shouldtherefore be explored to target these hard to reach farmers, including the nature of the trainingand information provisions available under this Axis.


xiii

• The assessment identified considerable uncertainty in relation to food quality schemes.Quality standards (e.g. ISO 9000) in themselves may be relatively meaningless in environmentalterms. Those food schemes relating to locality (i.e. Protected Designation of Origin andProtected Geographical Indication - PDO/PGI) may have potential to bring environmentalbenefits (e.g. reduced transport effects) if taken up and profiled locally, for example through localmarkets and tourism initiatives (e.g. under Axes 3 and 4). A high quality environment and theachievement of high environmental standards should be identified as a key element ofcompetitiveness in food quality schemes.

Axis 2:

• Afforestation has considerable potential to bring about positive environmental gains,particularly with respect to biodiversity and in its contribution providing a carbon sink, if usedappropriately. However, new forest planting can remove agricultural land from production, andalso may result in land take of non-agricultural land which might have other value, including forbiodiversity. New woodland planting also has the potential to have negative effects on waterquality and quantity, depending on the tree species and where they are planted. Targeting of theBetter Woodlands for Wales schemes, and the full use of Environmental Impact Assessment(EIA) at the project level, will be necessary to help ensure that wider biodiversity andenvironmental objectives are met, and to maximise opportunities for enhancement. There isalso the potential for visual/landscape effects and these issues should be incorporated into EIAand/or within forest management plans, as appropriate. Consultation and engagement withstakeholders should also form an integral part of such assessments.

Axis 3:

• Schemes promoting added economic value and the development of new products, by their verynature, encourage greater levels of economic development and activity. This means that greatcare is needed in implementation at scheme level to minimise potential negative environmentalimpacts and maximise the potential positive aspects. The support for infrastructure and building,even where undertaken sensitively, is still economic development and therefore has the potentialto have significant effects, particularly cumulatively.

• The encouragement of tourism activities has the potential to bring increased traffic (andassociated emissions), increased access (trampling, disturbance, litter, noise), buildings, visitorcentres and other infrastructure (land-take and visual impacts on the environment, waste,emissions to water). Most small scale and farm-based tourism development is unlikely to besubject to environmental impact assessment (EIA), though much will be subject to planningconsent. But the potential for these impacts needs to be considered in the detailed RDP schemedesign, so that wider environmental impacts are minimised from the beginning. The promotionof public transport and local markets could help to reduce food miles and therefore help toreduce transport emissions, for example. Management plans for protected areas and sensitive


xiv

sites will need to play an important role in facilitating increased access to such sites in asustainable way.

• Village renewal offers potential benefits to the wider environment, particularly where supportis given to public transport provision. This can be linked to the developments of tourism activityabove, where greater emphasis could be placed on local bus and rail based tourism, rather thancar use. LEADER programmes can have an important role in facilitating environmentallyacceptable tourism initiatives based around local activity, heritage or produce (e.g. theMonmouthshire Food Trail).

Axis 4:

• LEADER programmes can help facilitate environmentally beneficial outcomes from supportacross the other axes by encouraging community involvement at the local level in supportingmore environmentally sustainable economic activity and environmental projects. Critical to thiswill be to ensure that wherever possible the potential for small impacts, which may have asignificant cumulative effect, upon biodiversity, water quality and quantity, soil, air quality, climatechange and land use planning are recognised and efforts made to take these into account inLEADER local development strategies and local action groups.

S1.6. Monitoring proposals

Monitoring the significant environmental effects of implementing the RDP is an important andongoing element of the SEA process. Given the inherent long-term nature of delivering the schemes,monitoring the implementation of the RDP from an environmental perspective will ensure that actualprogress against the environment objectives, which formed the core of this assessment, can bemeasured. Where negative effects are identified, appropriate remedial actions can be identified andimplemented.

This environmental monitoring process is likely to take as its starting point the objectives, andsupporting indicators, developed for the SEA assessment and the key negative environmental effectspredicted. However, the monitoring required is likely to draw significantly on existing monitoringprogrammes, for example those undertaken by the Assembly and other organisations (such as CCWand Environmental Agency Wales), rather than require additional monitoring. Table 1.2 summarisesthe monitoring proposed in the ER, to take account of the potential adverse environmental effects.


xv

Table 1.2: Proposed monitoring of key significant and cumulative negative effectsidentified in the SEA

Significant negative effects from specificschemes (in bold, by axis and scheme)

Specific indicators (from Table 2)particularly relevant to monitoringidentified effects

SEA Theme

• Cumulative effects New indicators/gaps (in italics)

Biodiversity

Axis 3, Schemes 1, 2, & 4

• Cumulative effects: potential for possiblenegative effects at local level from Axis 1 and3 schemes in particular, as a result ofdevelopment of infrastructure and greatereconomic activity in agriculture and forestry.

• Area and condition of protected areas

• Status of BAP species/habitats

• Trends in natural and a semi-natural habitats;area and condition

• Biodiversity index: species indicators –widespread breeding birds

Water

Axis 1, Schemes 4, 5, & 6Axis 2, Schemes 5 & 9Axis 3, Schemes 4

• Cumulative effects: potential for cumulativeeffects on discharges, water quality andquantity from forestry and tourism activity inparticular.

• Quality of rivers and freshwater bodies

• % of water bodies likely to comply withWater Framework Directive environmentalobjectives

• Distribution of nitrate concentrations

Soil

Axis 3, Scheme 2

• Cumulative effects: tourism activities fundedunder Axis 3 have the potential for locallysmall scale cumulative effects on soil erosionand soil processes.

• Soil carbon content

• Soil erosion risk

Air quality

Axis 1, Scheme 9Axis 2, Scheme 9Axis 3, Scheme 2 (specifically major significanteffect on minimising demand to travel)

• Cumulative effects: significant potential forcumulative effects to arise from locally smallscale emissions to air from increasedtransport resulting from increased economicactivity in the agricultural and forestrysectors, and in tourism in particular.

• Number of days of air pollution (rural areas)

• Distances travelled per person per year (bymode)

• % population with access to public transport

• Levels of car and van ownership

• Amount and type of fuel used in transport

Climatechange

Axis 1, Schemes 4, 5 & 9Axis 3, Scheme 2

• Cumulative effects: while there arepotential benefits from e.g. forestry, there isthe clear potential for small scalecontributions to carbon dioxide emissionsfrom increased economic activity, transportand tourism

• Total greenhouse gas emissions

• Carbon equivalent emissions by sector





xvi



SEA Theme


Land useplanning

Axis 1, Schemes 4, 5 & 7Axis 2, Schemes 5 & 6Axis 3, Schemes 1,2, 3 & 4

• Cumulative effects: this is a key area wheremultiple schemes may have negative orpossible negative effects across manyschemes, Axis 1 and 3 but also Axis 2resulting particularly in land take and impactson wider environmental, visual and culturalamenity.

• Distribution of land use by type

• Area under agri-environment schemes

• Landscape character maps (available for Englandonly)

• Tranquil area maps (available for England only)

Other significant negative effects

Waste

Axis 2, Scheme 9Axis 3, Schemes 2 & 3

• Rates of waste arising

• % waste arising by sector going to recycling,composting, energy recovery, landfill

Culturalheritage andlandscape

Axis 3, Scheme 3 • Extent and condition of designated areas,buildings and archaeological sites

• Protection afforded to the historicenvironment by sympathetic farmmanagement regimes (e.g. Tir Gofal, TirCynnal: from WENDI database)

S1.6.1. Relationships with other assessments

Other forms of environmental assessment exist at lower levels of decision making where a numberof the key issues identified can be picked up and assessed in more detail. These include SEA/SA atregional spatial and local development plan levels, EIA for forestry and other sectors, developmentcontrol planning consent for new developments and the potential for interaction of specific schemesand projects with “appropriate assessment” under the Habitats Directive.


1

1. Introduction

1.1. Purpose of the Strategic Environmental Assessment

The Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of the Rural Development Plan (RDP) 2006-13 hasbeen carried out by Collingwood Environmental Planning (CEP), in association with Agra CEASConsulting and on behalf of the Welsh Assembly Government (The Assembly), in accordance withthe requirements of the EC SEA Directive (2001/42/EC) and the Environmental Assessment of Plansand Programmes (Wales) Regulations 2004 (Welsh Instrument 2004 No. 1656 (W.170)).

The SEA has been undertaken alongside the development of the Wales RDP and ex-ante evaluation(as required under EC Regulation 1698/2005, Article 85) and seeks to ensure that the RDPcontributes positively to the high level of environmental protection now expected of EU fundingprogrammes. This Appendix constitutes the Environmental Report (ER) required under the SEADirective. It contains a non-technical summary of the ER, which is also available as a stand-alonedocument. Both of these documents can be downloaded from the internet athttp://www.countryside.wales.gov.uk.

The overall aims of the SEA are to:

• provide for a high level of environmental protection;

• ensure that likely significant effects on the environment of implementing the RDP are identified,described, evaluated and taken into account before the plan is adopted; and that,

• reasonable alternatives, taking into account the objectives and geographical scope of the plan, areevaluated for their likely significant effects and inform the nature and content of the proposedRDP.

1.2. SEA steps prior to this report

1.2.1. Screening

Under the SEA Directive 2001/42/EC1 the RDP for Wales 2007-13 was potentially required toundergo SEA, subject to the European Commission’s report on the relationship between the SEADirective and Structural Funds and Rural Development Regulations (EC) 1260/1999 and 1257/1999(Art 12(4), 2001/42/EC). The Assembly decided in September 2005 that an SEA be undertaken ofthe RDP in order to avoid any risks of failing to be compliant with the SEA Directive in the future.The Commission confirmed (February 2006) that SEA was required in its draft guidelines to Member

1 Official Journal of the European Commission, Council Directive of 27 June 2001 on the assessment of the effects of certain plans andprogrammes on the environment (2001/42/EC) OJ L 197/30-37.


2

States on carrying out the ex-ante evaluation2. The decision taken by the Assembly fulfils the“screening” requirements of the SEA Directive, i.e. deciding whether SEA is required.

1.2.2. Consultation on the Scoping Report

An SEA scoping report was produced following an initial scoping meeting held on 14 December 2005in Cardiff with representatives invited from the Countryside Council for Wales, The EnvironmentAgency Wales and Welsh Historic Monuments (CADW). These are the designated environmentalauthorities to be consulted under the Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes (Wales)Regulations 2004, “the SEA Regulations”. Further comments on the scoping report were invitedfrom these bodies and from other consultees representing wider interests in rural Wales duringFebruary and March 2006. This document was sent out to the full range of Assembly consultees3

and was readily available to download from the internet. The consultation on the SEA scopingreport occurred at the same time as the Assembly consultation on the Draft Rural Development Planstrategy document for Wales 2007-134, the precursor to the draft RDP.

2 Rural Development 2007-13, Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework, Draft Guidelines for Ex-ante Evaluation, February 2005,Directorate General for Agriculture and Rural Development.3 The range of people and organisations consulted was extensive and included businesses, NGOs, community groups, etc, with the scopingreport being made available to the Assembly’s list of key stakeholder organisations who have in an interest in Rural Development In Wales.4 Draft Rural Development Plan for Wales 2007-2013 - The Strategic Approach, available at www.countryside.wales.gov.uk.


3

2. Background

2.1. Objectives of the Wales Rural Development Plan 2007-13

The Wales RDP for the period 2007-13 will operate under the Rural Development Regulation(Council Regulation (EC) 1698/2005) which offers a new strategic approach to rural developmentand focuses on the following three core objectives:

• increasing the competitiveness of the agricultural and forestry sector through support forrestructuring;

• enhancing the environment and countryside through support for land management; and,

• enhancing the quality of life in rural areas and promoting the diversification of economic activitiesthrough measures targeting the farm sector and other rural actors.

For each core objective, key actions are suggested by the EC Regulations across four OperationalAxes:

Axis 1: Improving the competitiveness of the farming and forestry sector

Examples:

• fostering human capital by providing training and advice to farmers and foresters;

• improving and developing infrastructure related to the development and adaptation of agricultureand forestry;

• supporting farmers who participate in food quality schemes;

• setting up of young farmers; and,

• support for semi-subsistence farmers in new Member States to become competitive.

Axis 2: Improving the environment and the countryside

Examples:

• natural handicap payments to farmers in mountain areas;

• NATURA 2000 payments;

• agri-environment measures;

• animal welfare payments; and,

• measures for sustainable forestry.

Axis 3: Quality of life in rural areas and diversification of the rural economy

Examples:

• diversification to non-agricultural activities;

• support for the creation of micro enterprises;


4

• encouragement of tourism; and,

• village renewal.

Axis 4: the LEADER approach

Each programme must have a LEADER element for the implementation of bottom-up localdevelopment strategies of local action groups.

2.2. Approach

The strategic approach adopted by the Assembly in developing the RDP was set out in the DraftRural Development Plan for Wales 2007-13 – The Strategic Approach. Consultation on thisdocument was undertaken between January and March 2006, which helped inform the draft RDP.The RDP for the period 2007-13 will follow on from the Plan already in place (2000-06) and will offera range of schemes within the framework set out in Box 2.1.

Box 2.1: Proposed focus of the draft 2007-2013 Wales RDP5

Axis 1The actions will build on the work already undertaken under the 2000-06 RDP and the Objective 1Structural Fund and will continue the movement of the Welsh agri-food sector towards the overallobjectives of sustainability, competitiveness and innovation. They will have as their overarchingpriority knowledge transfer, modernisation, innovation and quality improvement and will address theneeds of both human and physical potential.

Axis 2Reflecting the Assembly Government’s priorities under the existing RDP, the successor Plan willcontinue to have a significant emphasis on measures aimed at further developing farmer participationin agri-environment schemes and the continued development of support for forestry measures. TheTir Gofal scheme is considered to have been a success and the progress achieved to date will be builtupon with annual targets from 2007 to continue to expand participation in the scheme. There willalso be continuing support for the entry level Tir Cynnal scheme.

Axis 3The exact actions to be implemented will be tailored to meet local circumstances through localdevelopment strategies prepared in line with the objectives of the successor Plan. They will have astheir overarching priority the creation of employment opportunities and establishment of suitableconditions for sustainable growth and will be required to address the specific requirements ofwomen and young people.

5 Draft Rural Development Plan for Wales 2007-2013 – The Strategic Approach, January 2006


5

Axis 4As with Axis 3, the exact actions to be implemented will be finalised at the local level through thepreparation of local development strategies in line with the objectives of the successor Plan. Actionswill seek to deliver local priorities in a co-ordinated manner and will contribute to achieving thepriorities of the other Axes as well as on improving local governance and endogenous developmentpotential through capacity building and needs audits.

The specific schemes identified and proposed in the draft plan are:

Axis 1: Improving the Competitiveness of the Agriculture and Forestry Sector1. Vocational training and information actions.2. Use of farm and forestry advisory services.3. Modernisation of agricultural holdings.4. Improving the economic value of forests.5. Adding value to agricultural and forestry products.6. Co-operation for development of new products, processes and technologies in the

agriculture/food sector and forestry sector.7. Infrastructure related to the development and adaptation of agriculture and forestry.8. Participation of farmers in food quality schemes.9. Information and promotion activities.

Axis 2: Improving the Environment and the Countryside1. Agri-environment payments – Tir Cynnal.2. Agri-environment payments – Tir Gofal.3. Agri-environment payments – Higher level scheme.4. Agri-environment payments – Organic farming scheme.5. Better Woodland for Wales (BWW) First afforestation of agricultural land.6. BWW First afforestation of non-agricultural land.7. BWW Forest-environment payments.8. BWW Restoring forestry potential and introducing prevention actions.9. BWW Support for non productive investments (forestry).

Axis 3: Quality of Life in Rural Areas and Diversification of the Rural Economy1. Support for business creation and development.2. Encouragement of tourism activities.3. Basic services for the economy and rural population.4. Village renewal and development.5. Conservation and upgrading o the rural heritage.6. Provision of training & information for economic actors in Axis 3.7. Skills acquisition and animation re: a local development strategy.


6

Axis 4: LEADER1. Local development strategies.2. Inter-territorial and trans-national co-operation.3. Running the local action group.


7

3. Strategic Environmental Assessment methodology

3.1. Overview of the SEA of the Rural Development Plan

The objective of the SEA Directive 2001/42/EC is:

“to provide for a high level of protection of the environment and to contribute to theintegration of environmental considerations into the preparation and adoption of plans…witha view to promoting sustainable development”.(Article 1).

Whilst these goals are broadly consistent with a range of national and more local policies, and havebeen reflected for a number of years in wider planning policy formulation, the Directive emphasises:

• collecting and presenting baseline environmental information;

• predicting “significant environmental effects” of the Plan and addressing them during itspreparation;

• identifying strategic alternatives and their effects;

• consulting the public and authorities with environmental responsibilities; and,

• monitoring the actual effects of the Plan during its implementation.

The UK Government (in association with the Welsh Assembly and other devolved governments)produced generic guidance for implementing the SEA Directive in September 20056. This guidancehighlights the key stages of SEA that need to be followed in order to meet the requirements of theSEA Directive. After screening and the decision to require SEA, the main stages of the SEA are:

• setting the context and SEA objectives, establishing the baseline and deciding on the scope (or“scoping”);

• assisting with the development and refinement of alternatives and assessing effects (of the RDP);

• preparing the environmental report;

• consultation on the draft RDP and the environmental report; and,

• monitoring the significant effects of implementing the RDP.

The activities that comprise each of the five main stages of the SEA are described below (adaptedfrom ODPM, 2005).

6 ODPM (2005) A Practical Guide to the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive – Practical guidance on applying EuropeanDirective 2001/42/EC “on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment”, September 2005, ODPM,London.


8

Stage A. Setting the context and objectives, establishing the baseline and deciding onthe scope (or “scoping”)

TASKS PURPOSE

A1: Identifying other relevant plans,programmes, and environmentalprotection objectives

To establish how the RDP is affected by outside factors, to suggest ideasfor how any constraints can be addressed, and to help to identify SEAobjectives.

A2: Collecting baseline information To provide an evidence base for environmental problems, prediction ofeffects, and monitoring; to help in the development of SEA objectives.

A3: Identifying environmentalproblems

To help focus the SEA and streamline the subsequent stages, includingbaseline information analysis, setting of the SEA objectives, prediction ofeffects and monitoring.

A4: Developing SEA objectives To provide a means by which the environmental performance of the planor programme and alternatives can be assessed.

A5: Consulting on the scope of SEA To ensure that the SEA covers the likely significant environmental effectsof the RDP.

Stage B. Developing and refining alternatives and assessing effects

TASKS PURPOSE

B1: Testing the RDP objectivesagainst the SEA objectives

To identify potential synergies or inconsistencies between the objectivesof the RDP and the SEA objectives and help in developing alternatives.

B2: Developing strategic alternatives To develop and refine strategic alternatives.

B3: Predicting the effects of the RDP,including alternatives

To predict the significant environmental effects of the RDP andalternatives.

B4: Evaluating the effects of the RDP,including alternatives

To evaluate the predicted effects of the RDP and its alternatives and assistin the refinement of the RDP.

B5: Mitigating adverse effects To ensure that adverse effects are identified and potential mitigationmeasures are considered.

B6: Proposing measures to monitorthe environmental effects of theRDP implementation

To detail the means by which the environmental performance of the planor programme can be assessed.

Stage C. Preparing the Environmental Report

TASKS PURPOSE

C1: Preparing the EnvironmentalReport

To present the predicted environmental effects of the plan or programme,including alternatives, in a form suitable for public consultation and use bydecision-makers.


9

Stage D. Consulting on the draft RDP and the Environmental Report

TASKS PURPOSE

D1: Consulting the public andConsultation Bodies on the draftRDP and the EnvironmentalReport

To give the public and the Consultation Bodies an opportunity to expresstheir opinion on the findings in the Environmental Report and to use it asa reference point in commenting on the RDP. To gather moreinformation through the opinions and concerns of the public.

D2: Assessing significant changes To ensure that the environmental implications of any significant changes tothe draft RDP at this stage are assessed and taken into account.

D3: Making Decision and providinginformation

To provide information on how the Environmental Report and consultees’opinions were taken into account in deciding the final form or the RDP tobe adopted.

Stage E. Monitoring the significant effects of implementing the RDP on the environmentNote: This stage will be an on-going activity undertaken beyond the scope of this work on the SEAonce the RDP has been finalised.

TASKS PURPOSE

E1: Developing aims and methods formonitoring

To track the environmental effects of the RDP to show whether they areas predicted; to help identify adverse effects.

E2: Responding to adverse effects To prepare for appropriate responses where adverse effects areidentified.

3.2. Timing

The draft RDP has been produced in parallel with the Wales Environment Strategy7 and so the RDPprocess has benefited from the development of broad environmental objectives for the whole ofWales. The RDP strategy document was consulted on simultaneously with the scoping report forthe RDP SEA (between January and March 2006). However, the timescale created by delayeddecisions at European Commission level, for example in finalising guidelines for the ex-ante evaluation,has meant that the draft RDP that was put out for consultation was effectively a work in progress,and that the SEA process (culminating in this Environmental Report (ER)) was not able to influencethe draft plan to the extent that would have been preferred. This ER, along with the consultation onthe draft plan and environmental report, has influenced the final form of the RDP that was submittedto the European Commission in Autumn 2006. This has had to be a pragmatic response to theimposed timetable. Changes to the draft RDP following consultation were assessed as part of theSEA where necessary (in line with Stage D2 above) and these changes are incorporated in this ER.

3.3. Approach and methodology

3.3.1. Temporal and geographical scale

In developing the approach to be adopted and the appropriate methodologies to be used inundertaking the SEA there are a number of important considerations. First, the boundaries of the

7 Published 17 May 2006.


10

SEA, temporal and spatial, set the framework for identifying the most relevant issues. The timescaleof the RDP (2007-13) is clearly the main focus, but the previous RDP (2000-06) and its monitoringand evaluation are also central to the understanding of environmental impacts and the nature of theschemes supported by the RDP. By necessity, the timescale for consideration of long-term impactsmust extend beyond the immediate boundaries of the plan itself for certain types of issues, forexample in relation to climate change. The geographical focus is on the whole of Wales, the coastsand where necessary across the border into England. Some aspects here are very relevant, such astrans-boundary pollution and cross-border farm ownership.

3.3.2. A strategic approach

It is important to note that the approach taken to the SEA for the Wales RDP is a strategic one (i.e.the RDP is a high level plan). Consequently, local level detail generally is unlikely to be particularlyrelevant or appropriate to this level of strategic environmental assessment. The SEA Directive(Article 5 (2)) requires the assessment to be undertaken taking into account “current knowledge andmethods of assessment, the contents and level of detail in the plan or programme, its stage in thedecision-making process and the extent to which certain matters are more appropriately assessed atdifferent levels in that process in order to avoid duplication of the assessment.”. The SEA is notintended to address issues that are more properly the consideration of lower level assessments(even if those assessments may not in practice exist, for example, for each individual programmewithin each Axis). As such the SEA is guided by the appropriate selection of a manageable set of SEAobjectives which in turn determine the key relevant indicators to focus the baseline data collected.

This baseline data informs the assessment of the many RDP schemes against the SEA objectives. Theuse of causal chain analysis has been adopted as a means of understanding the key links betweenbaseline trends and environmental effects of the schemes. This is seen as one of the only practicalways in which a useful assessment can be delivered, given the nature of the RDP planning process andthe constraints imposed by the timescale set by the European Commission. The intention has beento make meaningful use of baseline data rather than the extensive collection of data that does notadd significant practical value to the assessment process. Two key questions have been asked as ameans of determining the appropriate level of detail:

1. What difference would more detail make to the assessment?2. How can this be used?

In this way, a workable set of indicators has been selected relevant to each set of headline objectives,rather than a comprehensive set of indicators.

3.3.3. Scoping

Figure 3.1 illustrates the relationship between the key stages of the SEA process.


11

Figure 3.1: The Strategic Environmental Assessment process

Stage A: Setting the context andobjectives, establishing the baselineand deciding on the scope

Stage B: Developing and refiningalternatives and assessing effects

Stage C: Preparing theEnvironmental Report

Stage D: Consultation on the draftplan or programme andEnvironmental Report

Stage E: Monitoring implementationOf the plan or programme

A1: Identifying other relevant pansprogrammes, and environmental

objectives

A2: Collecting baselineinformation

A.3: Identifying environmentalproblems

A.4: Developing the SEAobjectives

A.5 Consulting on the scopeof SEA

B.1 Testing the plan objectives against theSEA objectives

B2: Developing strategicalternatives

B3: Predicting the effects of thedraft plan or programme and

alternatives

B5: Considering ways of mitigatingeffects

B4: Evaluating the effects of thedraft plan or programme andalternatives

B6: Proposing measures to monitor theenvironmental effect of plan or programme

C1: Preparing the Environmental Report

D1: Consulting on the draft plan orprogramme and environmental Report

D2: Assessment of significant changes

D3: Decision making and providinginformation

E1: Developing aims and methods formonitoring

E2: Responding to adverse effects


12

Scoping (Stage A) refers to the process of identifying the key environmental issues, the parametersfor the assessment (including the appropriate geographical scale and time period for the assessment),the development of SEA objectives, the relationship with other plans and programmes andestablishing the baseline information relating to the plan and the environment likely to be affected. Ithas been important to expend some effort on the development of a set of appropriate SEAobjectives since these set the framework against which the RDP schemes are addressed.

The scoping process began in October 2005 with initial reviews of available information. In relationto the RDP this was very early in the planning process, since the National Strategy Plan (theprecursor to the RDP) was only in its earliest stages of development. This presented both benefits(the potential opportunity to engage with and influence the plan process) and disadvantages (the planobjectives were still at a very elementary stage of formulation and hence the focus for the SEA wasuncertain).

A one-day scoping meeting, attended by representatives from the environmental authorities, washeld in Cardiff on 14 December 2005. A list of attendees, along with the agenda for that meeting,can be found in Appendix 1 of this Annex. The meeting included a brainstorming of the keyenvironmental issues and problems relevant to the RDP and discussed draft SEA objectives, whichwere further revised as a result of that discussion. These discussions and feedback provided directinputs to the scoping report8, which was distributed for wide consultation between January andMarch 2006. Comments received from respondents were then collated and incorporated into theSEA as appropriate. A summary of the comments received and how they were addressed in the SEAis provided in Appendix 2 of this Annex.

3.3.3.1. Identifying other relevant plans and programmes andenvironmental objectives

The purpose of reviewing other plans and programmes, which includes policies, strategies andinitiatives and environmental objectives, as part of the SEA is to ensure that the relationship withthese other documents and their requirements are explored. The purpose of this is to help establishwhether the RDP is affected by outside factors and to help identify SEA objectives. The plans,programmes and environmental objectives that need to be considered include those at aninternational, national and regional scale. There are influences upon the Wales RDP beyond thegeographical borders of Wales itself, and it is important that the extent and nature of theseinfluences are understood. The geographical boundary of the SEA, therefore, is not the Welshborder, though the main focus is within it. The nature of farm ownership, for example, means thatsome farmers in Wales own land in England and vice versa. Importantly, the environment iscontinuous across the administrative boundaries and so different geographical boundaries may beappropriate depending on the issue being considered. This is addressed further in discussing keyenvironmental issues in the context of the current baseline below.

8 http://www.countryside.wales.gov.uk/fe/master.asp?n1=797&n2=358&n3=948


13

Table 3.1 provides a summary of plans and programmes (PPs) included in the review as part of theSEA, divided by sector or topic, although it is acknowledged that some documents have overarchingobjectives and do not fit solely into one category. These plans were reviewed for their mainobjectives/requirements and how these might be relevant to the development of the RDP. This wasa dynamic process throughout the SEA as new policies, plans and programmes came forward.

There is, however, a genuine risk that such a review process can get out of hand and that sight is lostof the real purpose of reviewing other plans and programmes, especially given the wide ranging remitof the RDP. At this level there are many uncertainties and there is a need to be aware that aspurious degree of accuracy might be attained simply by having more objectives and indicators drawnfrom only remotely relevant plans. Some plans and programmes are clearly more relevant becausethey relate to the same scale as the plan, or provide a framework within which the plan will operate.International objectives, for example, are frequently expressed at more relevant levels, e.g. EUstrategies translated into Wales-level strategies. The Wales-level documents are therefore morerelevant to the SEA process, and have been drawn upon particularly in developing the SEA objectivesand indicators. Others, while they may have a bearing on the plan indirectly, are not necessarilycentral to the SEA process being undertaken here. That is not to say they are not important, butgiven the nature of the SEA and the Plan, it is essential to focus only on those issues that are mostrelevant and can be deemed to be influential upon or influenced by the RDP reasonably directly.While individual interests may wish to see their particular concern addressed in considerable detail,this risks running counter to the purpose of the SEA to inform the RDP process.

In Table 3.1, those PPs listed in bold have helped inform the selection of objectives and indicatorsand provide context for the assessment itself, and proposals for mitigation and monitoring. Thoselisted in lighter text provide useful wider context or are reflected at more relevant levels by otherPPs.


14

Table 3.1: List of relevant plans and programmes reviewed (from most strategic to leastin each section, those in bold are most relevant )

Sector/Topic Plan or programme title

Agriculture/Farming

• CAP Horizontal Regulation 1783/03 (cross compliance requirements)

• EC Rural Development Plan Regulations 1698/2005

• Council Directive 96/61/EC of 24 September 1996 concerning integrated pollutionprevention and control (IPPC) for the Pig and Poultry sector

• European Action Plan for Organic Food and Farming

• EU Soil Thematic Strategy

• The Strategy for Sustainable Farming and Food – Facing the Future [primarily England]

• Farming for the Future – A new direction for farming in Wales

• Agricultural and Rural Development Committee Report – The Future of Agri-environment schemes on Wales (2003)

• Second Organic Action Plan for Wales 2005-2010

• Rural Development Plan 2000-2006

• Sheep Dip Pollution Reduction Plan

• Business as Usual Projections of Agricultural Outputs – Final report to the Environment Agency(Centre for Rural Economics Research, University of Cambridge, July 2004)

• Business as Usual Projections of Agricultural Activities for the Water Framework Directive, Phase IIFinal Report to the Environment Agency (University of Cambridge and Scottish AgriculturalCollege, December 2005)

• Environment Agency State of the Farmed Environment Report

• Environment Agency State of Soils Report

SustainableDevelopment

• UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), Rio de Janeiro, 1992

• The World Summit on Sustainable Development, leading to the Johannesburg Plan ofImplementation, Johannesburg, September 2002

• The UN Millennium Declaration and Millennium Development Goals (2002)

• EU Sustainable Development Strategy

• The Council of Europe’s European Landscape Convention, which guides the integration of landscapeinto agricultural, cultural, economic, environmental , social and spatial planning policies

• The Contribution of Good Environmental Regulation and Competitiveness – Paper by the NetworkHeads of European Environment Protection Agencies (‘Prague Statement’)

• Environment 2010: Our Future, Our Choice The Sixth Environment Action Programme of theEuropean Community 2001-2010

• Securing the Future: the UK Government Sustainable Development Strategy

• “Together We Can” – people and government, working together to make life better – TheGovernment Action Plan (England focus)

• One Future – Different Paths. The UK’s shared Framework for Sustainable Development DEFRA2005

• Environment Agency, A living and working environment for Wales: State of the WelshEnvironment, 2003

• Our Environment, Our Future, Your Views - The Consultation on the EnvironmentStrategy for Wales (and Draft Strategy, December 2005)

• Sustainable Development Action Plan 2004-2007 for Wales

• Sustainable Development Annual Report 2005

• Learning to Work Differently – Sustainable Development, Welsh Development Agency

Forestry /Woodlands

• The UK Forestry Standard – The Government’s Approach to Sustainable Forestry(2004)

• Forestry Commission Wales Corporate Plan 2005/06 – 2007/08


15


• Woodlands for Wales

• Better Woodlands for Wales – “A grant scheme to support sustainable woodlandmanagement”

• Woodland Habitat Network for Wales

• Woodland Trust – Space for Nature

• Space for People

• The Woodland Access Standard – provides a toolkit for delivering wooded green spacewithin the CCW toolkit for all greenspace

• The Conservation and Restoration of Plantations of Ancient Woodland Sites

Biodiversity,Flora andFauna

• Bonn Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (1979)

• Berne Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats(1979)

• The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands 1971

• EU Biodiversity Strategy (1998)

• EC Directive on Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora(92/43/EEC)

• EC Directive on the Conservation of Wild Birds (79/409/EEC)

• Biodiversity – The UK Action Plan (1994)

• Local Biodiversity Action Plans – Wales [Approximately 27 LBAPs in Wales]

• Future Biodiversity Action in Wales – Advice to the National Assembly for Wales onthe UK Millennium Biodiversity Report, The Wales Biodiversity Group (May 2002).

• A Better Wales: The natural environment of Wales in 2010

• Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 – Section 74 – “Biological diversity”

• TAN 5 – Nature Conservation and Planning (1996)

• Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act (2006)

• Countryside Council for Wales Corporate Plan 2005-08 – Working together to createa better Wales (July 2004)

• “Going Wild in Wales” – List of Species and Habitats of Principal Importance for theConservation of Biological Diversity (Nov 2003)

• Trunk Road Estate Biodiversity Action Plan (Jan 2004)

• Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended)

• Priority Habitats of Wales (CCW 2003)

• Environment Act 1995|

Economy /Transport

• EU European Employment Strategy – ESS (2005)

• A Winning Wales – The National Economic Development Strategy

• Transporting Wales into the Future (July 1998)

• The Transport Framework for Wales (Nov 2001)

• Walking and Cycling Strategy for Wales (Dec 2003)

• Trunk Road Forward Programme 2002 (and 2004 supplement)

• Wales A Vibrant Economy (WAG 2005)

• Wales Transport Strategy (in preparation)

• European Structural Funds in Wales

• Regional Transport Plans

• Transport (Wales) Act 2006

• The Walking and Cycling Strategy for Wales (2003), to be updated 2006. Frameworksfor improving recreational and non-recreational walking and cycling activities

• Social Enterprise Strategy for Wales

• Valuing Our Environment – The Economic Impact of the Environment of Wales (July2001)


16


Planning andLandscape

• European Spatial Development Perspective

• Planning Policy Wales - TANs supplement

• Technical Advice Notes (including those at draft consultation stage e.g. TAN5)

• Guidance on the Statutory Duties on Relevant Authorities to have Regard to thePurposes of National Parks and AONBs (WAG, 2005)

• Wales: A Better Country – The Strategic Agenda

• People, Places, Future – The Wales Spatial Plan

• Rural Development Plan 2000-2006

• Unitary Development Plans for National Parks

• Local Development Plan Manual (WAG, 2006)

• Local Development Plans

• Community Strategies

• Environment Act 1995 Section 62(2) – specific reference to National Parks

• Draft Welsh National Park Authorities – New Policy Statement

• Review of the National Park Authorities (March 2004) (and Draft Action Plan, Sept 2004)

• “Towards a Strategy for the Heads of the Valleys, 2006 / late 2005

• National Park Management Plans

• AONB Management Plans

• Unitary Development Plans (and structure/local plans where applicable)

• Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000

Water

• EC Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC

• EU Nitrates Directive (91/676/EEC)

• Drinking Water Directive (98/83/EC)

• Waterways for Wales – Improved Quality of Life Through the SustainableDevelopment of the Waterway in Wales

• Waterways for Wales – The Way Forward

• Welsh Water Biodiversity Overview

• Water Resources Strategy - Water Resources for the Future, Environment AgencyWales

• TAN 15 – Development and Flood Risk

• Environment Agency - Drought Management Plan for Wales

• Marine Strategy

• A Better Environment, Healthier Fisheries: Better Fisheries for Our Nations – OurStrategy 2006-2011, Environment Agency, 2006

• National Salmon Strategy

• River Basin Characterisation Reports for Western Wales, the Dee, and the Severn(2005)

• Shoreline Management Plans

• Catchment Abstraction Management Strategies

• Severn Trent Water Monitoring Plan for 2005-2010

• Individual Salmon Action Plans

• Catchment Flood Management Plans

• Inter-coastal Zone Management Strategy for Wales

• Draft Marine Bill to be published in Autumn 2006

• Water Resource Management Plans

Waste

• EU Waste Framework Directive 91/156/EEC

• EU Council Directive on Waste (75/442/EEC)

• Council Directive 99/31/EC of 26th April 1999 on the landfill of waste

• Wise About Waste – The National Waste Strategy for Wales


17


• Regional Waste Plan for the South West Wales Region

• South East Wales Regional Waste Plan

• TAN 21 – Waste (2001)

• Agricultural Waste Regulations

• South East Wales Regional Waste Plan – Analysis of Best Practicable Environmental Option

• North Wales Regional Waste Plan 2003-2013

• Cross-Border Waste Strategies

Energy

• EU Biofuels Directive

• EU Biomass Action Plan 3 (2005)

• Energy for the Future: Renewable Sources of Energy. EU White Paper for a Community Strategyand Action Plan

• Our Energy Future – creating a low carbon economy – DTI 2003

• TAN 8 – Planning for Renewable Energy

• Energy Wales: Route Map to a Clean, Low-Carbon and More Competitive EnergyFuture for Wales – Consultation Document

Industry

• Council Directive 96/61/EC of 24 September concerning IPPC control

• Nuclear Decommissioning Authority Strategy [Summary Report]

• Sector plan for the chemical industry

• Sector plan for the cement industry

• Sector plan for the nuclear industry

• Metal Mines Strategy

Tourism

• Tourism Strategy North Wales 2003-2008 Planning Tomorrow’s Tourism Today

• National Tourism Strategy “Achieving Our Potential” 2005-2013

• HERIAN: Heritage in Action, a tourism initiative covering industrial South Wales

• Sustainable Tourism Framework – Draft (Wales Tourist Board)

Housing &Services

• Better Homes for People in Wales – A National Housing Strategy for Wales ActionPlan

• Making the Connection: Delivering Better Services for Wales

• Leading reform in local services: Manifesto for Welsh Local Government 2005-2008

Health andWellbeing /Public Access

• Healthy and Active Lifestyles in Wales (WAG June 2003)

• Climbing Higher, The Welsh Assembly Government Strategy for Sport and PhysicalActivity (July 2003)

• Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000

• The Walking and Cycling Strategy for Wales (2003), to be updated 2006. Frameworksfor improving recreational and non-recreational walking and cycling activities

ClimateChange

• United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

• Kyoto Protocol

• UK Climate Change Programme, Department of the Environment, Food and RuralAffairs, 2006

• Monarch Programme (Modeling Natural Resource Responses to Climate Change)

• UK Phenology Network

Minerals• Regional (in preparation) and National Minerals Plans

• Minerals Technical Advice Note (Wales) 1, Aggregates, 2004

Other • Environmental Liability Directive (effective from 2007)

3.3.3.2. Developing baseline information

The collection of baseline data is essential to identify the current “state of play” and anyenvironmental issues, to support the prediction and evaluation of results and to set a baseline for


18

future monitoring. An initial review of available baseline data was undertaken following discussionswith staff from the Welsh Assembly Government. This included existing data sets, including thoseavailable as web-based resources and held by statutory agencies. Given the strategic nature of theRDP it was considered more appropriate to focus the baseline review via the process of developingSEA objectives. In addition, a certain amount of environmental and socio-economic baseline data hasto be compiled in the development of the RDP itself, and key indicators are required as part of theex-ante evaluation. A large amount of data at varying levels of detail is therefore now availablethrough a wide range of databases. However, not all the available datasets are necessarily veryrelevant to the strategic nature and scale of the RDP or the SEA. The use of the SEA objectivestherefore provided an appropriate means of focusing on baseline information that is most relevant tothe nature and scale of the plan. The use of other relevant and recent strategies has facilitated thedevelopment of these SEA objectives. Most recently, the Wales Environment Strategy9 has beenconsulted upon and was in draft form during the SEA process, bringing together key sets of baselinedata and environmental objectives relevant to the Wales-wide strategic level.

As the SEA objectives have been developed, so have relevant indicators (means of measuringprogress towards the objectives). Available datasets of information have then been examined fordata that are already available that can provide the necessary indicator information, or that can beused as a proxy for it, or where there may be gaps in information. This information was included inthe scoping report and useful suggestions for additional objectives, comments on the proposedobjectives and ideas for further data sources were provided by consultees and are included here.

3.3.3.3. Difficulties in compiling baseline data

Difficulties were found particularly in identifying suitable current data sets that were relevant to thestrategic level of Wales as a whole, as opposed to local level data or UK-wide data. There proved tobe many diverse databases, though often key elements were not in a consistent form or even heldcentrally, e.g. overview data of the status of protected sites. Trend data, indicating direction overtime, in particular is often difficult to obtain, but especially of value at the strategic level of a plan suchas the RDP. This highlights the importance of gathering data over a long enough time period. Theseconsiderations have been taken into account in recommending monitoring proposals. As theAssembly, the Wales Rural Observatory and statutory agencies develop their databases then theseproblems should begin to decline over time, but the follow up to the SEA provides a suitableincentive to begin to address any gaps.

Examples of difficulties in locating data, or where suitable data sets don’t appear to exist are:

• conditions of national nature reserves and RAMSAR sites (only local level available, not Waleswide);

• flood risk maps: only very local data or old data on a larger scale;

9 Our Environment, Our Future, Your Views - The Consultation on the Environment Strategy for Wales (and Draft Strategy, December2005) - final Environment Strategy published 17 May 2006.


19

• data generally at the different scales of rural Wales, Wales, UK, village levels: often data isinconsistent across these geographical scales;

• tranquil area maps (only available for England);

• landscape character maps (only available for England); and,

• differing definitions of ‘rural’ by different authorities.


21

4. Environmental baseline and key issues

4.1. Introduction

Wales is typified by mountain ranges and undulating valleys covering more than half the country. Itsvaried landscape comprises habitats and species of particular wildlife value. This is illustrated by thefact that some 70% of its coastal environment has been designated at a European level. The ruralenvironment supports 117,000 full time equivalent jobs (one in six of the Welsh workforce) and themanagement and enjoyment of the Welsh environment generates around £9 billion per annum;equivalent to almost 10% of Welsh GDP10.

The chief environmental challenges in Wales, and thus for the RDP, are unsustainable resource use;degraded ecosystems; biodiversity loss; loss of the historic environment; degradation of high qualitylandscapes and seascapes; poor quality local environments; environmental hazards; and, climatechange11. The current status and trends in these areas and the related key issues at the strategic level(as outlined in section 3.3.2) are considered below under the main topics identified in the SEADirective 2001/42/EC and/or relevant to the RDP: biodiversity; fisheries; woodlands/forestmanagement; animal welfare; population and human health; rural-based tourism; soil; water: qualityand resources; air; climatic factors; renewable energy; material assets and resource use; transportinfrastructure; waste and waste management; cultural heritage and landscape; and the interactions ofthese factors. Generally, “current status and trends” covers the present state of play, what has ledto this, and what strategies are in place to improve the status. “Key issues”, typically highlights anydata gaps (also highlighted in Table 9.1) and uncertainties, problems and opportunities, therelationships with other plans and programmes and topic areas and how the RDP may be influentialon the topic under discussion. Further detailed baseline data can be found in Appendix 1.

4.2. Biodiversity

4.2.1. Current situation and trends

Biodiversity is the variety of life on earth, including the diversity of organisms, their behaviour andinteractions. It is essential for the maintenance of ecosystem services, such as the maintenance ofthe atmosphere and climatic conditions, water purification, oxygen production and pollination.Habitat fragmentation, climate change, pollution, disease, invasive and/or exotic species, intensive useof land and water, ill-informed management and fire, to name a few, and their interactions, all pose apotential threat to biodiversity, and thus ecosystem services.

10 Bilsborough S. and Hill S. (2000) Valuing our Environment: The Economic Impact of the Environment in Wales; Countryside Council forWales.11 Wales Environment Strategy (draft, December 2005).


22

Wales currently boasts three National Parks, five Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty12 (AONBs),six Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs), 19 Special Protection Areas (SPAs) (two of which crossinto England), 10 RAMSAR sites, 66 National Nature Reserves (NNRs), more than 1,000 Sites ofSpecial Scientific Interest (SSSIs)13 and 90 Special Areas for Conservation (SACs)14. Results of the2002 UK Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) reporting for Wales show that 46% of priority habitats weredeclining and 30% were stable or increasing; the same report showed that 7% of species were lost,18% were declining, 22% stable or increasing and for 45% there was no clear information.

The UK report on Common Standards Monitoring (2005) found that, of those SAC featuresmonitored in Wales (just over half of all terrestrial and freshwater features), 61% of SAC speciesfeatures and 80% of SAC habitat features were reported as being in an unfavourable condition.About one third of SPA features (all of which are bird species or assemblages of bird species) hadbeen monitored by this date, with 86% of features reported as being in favourable condition and 14%unfavourable.

Priorities for Wales in terms of biodiversity are to cut the loss of biodiversity by 2010, see arecovery in biodiversity loss already experienced by 2025, and to see statutory protected sites in afavourable condition15.

4.2.2. Key issues

Designated protected sites are established with the aim to reduce biodiversity loss. However,biodiversity cannot be adequately conserved solely through the management of protected sites.Conservation over wider non-designated areas is also required, enabling species to occupy a greaterdistribution of habitats, and so reducing the susceptibility of species if one habitat was destroyed ordamaged.

Public access to designated sites and rural areas as a whole may also impact adversely on biodiversitythrough potential habitat degradation and/or destruction16. However, conversely, improved accessmay increase awareness and/or publicity of particular species and may therefore impact positively onconservation efforts for some species.

The nature, level and type of agricultural practices may also interact with and/or influence the effectthat climate change has on biodiversity. This is especially a concern with regard to the conservationstatus of protected sites, mobile species and the ability of species to adapt to climate change. Areasat risk of flooding may increase as a result of climate change and so adaptive planning is required nowto help minimise its impact (see climate change in Section 4.11). The past RDP programming periodhas identified the benefit of targeting larger blocks of land, for example to support Natura 2000 sites, 12 One of which falls partly in England (Wye Valley).13 Key Environment Statistics for Wales (2005).14 WAG (2006) Draft RDP 2007-13.15 Areas designated for their importance for biodiversity – Source: Our Environment, Our Future, Your Views. Consultation on theEnvironment Strategy for Wales (2005).16 Although appropriate management can mitigate against such impacts.


23

and to target different species within these areas. Cattle housing (protecting the aquaticenvironment) also may help support biodiversity. However, there are other aspects, such as changesin grazing intensity in the uplands, that could have major impacts, but of unknown direction (positiveor negative).

Further still, there are potential issues that may reduce the likelihood of realising the stated prioritiesfor biodiversity. For example, although biomass crops are likely to have globally significant positiveeffects in reducing carbon emissions17 and can offer local, though seasonal, soil and water protection,encouraging biomass production may alter forest structure, create monocultures and promote theuse of non-native species that are uninhabitable by native fauna and flora. Other foreseeable risksinclude, farm animal diseases such as anthrax, trans-boundary environmental health issues such asavian flu and sheep dip pollution of the aquatic environment.

4.3. Fisheries


Fish are an important source of nutrients. Oily fish such as salmon and trout are especially rich inomega-3 fatty acids, which may be linked to reduced blood clotting rates and decreased rates ofheart attacks when they are consumed as part of a healthy diet. They are also an important part ofthe Welsh economy. For example, freshwater conservation angling currently raises around £75million per annum for the Welsh economy18. There are 240 salmon and trout rivers, several hundrednatural lake fisheries, more than 20 large reservoirs and over 200 small stocked still water fisheries,in addition to 150km of canals and 1,200km of coast that one can fish.

Catches of Salmon by fixed engine have declined by 27% in 2004 on the 5-year mean (1999-2003),while catches by rod have increased by 88% in 2004 on the 5-year mean (1999-2003). Sea Troutcatches however have decreased via net, fixed engine catches as well as rod catches over the sameperiod.

A Better Environment, Healthier Fisheries19 aims for fisheries to play a greater role in England andWales and for more people to help protect and improve the environment and to help fishingcontribute more to society. By 2011 the stated hopes are to see large improvements in fish stockand a better environment for wildlife and people, more chances for more people to fish and forfisheries to perform better and for sustainable fisheries to boost the local economy. It states thatthis will be achieved by benchmarking England and Wales’ services against the best world-wide.

17 For example, one dry tonne of wood will displace 15 GJ of coal. The 15 GJ of coal will have the equivalent of 0.37 tonnes of carbonassuming the wood is converted at an efficiency of 25%. - http://bioenergy.ornl.gov/reports/fuelwood/toc.html.18 EAW & CCW (2004) Diffuse Pollution of Water: A Scoping Study. A Report for the Welsh Assembly Government on CurrentKnowledge Regarding the Impact and Extent in Wales.19 Environment Agency (2006) A Better Environment, Healthier Fisheries: Better Fisheries for our Nations - Our Strategy 2006 – 2011.


24

4.3.2. Key issues

The quality/health of fish is integrally linked to water quality and therefore all factors that influencewater quality influence fish quality. For example, an increase in soil deposition rates (linked to soilerosion and soil cover) can result in decreased concentrations of oxygen in spawning beds, causing adecrease in fish quantity and quality. Similarly, chemical concentrations of water courses affectchemical concentrations within fish, especially bio-accumulative pollutants. Acidification offreshwater in Wales (from emissions of sulphur dioxides, nitrogen oxides and ammonia) has acontinuing impact on fisheries even though levels of emissions of sulphur and nitrogen oxides havedeclined substantially. The RDP has the opportunity to contribute to reduced erosion and soildeposition rates and pollutant loads of water courses though agri-environment and forestry basedschemes. Over-fishing is also a threat to the continuity of fish stocks and the security of biodiversity.

4.4. Animal welfare


The link between animal disease and human health is directly relevant to the RDP, particularly in thecase of avian influenza, where the disease can be fatal in humans. The link between animal diseaseand the rural economy is also particularly important; the Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE)crisis (hitting its peak in Wales in 1996) highlights the effect that animal disease can have on theeconomy, with the ban on British beef exports only lifted in March 2006.

The Animal Health and Welfare Strategy (AHWS) for Great Britain20 was launched in June 2004 bythe Department of Environment, Food and, Rural Affairs (Defra), the Scottish Executive and theWelsh Assembly Government with the aim to improve the health and welfare of domestic andcommercial animals, and protect human health from animal disease, in order to reduce the impactthat animal disease may have on human health and the rural economy.

The vision of the strategy over the next ten years is:

• to achieve the best disease status in the world and therefore be able to trade animals and animalproducts internationally;

• that animals kept for food, farming, sport, companionship, entertainment and in zoos are healthyand treated humanely;

• that the costs of livestock health and welfare are appropriately balanced between industry andthe taxpayer;

• that all disease emergencies are dealt with swiftly and effectively using an agreed approach;

• that consumers value the confidence they have in food produced safely from healthy animals thatare well cared for; and,

20 Animal Health and Welfare Strategy Welsh Assembly Government Action Plan 2005-2006.


25

• that consumers and retailers accept that higher standards of animal health and welfare are notcost free and that livestock keeping is part of a competitive British farming industry whichsucceeds by meeting the needs of consumers at home and abroad, producing food safely and tohigh standards of health and welfare.

The strategy will be reported on annually and will be updated each year in close consultation withWelsh stakeholders. It will be published on the Assembly’s website.

4.4.2. Key issues

Animal welfare is closely associated with human health and biodiversity, and so it is essential thatanimals are reared in clean and comfortable conditions, to prevent spread of disease from poultryand beef for example, to humans, in order to contribute positively to the RDP human healthobjectives. Schemes within the draft RDP can be used to help support animal welfare objectives.The well-being of animals is also a key ethical issue with a high public profile.

4.5. Woodland/forest management


Woodlands and forests are a natural resource that generate economic (for example, energy, foodand furniture sales; in all, woodland industries contribute some £400 million a year to the Welsheconomy), social (for example, recreation opportunities and health benefits, notably, over 11 millionvisits are made to Welsh woodlands each year) and environmental benefits (for example,contribution to the hydrological and carbon cycles). Currently 14% of Wales is wooded, of which44% is certified21 and 53% is permissively accessible to the public. This is a dramatic increase onprevious figures which show that woodland cover has been as low as 5% for the UK.

21 2001 data, under the UK Woodland Assurance Standard under the FSC or another scheme or under the FSC standard.


26

Lowland beech and yew woodland is singled out by Our Environment Our Future Your Views(WAG, 2005) as being likely to face significant pressure from climate change and be affected byincreasing deer numbers in the coming years, and is therefore of particular relevance to the RDP.

22 UK Indicators of Sustainable Forestry Forestry Commission (2002)http://www.forestry.gov.uk/website/pdf.nsf/pdf/sfiwood.pdf/$file/sfiwood.pdf

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1924 1947 1965 1980 1995-1999 2002

Year

Are

a ('0

00 h

ecta

res)

Figure A1.1: Area of woodland in Wales22


27

Figure 4.1: Area of woodland by Forest Type in Wales (2002)

* 98ha of short rotation coppice

Woodlands for Wales (2001) sets out the Assembly’s strategy for trees and woodlands in Wales.The strategy spans the next 50 years with the objectives to:

• provide environmental and social benefits to local communities;

• emphasise woodland management, such as increasing benefits to owners and the public;

• make Wales a location for first-class forest industries;

• maximise the linkages to other businesses in agriculture, tourism and the rest of the economy;

• provide a diverse and healthy environment with the aim of achieving true sustainability; and,

• provide for tourism, recreation and health.

4.5.2. Key issues

Wales’ strategy for woodlands has a focus on diversity and recreational use of woodlands, thussupporting the access, tourism and biodiversity agendas of the RDP. In addition, woodland coversafeguards land from development. Low impact silvicultural management associated with economicoutput of the forest and management for biodiversity also provide benefits to native flora and faunaas mixed aged stands allow light penetration to the under-storey layers as well as providing a greaterdiversity of habitats which is particularly important when species depend on different stages of treegrowth during different stages of their life-cycle.

Sustainable forest management also provides, inter alia, benefits to energy supply, water quality andmanagement, social and health improvements, carbon sequestration and tourism. Conversion orrecovery of previously coniferous planting to native species could bring positive wildlife benefits.


28

However, there are species such as red squirrels that fare better in predominantly coniferous ratherthan broad-leaved woodland, so there may also be adverse affects.

Invasive species can pose challenges to meeting biodiversity objectives. Rhododendron is a particularconcern in Wales, causing a threat to biodiversity, flora and fauna, water quality and human health.Rhododendron is able to out-compete native species and thus can lead to the reduction in habitat forother species, so reducing the conservation value and species diversity of woodlands. Its horizontalgrowth enables it to overgrow water courses, poison animals such as sheep and cattle and poisonhumans through honey produced from Rhododendron flowers leading to intestinal and cardiacproblems.

4.6. Population and human health


There are potentially many diverse health issues affecting rural Wales. Those relevant to the RDPand the SEA are more limited, especially considering the fact that environmental factors are not theonly issue influencing quality of life. Assembly Government data suggests that there is little differencebetween causes of mortality in urban and rural areas, although mental health is reported to be moreof an issue in rural areas.

In terms of access to the countryside, which can contribute to both mental and physical fitness, thereare 33,200km of public rights of way in Wales (public footpaths, bridleways and byways). About 20%of the Welsh countryside is accessible for public access on foot, however, only 51% of public rightsof way (2002 data) were classified as easy to use. Some 53% of Welsh woodland is reported to bepermissively accessible to the public (2004 data). Increased access may exacerbate existing lightpollution levels23.

In Climbing Higher24, the Assembly has set targets to increase the percentage of people using thenatural environment for outdoor activities from 36% to 60% by 2020 and to enable 95% of people inWales to have a footpath or cycle path within a ten-minute walk. Similarly, the UK WoodlandAssurance Standard25 aspires that no person should live more than 500m from at least one area ofaccessible woodland of no less than 2 hectares in size and that there should also be at least one areaof accessible woodland of no less than 20 hectares within 4km (8km round-trip) of people’s homes.Addressing environmental inequalities directly and delivering higher quality living environments is toremain a key Assembly priority.

23 Through the lighting of car parks and visitor facilities.24 Climbing Higher: Sport and Active Recreation in Wales, WAG, July 2003.25 http://www.ukwas.org.uk/.


29

4.6.2. Key issues

While access to the countryside brings positive human health effects it can impact negatively onbiodiversity, access may disturb biodiversity in general, dogs may disturb ground nesting birds andtrampling can reduce the viability of plants/crops and compact soil. Compacted soil has reducedinfiltration capacity, and may therefore increase flood risk. This is a particularly potent issue,considering predictions of climate change (see Section 4.11). Soil compaction also depletes soilcarbon storage potential and therefore also affects fertility as well as climate change related issues.

Erosion of footpaths and other areas associated with access may also have an effect on local floodrisk as soil particle deposition raises the level of the river bed. Planting patterns and floodmanagement may well affect the level of erosion and of floods respectively. The transportation ofsoil via water and/or air into water courses, along with its complexed nutrients, minerals andpotentially pollutants, such as pesticides and phosphates, can cause sedimentation and increasepollutant loads of local water supplies.

Increasing access to the countryside is likely to promote the transport of visitors and goods to andfrom these areas, increasing traffic and emissions.

Agri-environment schemes, such as Tir Gofal, encourage farmers to maintain and enhance theagricultural landscape and its wildlife, and to provide new opportunities for people to visit thecountryside, offer permissive access to areas of land, provide access for educational purposes andprovide new footpaths for the public. Increased access may impact positively on mental and physicalwell-being and may aid a reduction in health inequalities, though may simply facilitate improved accessby the same people.

Pollution emissions from certain chemicals and radioactivity are potential health risks to ruralcommunities in Wales. In many areas there is insufficient knowledge about the risks posed,particularly of different substances in combination or from long-term exposure to them. Depositionof caesium following the accident at Chernobyl in 1986 continues to affect parts of upland north-west Wales (where restrictions remain in place).

4.7. Rural-based tourism

4.7.1. Current situation and trend

Rural tourism is a major source of employment and economic activity (employing some 12% ofWelsh Rural communities). Wales Tourist Board statistics show that rural tourism is worth about£350 million to rural communities per annum. Around 1,280,000 people visited monumentsmanaged by CADW in 2005.


30

4.7.2. Key issues

Rural tourism has the potential to increase public awareness of protected species and wildlife ingeneral. However, as numbers of tourists increase, so does the associated noise, light, air, soil andwater pollution which may adversely affect the very biodiversity and the natural environment thatthey were attracted to in the first place. Trampling and erosion induced by visitors may alsocompact soil and consequently affect water flow regimes. Increasing tourist numbers offers anexpanded market for selling local produce, the combination of which may give rise to an increase inwaste and litter. Specialist activities such as trail biking may also give rise to additional wastegeneration.

4.8. Soil


Soil plays an important role in supporting biodiversity by providing a habitat for soil dwellingorganisms, provides a growing medium for food and fibre (and is therefore the foundation foragriculture in Wales), stores nutrients and water, helps to regulate the flow of water and provides acrucial link between the atmosphere, geology, water resources and land use. In addition, soil alsohelps store and protect archaeological remains. It is integrally related to the quality of water and airthrough atmospheric, nutrient and water cycles. There is a wide variety of soil types in Wales ofvarying soil fertility levels for agriculture.

Erosion is one of the main factors affecting the state of soil, with 17% of soils affected and some 2.2million tonnes of arable topsoil moved annually (England and Wales). This is particularly a problemwith regard to water pollution as erosion causes the movement of soil and their associatedcontaminants into watercourses. The build-up of soil/silt in watercourses can also cause thesmothering of river-bed gravels, harming aquatic plants, invertebrates and the eggs of fish.

The area of arable land in Wales has been reasonably static over recent years at 4% of totalagricultural area. Inputs to the soil on these lands can affect soil nutrient balances which can reduceplant growth and/or result in growth abnormalities. For example, the vast majority of Wales is atleast 7-14 keq/ha/yr over the critical load of nutrient nitrogen. Soil carbon levels are also high withabout 350-480 Mts in the top metre of soils. Increasing soil carbon will depend on increasingbiomass both in the soil and above it.

Defra’s Soil Action Plan (2004 – 2006) contains 52 actions, the key ones (for the first Action Plan)focus on education and awareness of soil issues among the general public, better management ofagricultural soils, identification of the indicators which should be built into a national soil monitoringscheme and to provide better access to information on soils. The plan is soon to be reviewed (2006)and a Second Action Plan to be drawn up with a longer-term vision. Wales will also need to complywith the, yet to be set, Water Framework Directive objectives.


31

4.8.2. Key issues

Farming practices and trampling (from access to the countryside) can result in local compaction ofsoil which alters soil structure, reduces the organic content of soil and thus reduces soil infiltrationrates of water. As a result, overland flow rates can increase and therefore so does the risk of flash-floods, which may have impacts on biodiversity and human health. Type of vegetation cover andcontinuous cover crops can influence the rate of soil erosion, alter the ability of soil to regulatewater flow and may well affect its function as a carbon store. Topography also affects the type of soilfound in any one location along with vegetation, climatic factors, biodiversity, air and water, as soilson steeper slopes are more prone to erosion.

Soil erosion can cause sedimentation of watercourses, this includes the transportation of pollutantssuch as pesticides and phosphates, which may affect water chemical and biological (biodiversity)quality. Consequently, a range of cumulative issues are likely to be associated with respect to soil.

4.9. Water: quality and resources


Water availability and water quality (biological and chemical) are directly related to the productivityand/or status of tourism, industry, recreation, human health and biodiversity in Wales. Abstraction ismainly for hydroelectricity generation (73%, which is returned to rivers down stream of abstractionpoint), industry (8%), agriculture (3%) and public water supply (16%)26.

Pollution, in particular diffuse pollution, is the main threat to water quality causing acidification andnutrient enrichment of streams and lakes. The main sources of diffuse water pollutants areagriculture, forestry, historic mineral extraction and, to a lesser extent, industry and urbandevelopment27. Key pollutants are suspended solids, nutrients (especially phosphorous and nitrogen),pesticides, chemicals, acidifying pollutants, metals, oils, organic waste and faecal pathogens. Pointsource pollutants, namely slurry storage, cattle housing, guttering and sheep dip, are also of majorconcern to the quality of rural waters.

Currently, 92.5% of rivers (by river length) in Wales have good chemical river water quality and79.3% good biological quality. Poor chemical and biological quality is found in 0.2% of rivers, but notnecessarily in the same rivers. Soil/sediment pollution is of greatest concern in the north east, eastand south Wales. Eutrophication is not a widespread problem, although some catchments in theborder area (Rivers Dee, Wye and Usk) are at significant risk due to land use related and pointsource pollutants. Sheep dip pollution of Welsh rivers is a local concern in areas affecting macroinvertebrate populations with consequential impacts on higher life forms, especially fish. Pollutionfrom other pesticides, in contrast, is not a significant issue. About 86% of coastal waters meet

26 Farrar, J. P. & Vase, P. (Eds.) (2000) Wales: Changing Climate, Challenging Choices – a scoping study of climate change impacts in Wales.27 EAW & CCW (2004) Diffuse Pollution of Water: A Scoping Study. A Report for the Welsh Assembly Government on CurrentKnowledge Regarding the Impact and Extent in Wales.


32

Bathing Water Quality guideline standards indicating there may be some problems inland feeding intotidal waters28.

The Environment Agency’s water resource strategy aims to enhance water supply by about 5% overthe next 25 years by improving existing schemes and developing some new resources, activelypromote water efficiency, make household water metering widespread over the next 25 years, makecontinued progress in leakage control and for agriculture to focus on using available water to besteffect29.

4.9.2. Key issues

Water quality and availability may be directly affected through agri-environment and forestryschemes. Promotion of reduced soil compacting activities and continuous soil cover is likely toresult in the reduction of soil erosion and the associated transport of pollutants into water courses.However, increased crop and tree cover may adversely affect flow regimes by reducing water inputto rivers and may lead to the concentration of pollutants; agricultural abstraction and irrigation maycause similar effects. Farming initiatives may also address various sources of pollution, for example,sheep dip pollution under Axis 1 initiatives.

Agricultural and forestry activity on floodplains may contribute negatively to water quality. Althoughflooding can raise soil fertility levels through nutrient deposition, flooding can also pose a threat tohuman health and may destroy/alter habitats so that they are not suitable for the wildlife that onceinhabited them. There may also be direct effects on flora and fauna, especially in the case of aerobicorganisms that cannot survive in oxygen deprived situations. Flooding may also affect tourism,recreation and access objectives of the RDP as well as biodiversity.

4.10. Air


In general, air quality is improving. However, poor air quality still contributes to between 12,000 and24,000 premature deaths per year in the UK30. Air pollution is closely linked with both soil andwater pollution through the hydrological cycle. In 2003, average urban air quality was worse inWales compared to the rest of the UK, with moderate or high pollution levels on 64 days comparedto 50 days in the UK. Rural air quality was slightly better in Wales with moderate or high pollutionlevels on 47 days compared to 61 days in the UK.

The draft Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (2006)31 aims tomap current and future ambient air quality policy in the UK in the medium-term, provide the best

28 Environment Statistics for Wales (Jan 23rd 2005).29 Water Resources for the Future: A Strategy for England and Wales (EA, 2001).30 State of the Environment Report (EA 2005).31 Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland: A consultation document on options for further improvementsin air quality (Volume 1, 2006).


33

practicable protection to human health and the environment by setting evidence based objectives forthe main air pollutants and describe the air pollution climate in the UK.

4.10.2. Key issues

Of specific relevance to the RDP is low level (in terms of altitude) and high concentrations of ozonein comparison to urban areas. Ozone is the main pollutant causing the majority of pollution days inrural areas. Methane and ammonia (indoor and outdoor) emissions contribute to the greenhouseeffect and can affect people and flora and fauna. Carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, fine particlesand sulphur are also of significant importance in terms of short-term human health effects. There arefurther effects from the synergistic and cumulative effects of all air pollutants. For example,cumulative impacts of sulphur and nitrogen oxides, ammonia and synergistic impacts of sulphurdioxide and nitrogen oxides and their combined aerosol forming effects32.

4.11. Climatic factors


Climate change is a global issue, which is already having impacts on parts of Wales, with manyflowers flowering earlier and for longer than previously33. Sea levels rose by 20cm during the 20thcentury and in Wales are predicted to rise by between 11cm and 71cm by 208034. UK agriculturecurrently contributes about 12% of the greenhouse gas emissions in carbon equivalent, but 50% ofmethane and 90% of nitrous oxide. Total emissions of both are declining steadily, but the share fromagriculture is increasing as other sources of emissions have declined at a faster rate. The vastmajority of agricultural methane emissions result from digestive processes in animals, with theremainder from degradation of animal wastes. Agricultural emissions of nitrous oxide derive mainlyfrom fertiliser use, both of inorganic supplements and organic manures.

Wales receives relatively high rainfall and experiences low temperatures compared with much of therest of the UK (especially England), with only localised differences relating to altitude and distancefrom the sea. Snow often accumulates and remains on mountainous regions in the winter, presentingproblems for hill farmers. Summer rainfall has declined by 15% during the 20th century in Wales,whilst winter rainfall has increased by 10%. A higher frequency of storm events is predicted35, whichposes a threat to the human population and biodiversity as a whole through flooding and associatedpressures on sewer systems, habitat/land-use change, erosion, storm damage and erosion. Averagetemperatures are also likely to rise and summer temperatures are expected to increase with anincrease in extremely hot days. This may lead to an increase in heat-related deaths linked to high airpollution, increased spread of disease and thermal discomfort in buildings. However, there is alsolikely to be a decrease in illness resulting from inhabiting cold areas. Habitat/land-use change mayalso result in habitat and species loss. Summer water shortages and low stream flows (coupled with

32 http://www.defra.gov.uk/news/2005/050428b.htm33 Woodland Trust http://www.woodland-trust.org.uk/news/index.htm34 Environment Agency: A living and working environment for Wales: The State of the Welsh Environment 2003.35 Ibid.


34

higher demand) are also predicted to be impacts of climate change. Also, as the number of hot daysincreases, so does the growing season, which may be locally useful in terms of increased foodproduced per season, but is also likely to have adverse effects on biodiversity due to changes inphenology.

The Kyoto Protocol came into force in 2005 to aid a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, bindingsignatory industrial nations collectively to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 5.2% below 1990levels by 2008 - 2012. The UK Government’s domestic target is to reduce carbon dioxide emissionsby 20% by 2010 and by 60% by 2050. However, recent Government announcements indicate thatthe UK will not meet the 2010 target. Greenhouse gas emissions in Wales have declined by about9%; a decrease from 14.0 million tonnes of carbon (MtC) equivalent in 1990 to 12.8 million tonnes in200236. The most recent figures for Wales, according to the Wales Environment Strategy, report a3.6% decrease in emissions for 2003 compared to 1990; emissions of carbon dioxide were 0.2%above those in 1990.

4.11.2. Key issues

Uncertainty is a key issue, making it difficult to know how to respond to the potential impacts.Potentially higher temperatures in Wales will bring about a longer growing season, thus benefitingfarmers as they can produce more product per season. However, if glacial melting ‘switches off’ thegulf-stream, this could set the UK into an ice age, thus drastically reducing the length of the growingseason. This, however, seems unlikely in the time frame of the RDP.

In terms of the RDP, climate change could potentially have some local advantages (depending onscale and rate of climate change) such as a longer growing season; enhanced yields and potentialopportunities for agricultural diversification; less cold-weather transport disruption balanced bygreater disruption from storms; reduced demand for winter heating and less cold-weather relatedillness.

However, the majority of the potential impacts are invariably challenging/negative; the main concernwith respect to the RDP being land use change and the ability of flora and fauna to adapt to thechanging landscape and climate. Phenology is therefore a great concern as alterations in predator-prey and mating cycles may prevent predators keeping prey numbers in check and species mating in atimely manner, thus having a devastating effect on Welsh agriculture. There may also be issuesrelating to species that may become pests, diseases and exotic species that may arise under thechanging climate.

Land management schemes are also likely to be challenged by the changing climate, for example,conversion schemes for energy crops. Periodicity in water flow and sea level rise may affect theusability of land for agriculture and may also degrade/alter designated sites. This is of particular

36 WES part 3.


35

relevance to the 70% of sites that are located in coastal areas. Increased incidence of watershortages, fire and flood are also issues that land managers are likely to have to contend with.

Climatic change will affect all areas of the RDP as it influences much of the arena in which RDPschemes and initiatives will take place. In addition to these, indirect effects of climate change are alsoimportant and may include migration of people from vulnerable areas (for example, flood risk, coastalerosion), movement of species from southerly areas, and changes in food supplies and tourism.

4.12. Renewable energy


Fossil fuels supply 95% of Wales’ energy, with renewables supplying less than 3%, most of which iswind generated. There are 19 wind power installations (365 turbines on land), plus 4 installations of72 turbines with planning consent (2003 figures). There are also three offshore wind farms (30turbines each) consented (2003, figures)37. There are currently no thermal renewable sources ofenergy provided by major power producers, though other generators do transform some thermalpower to a useable form. The main sources of renewable energy in Wales are water (initiated over100 years ago), wind, solar power and biomass38.

The UK Energy White paper sets the target of 10% of energy to be produced from renewablesources by 201039; recent UK Government reports suggest that it is unlikely that this target will bemet. The Assembly target is 4TWh of electricity per annum to be produced from renewablesources by 2010 and 7TWh by 2020. In order to meet this target, 800MW additional installedcapacity will be required from onshore wind and 200MW from offshore wind and other renewabletechnologies.40,41

4.12.2. Key issues

The use of renewable energy in Wales will help the country meet its energy demand and alsopotentially aid a reduction in the use of non-renewable energy, thus reduce Wales’ contribution toglobal climate change. The use of energy crops locally may also have added benefits for the localeconomy, reduce transportation costs and aid an improvement in local standards of living. There isalso the potential to combine land uses, especially with large wind farm projects where land couldalso be used for grazing. There are potentially significant negative impacts from renewables: visualimpact on high quality landscapes (of which Wales has a lot), noise and biodiversity.

37 Environment Agency: A living and working environment for Wales: The State of the Welsh Environment 2003.38 http://www.cat.org.uk/grew/index.tmpl39 Energy White Paper., Our Energy Future - creating a low carbon economy. DTI 2003.40 Joint Ministerial Statement ibid.41 A detailed assessment of the potential of wind power and a bibliography on the subject can be found in theSustainable Development Commission’s Report Wind Power in the UK 2005. www.sd-commission.org.uk


36

Changes in farming practices and in the use of biomass crops may have an impact on growingseasons, biodiversity and landscape aesthetics. For example, Miscanthus can cause waterresource/re-charge issues and impact on water quality because the nature and timing of harvestingtechniques can lead to enhanced run-off and soil erosion. Coppice, Willow and Poplar may alsocause similar water resource problems. Bio-fuel and hydro schemes have the potential for significantcumulative and indirect effects, through changes to landscape, flora and fauna, and impacts on habitat.Other energy sources, of course, may also have an impact on rural areas, for example, coal mining.

4.13. Material assets and resource use


Minerals and aggregates are non-renewable resources, the range of which is extremely diverse owingto the great diversity of Wales’ geology. There are more than 400 Geological Conservation Reviewsites in Wales, and the majority have been notified as SSSls. The first cave National Nature Reserve,Ogof Ffynnon Ddu, was established in Wales. Minerals and aggregates are used in construction,various industrial processes and energy production. Use of natural reserves depletes the naturalstock, and creates waste and pollution (specifically air and water). It also reduces the amenity valueas a result of excavation and processing operations (noise, air quality and traffic impacts).

The Environment Strategy for Wales highlights the need for a gradual change in the current supply ofaggregates to reflect sustainability objectives. In particular, using aggregates more efficiently andmaking use of alternative materials, for example re-use of demolition waste or materials fromsustainable sources, such as timber. Discharges of mine waste from historic mines is a continuingproblem.

One of the key commitments in the Assembly’s Sustainable Development Action Plan42 is to “respectenvironmental limits, so that resources are not irrecoverably depleted or the environmentirreversibly damaged: this implies, for instance, promoting sustainable use of natural resources”.

4.13.2. Key issues

The rich diversity of geology has enabled Wales to capitalise on its natural assets. However, efficientresource use is what is required in keeping with the objectives of the RDP, for example making useof alternative materials such as the re-use of demolition waste and/or use of sustainably harvestedproducts such as timber.

4.14. Transport infrastructure


Of the 1,209,048 households in Wales, 26.0% have no car, 45.5% have 1 car, 22.9% have 2 cars and5.6% have 3 or more cars, or cars owned or available for use by one or more members of the 42 The Sustainable Development Action Plan of the Welsh Assembly Government, 2004- ... Starting To Live Differently.


37

household (includes any company car or van if available for private use). Some 79% of householdsare within 13 minutes of a bus stop with a service at least once every hour. Car trips per person peryear by distance (1999/2001) and drivetimes to settlements of at least 10,000 persons (2001 data)are shown in the figures below. The Assembly’s vision is to halt the decline in walking and cyclingand then seek to increase it43.

According to the Wales Transport Strategy Group, the need for transport in 2040 is expected to beat least as great as it is today and that the demand for personal travel could be greater unless thereare significant changes in land use development and life style44. The Assembly’s policies aim to ensurean adequate rural bus network, to support rural rail services, to encourage local community servicesand to encourage local authorities to provide a rural road network with good links to the trunk roadnetwork.

4.14.2. Key issues

Increasing transport links to and from rural Wales to markets will enable fresh produce to betransported to markets at a greater speed and possibly to access new markets. Improving transportinfrastructure may therefore help secure the success of, for example, food quality schemes, althoughtransport associated air pollution impacts are likely to increase. Tourism and local access objectives(discussed under human health and population) should also be affected positively as more and betterquality transport infrastructure will enable people to access the countryside more readily than beforeand potentially create a higher profile and/or awareness for rural biodiversity, although again,transport associated air pollution impacts are likely to increase through increased access (likely to bemainly by private car)..

Increased traffic may be encouraged by RDP schemes that aim to support the rural economy.Infrastructure use and construction will result in air and associated construction waste production.Increased used of such networks may therefore lead to biodiversity loss through air pollutant effectsin addition to habitat loss, habitat fragmentation and habitat degradation and/or disturbance.

4.15. Waste and waste management


On average, every Welsh resident consumes almost 21 tonnes of materials and products each year.In 2003/04 Wales sent 82% of waste to landfill and only recycled or composted 18%. About 4.5million tonnes of industrial waste is disposed of to land each year. The majority of this is from thepaper, food and drink industries. Approximately 6 million tonnes of agricultural waste are producedin Wales, including both natural (organic) and non-natural wastes, the vast majority of which (5.9million tonnes) is animal waste45. The main sources of non-natural waste include waste from

43 Walking and Cycling Strategy for Wales (2003).44 Wales 2040: A Vision for Transport: A Summary View by the Wales Transport Strategy Group (2004).45 Environment Agency, 1998.


38

vegetable/plant washing, sheep dip, pesticide washings, packaging, non-packaging plastics (e.g. silageand horticultural films); animal health products (e.g. used syringes); waste from machinery (e.g. oil,tyres and batteries) and building waste (e.g. asbestos sheeting).

The Wales’ Environment Strategy sets the target of minimising the amount of waste produced atsource and to work towards achieving minimised waste to landfill by 2026. This means using andgetting value from all materials throughout their life to prevent the landfill of municipal waste inWales.

4.15.2. Key issues

Reduction in waste sent to landfill is a key issue and is necessary in order to meet the requirementsof the Landfill Directive. The agricultural sector has a significant role to play in this and the RDP cancontribute through support for modernisation of agricultural holdings and new processes. However,new processes are also likely to generate additional and different waste products that will need to bere-used, recycled or disposed of.

4.16. Cultural heritage and landscape


Wales’ land and seascapes have been shaped over the last 10,000 years (since the last ice age) bynatural and human forces. A distinctive historic character now results, which is continually changingin the ever-changing environment. Wales’ heritage is reflected in three National Parks, fiveAONBs46, 30,000 listed buildings of special architectural or historic interest, 3,700 scheduled ancientmonuments, two designated world heritage sites, 14 sections (498km) of heritage coastline, 514designated conservation areas, 372 registered historic parks and gardens and 58 registered historiclandscapes. CADW is the Assembly’s historic environment division and aims to promote theconservation and appreciation of Wales’ historic environment.

4.16.2. Key issues

Wales’ diverse and unique landscape and historic features offer opportunities for recreation andlearning and is a reason why many people visit Wales. However, the visiting of such sites can lead todegradation mainly through over-crowding, physical damage, soil erosion and litter. Visitorassociated traffic can also detract from the tranquillity of the environment and contribute to local airimpacts. Historic buildings and landscape, especially limestone buildings, are under particular threatfrom acid rain and climate change impacts, such as sea level rise in addition to pressures fordevelopment. Archaeological remains, in particular, may also be under treat from inappropriate landmanagement.

46 One of which falls partly in England (Wye Valley).


39

4.17. Inter-relationship between the above factors

A number of cumulative effects relevant to this strategic level assessment47 of the RDP have beenidentified above and as part of the initial scoping process. In particular, there is the potential foraquatic pollutants to give rise to cumulative effects on fauna and flora receptors. This could affectthe ecological status of rivers and water bodies with wider impacts upon biodiversity and the risk ofcumulative effects arising in relation to soil erosion and the loss of soil carbon. From the diverseissues identified above there is the potential for cumulative effects associated with landscape changewhich may be brought about as a result of a wide range of schemes under the RDP. The effects maybe cumulative where a number of schemes might bring about change within a particular local areaand/or within a specific period of time. These types of cumulative effects are known as spacecrowding and time crowding, and they can be positive or negative, additive, synergistic or neutralisingin their effect. Informed by the causal chain analysis and the significance criteria in Table 5.2, Table8.1 and Table 8.2, section 8.3.1 further highlight the key areas where adverse cumulative effects arepossible.

47 See section 3.3.2.


41

5. The Strategic Environmental Assessment framework

5.1. Strategic Environmental Assessment objectives

Following the review of relevant policies, plans and programmes and associated objectives, and takinginto account the priority areas (Biodiversity, Water Quality, Soil Protection and Climate Change)identified in the Commission guidance on ex-ante evaluation, a number of SEA themes were identifiedfor which SEA objectives could be developed:

• biodiversity;

• water;

• soil;

• air;

• climatic factors (including energy);

• population and human health and well-being;

• animal welfare;

• waste;

• cultural heritage and landscape; and,

• land-use planning.

This was followed by the drawing up of an initial list of draft “headline” SEA objectives and a numberof associated sub-objectives. The draft SEA objectives and sub-objectives were reviewed during thefirst scoping meeting (held in Cardiff in December 2005 with members of the RDP planning team andthe environmental authorities) and subsequently developed and amended following furtherconsultation on the scoping report (between January and March 2006). Comments from consulteeson the scoping report are included in Appendix 2 of this Annex.

Table 5.1 provides a list of the overall SEA objectives and sub-objectives and related indicatorsselected, following the consultations. These objectives form the framework for the assessment ofthe RDP schemes and measures. It was important that the wider environmental objectives forWales, relevant to the remit of the RDP, were reflected in the SEA objectives, and this was thepurpose of the consultations during the scoping phase. This helps to ensure that the likelyperformance of the RDP measures is properly assessed against the aspirations for the widerenvironment. The assessment of the proposed plan is informed by the baseline information, hencethe need for indicators that relate to the wider SEA objectives. The key baseline data relevant to theselected indicators have been summarised in Section 4 under the key issues sub-sections and furtherdetail is provided in Appendix 3 of this Annex.


42

Table 5.1: SEA objectives for the assessment of the proposed RDP

SEATHEME

HEADLINE OBJECTIVE SUB-OBJECTIVE (TO…) INDICATORS (relating tooverall headline objective)See Appendix 3 for relevantbaseline data.

BIO

DIV

ER

SIT

Y

To maintain and enhancebiodiversity

• Halt the loss of biodiversityand promote recovery

• Meet the targets ofbiodiversity and habitat actionplans

• Enhance protected speciesand their overall population

• Enhance and protect specieswithout statutory protectionand their overall population

• Enhance the quality andnumber of natural and semi-natural habitats

• Reduce habitat fragmentationand enhance habitatconnectivity where notcausing other fragmentation

• Avoid damage and adverseimpacts to Priority Habitats inWales

• Area and condition ofprotected areas (SPAs, SACs,Ramsar, SSSIs, NNRs)

• Status of Biodiversity ActionPlan priority species

• Trends in natural and semi-natural habitats; areas andcondition

• Volume / number of transitingfish stocks (river salmon,trout): fish catches

• Percentage area ofindependently certifiedwoodland (such as FSC)

• Biodiversity index: speciesindicator: widespreadbreeding birds

WA

TE

R

To meet environmental standardsrequired by the Water FrameworkDirective (WFD)

• Minimise discharges to waterand any adverse effects onwater quality

• Maintain and enhance Wales’groundwater, rivers, lakesand coastal waters

• Reduce point source anddiffuse pollution

• Avoid adverse impacts onwater resources throughavoidance, mitigation andeffective management

• Protect and maintain thequality and quantity ofsurface, groundwater anddrinking water

• Increase water efficiency

• % of water bodies likely tocomply with WaterFramework Directiveenvironmental objectives

• Number of water pollutionincidents – category 1 & 2

• Quality of rivers andfreshwater bodies

• Quality of estuarine riversand coastal waters

• Number / proportion ofbeaches achieving Blue Flagstatus

• Pesticide use (amount) inagriculture and horticulture

• Proportion water abstractionby purpose

• Distribution of wateravailability

• Distribution of nitrateconcentrations


43

SEATHEME


To protect soil quality andquantity

• Reduce contamination, andsafeguard soil quality andquantity

• Maintain and enhance thefunction and integrity of soilprocesses and services

• Reduce soil erosion

• Ensure the protection of soilstructure

• Conserve ability of peatlandsoils to act as carbon sinks


• Amount of organicmaterials/wastes recycled toagricultural land

• Changes in area of grasslandand woodland

[see also CLIMATE FACTORSAND AIR]

SO

IL

To conserve agricultural land • Conserve the best and mostversatile agricultural land

• Reduce the amount ofnitrogen fertiliser and organicmanure48 used

• Protect permanent pastures

• Proportion of high qualityagricultural land

• Numbers of applications forspecific elements of agri-environment schemes relatedto conservation of specificagricultural/habitat landfeatures and area under agri-environment schemes

• Area of contaminated land


AIR

To improve air quality (withreference to pollutants under theEC Air Quality Directives)

• Reduce emissions ofatmospheric pollutants fromeach sector

• Reduce impacts on air qualityfrom each sector

• Minimise the demand fortravel (particularly by privatecar)

• Reduce acidification

• Reduce impacts on habitatsfrom all sectors

• Number of days of airpollution (rural and urban)

• Levels of car and vanownership

• Distances travelled perperson per year and by modeof transport

• Proportion of access topublic transport services

• Traffic volumes

• Proximity to urbanareas/drive time

• Amount and type of fuel usedin transport

48 A potential source of diffuse pollution.


44

SEATHEME


AN

IMA

L W

EL

FA

RE

To maintain and enhance animalwelfare standards

• Improve farm animal welfareand health status

• Improve marketing of animalproducts produced to higherwelfare standards

• Improve farm welfarestandards

• Ensure that improved animalwelfare standards do notresult in reducedcompetitiveness against thirdcountry imports

• Density of freerange/outdoor poultry

• Sales of Welsh higher welfareproducts

To reduce contributions toclimate change

• Reduce the concentration ofgreenhouse gases

• Increase the use ofrenewable/low carbon energyconsistent with widerenvironmental and ruralobjectives

• Encourage the recovery ofenergy from waste [as part ofthe waste hierarchy]

CL

IMA

TE

FA

CT

OR

S

(IN

CLU

DIN

G E

NER

GY

)

To adapt effectively to climatechange

• Respond to predicted climaticchange through adaptation

• Ensure access to housing withgood environmentalstandards and ensure highenvironmental standards aremet for buildings

• Reduce flood risk and theeffects of drought

• Total greenhouse gasemissions

• Carbon equivalent emissionsby sector

• Soil carbon [see SOIL]

• Electricity use fromrenewable energy sources

• Distribution of land use bytype [see LAND USEPLANNING]

• Flood risk

• Landfill methane emissions

• No. and type of livestock andlong-term trends [proxy formethane emissions from farmanimals]

[and see AIR]


45

SEATHEME


PO

PU

LA

TIO

N /

HU

MA

N H

EA

LT

HA

ND

WE

LL

BE

ING

To protect and improve the healthand wellbeing of the population

• Promote healthy living andreduce health inequalities

• Promote farmer health andwelfare

• Ensure greater access to thecountryside and outdoorrecreation activities

• Maximise the use ofwoodlands for learning andrecreation

• Increase opportunities fornon-recreational walking andcycling

• Increase access to quality,nutritious food

• Increase access to locallysourced food and increasinguse of local food in schooland tourism businesses

• Life expectancy at birth

• Changes in demography

• Proportion of people whofind access to national parksand countryside easy

• Number of walking andcycling routes

• Percentage of organic foodproduced

• Area of woodland (includingancient semi-natural) [seeSOIL]

• Area of woodland dedicatedfor open access to the public

WA

ST

E

To maximise efficient use ofresources

• Minimise and where possibleeliminate the generation ofwaste

• Maximise the use of waste asa resource

To ensure implementation of thewaste management hierarchy

• Reduce the amount of wastedisposed through landfill ineach sector

• Increase recycling andcomposting of waste

• Rates of waste arising bysector – household,commercial, construction,demolition and agricultural

• Percentage of waste arisingby sector going to: a)recycling, b) composted, c)used to recover heat, powerand other energy, and d)landfilled

• Percentage of waste used torecover heat, power andother energy (as above)


46

SEATHEME


To protect, conserve and enhanceWales’ historic environment,landscape and rural heritage

• Conserve and enhance theWelsh landscape, includingstatutory designated areas

• Protect Wales’ geodiversity.Avoid damage to protectedearth science sites (includingSSSIs limestone pavements,peatlands) and RIGS

• Strengthen and maintainWelsh rural heritage andidentity

• Conserve, enhance andpromote the historicenvironment, includingarchaeological heritage

• Promote the sharing ofecological and heritage data

• Extent of statutorydesignated areas e.g. AONBs

• Landscape designations (e.g.number of geological SSSIs)

• Number of listed buildingsand archaeological sites

CU

LT

UR

AL

HE

RIT

AG

EA

ND

LA

ND

SC

AP

E

To protect and conserve Wales’cultural identity

• Strengthen and maintain theWelsh language

• Distribution and numbers ofpeople speaking Welsh

LA

ND

US

E P

LA

NN

ING

To promote sustainable land-useplanning and development

• Minimise land-take andpromote re-use of previouslydeveloped land and buildings

• Reduce adverse impacts onenvironmental, visual andcultural quality

• Increase the proportion ofland under agri-environmentaland organic management

• Avoid and reduce visual,noise and light intrusion

• Protect rights of way, openspace, common land andregistered village greens andmaintain access to thecountryside

• Land use distribution by type

• Area under agri-environmentschemes [see SOIL]

• Percentage area converted toorganic production

• Light pollution (distribution)

[see also LANDSCAPE andPOPULATION]

5.2. Causal chain analysis

While the SEA objectives form the main element of the assessment framework, the schemesproposed by the draft RDP provide only a very limited basis on which to assess them, i.e. it is difficultto assess a name, it is necessary to explore the elements of the scheme to understand what aspectsare likely to give rise to environmental impacts (see Figure 5.1). Causal chain analysis provides amethodology for tracing the key consequences of a scheme and the potential environmental effects,and is informed by the scheme detail, past evaluations (for example, the mid-term evaluation) and anunderstanding of the relevant baseline data. Respondents to the scoping report consultation (seeAppendix 2 of this Annex), where they expressed a view, were generally supportive of using this


methodology in the SEA. Importantly, causal chain analysis provides transparency to the process ofidentifying impacts and provides the link between the scheme itself, the baseline data and theassessment.

Figure 5.1: Identifying Environmental effects of "measures" using

5.3. Significance criteria

The assessment consists of evaluating the schemes, via the causal chains, agassessment matrices. The indicators provide supporting evidence fromcurrent trends in the existing environment. To help in undertaking the asagainst each objective, guidelines were provided by developing generic sigshould a major effect be distinguished from a minor effect? Table 5.2 taking into account the SEA Directive’s requirements in Annex 1 to inclusynergistic, short, medium and long-term, permanent and temporary, poand that assessment take account of magnitude, sensitivity of the receiving they likely to be reversible or irreversible, probable or improbable, frequen

The assessment matrices themselves are provided in Chapters 7 and 8 belo

e.g. land ownership changes e.g. for land management

Schemes/measures Structural impacts Physical effects

e.g. Tir Gofal, OrganicFarming Scheme,Woodland Grant Scheme

Consequences/LandUse changes/Environmentaleffects

47

causal chains

ainst the SEA objectives in the baseline data aboutsessment for each schemenificance criteria, i.e. howsummarises these criteria,de secondary, cumulative,sitive and negative effects,environment, and whethert or rare.

w.


48

Table 5.2: SEA significance criteria

Score Description

MajorPositive(++)

A scheme/measure very likely to lead to a significant opportunity/improvement, or a series of long-termimprovements, leading to large-scale and permanent benefits to the SEA objective being appraised. A majorpositive effect is also likely to have cumulative and indirect beneficial impact and/or improve conditionsoutside the specific scheme area – will have positive trans-boundary effects.

MinorPositive(+)

A scheme/measure likely to lead to moderate improvement in both short and long-term, leading to largescale temporary, or medium scale permanent benefits to the objective being assessed. Even where beneficialeffects are felt to be temporary, they should not be easily reversible (to detriment of objective) in the long-term.

Neutral(o)

A scheme/measure which is unlikely to have any beneficial or negative impact/effect on the objective beingassessed in either the short, or long-term. Neutral scoring should only be used where it is very likely thatthe effect will be neither positive, nor negative. A neutral score is not the same as ‘uncertain’, where anappraiser is not sure if an effect is likely to be positive or negative, or ‘mixed’, where the appraiser feels thatthe effects are likely to be both positive and negative (see below for more detail).

MinorNegative(-)

A scheme/measure likely to lead to moderate damage/loss in both short and long-term, leading to large-scaletemporary, or medium scale permanent negative impact on the objective.

A scheme/measure which may also have limited cumulative and indirect detrimental impact and/or limiteddegradation of conditions outside the specific policy or project area. It is also likely that it will be possible tomitigate or reverse a minor negative effect through policy or project intervention.

MajorNegative(--)

A scheme/measure likely to lead to a significant or severe damage/loss, or series of long-term negativeeffects, leading to large-scale and permanent negative impacts on the SEA objective being assessed.

A scheme/measure which may also have significant cumulative and indirect detrimental impact and/ordegrade conditions outside the specific scheme area – will have negative trans-boundary effects.

A scheme/measure which is likely to threaten environmental thresholds/capacities in areas already underthreat.

The detrimental effects of scheme/measure will be hard to reverse and are unlikely to be easily mitigatedthrough policy or project intervention.

Any damage or detrimental effect in or to environmentally sensitive areas, issues or landscapes which arerecognised and/or protected locally, regionally, nationally or internationally should be scored as a majornegative.

Mixed(e.g. ++/-,+/-- etc.)

The effect is likely to be a combination of beneficial and detrimental effects, particularly where effects areconsidered on sub-issues, areas or criterion.

For example, a scheme/measure may enhance the viability of certain protected species or habitats (such asnative woodlands), but through this damage existing (non-native) habitats which may themselves beimportant. Such mixed and effects will be hard to predict, but could be significant in the long-term, or whentaken with other effects (cumulative).

Uncertain(?)

The effect of a scheme/measure is not known, or is too unpredictable to assign a conclusive score. Theappraiser is not sure of the effect. This may be the case where a scheme/measure covers a range of issues,or where the manner in which a scheme/measure is implemented will have a material impact on the effects itwill have.


49

6. Testing the compatibility of the plan and environmental objectives

6.1. Purpose of testing the compatibility of the objectives

The purpose of testing the objectives of the RDP against the SEA objectives is to identify bothpotential synergies and inconsistencies between what the plan is trying to achieve and the aspirationsfor the environment. This information can help the development of alternatives during thepreparation of the plan and can also help to refine the objectives of the plan itself.

6.2. Objectives of the RDP

The RDP will operate under the Rural Development Regulation (Council Regulation (EC) 1698/2005)which focuses on the following three core objectives49:

1. Increasing the competitiveness of the agricultural and forestry sector through support forrestructuring.

2. Enhancing the environment and countryside through support for land management.3. Enhancing the quality of life in rural areas and promoting the diversification of economic

activities through measures targeting the farm sector and other rural actors.

As the RDP Consultation Document does not include any explicit overarching objectives, these havebeen taken to capture the core purpose of the RDP. However, the RDP Consultation Documentdoes include sections which discuss the objectives of each of the four Operational Axes (see Part 3,Section 5). Therefore these, along with the core objectives taken from the Rural DevelopmentRegulation, have been used as part of the SEA process to test the compatibility of the objectives ofthe RDP with the SEA objectives (see below, Table 6.1).

The objectives of each of the four Operational Axes from the RDP Consultation Document are asfollows:

Axis 1: Improving competitiveness of the farming and forestry sector

1.1 to improve the performance of food and forestry producers and processors andencourage diversification; and,

1.2 to identify, exploit and service new, emerging and existing markets.

Axis 2: Improving the environment and the countryside

2.1 to ensure that the majority of land is used sustainability through an integrated programmeof agri-environment and other positive measures;

49 Note that the bold emphasis has been added to these and the objectives of the Axes and links to the abbreviated title for the objectiveused in the table testing the compatibility of the plan and SEA objectives below (Table 6.1).


50

2.2 to contribute to the Gothenberg target of halting loss of biodiversity by 2010;2.3 to ensure protection of cultural landscapes including historic and archaeological features

in line with the European Landscape Convention;2.4 to contribute to the Water Framework Directive target of achieving good ecological status of

water by 2015, in particular through the management and reduction of point sourceand diffuse pollution;

2.5 to maintain and enhance woodlands to ensure the provision of social, economic andenvironmental benefits;

2.6 to reduce Wales’ contribution to climate change by protecting and enhancing carbon sinks,managing flood risks and water resources, reducing consumption of non-renewable resourcesand encouraging use of renewable energy;

2.7 to contribute to public use, enjoyment and understanding of the countryside; and,2.8 to strengthen rural communities and the viability of rural businesses.

Axis 3: Quality of life in rural areas and diversification of the rural economy

3.1 to provide a broader range of better paid employment opportunities;3.2 to help to raise economic activity rates;3.3 to enhance or provide additional mainstream services for the rural economy;3.4 to provide openings for future economic development, including tourism and craft

activities;3.5 improving the physical environment of villages and conserving the rural heritage; and,3.6 addressing social exclusion by improving access to a range of services and developing

better links between remote and more densely populated areas.

Axis 4: the LEADER approach

No separate objectives are used for Axis 4 for the purposes of the SEA as this Axis is linked to thedelivery of the other three Axes.

6.3. Compatibility of the plan objectives and SEA objectives

Table 6.1 presents the results of testing the compatibility of the RDP and SEA objectives. The Tableidentifies whether there is the potential for a major conflict between achieving each objective of theRDP and SEA or whether they are potentially synergistic. Where there is unlikely to be a significantconflict or compatibility between objectives, or these are likely to be relatively minor, they areindicated as neutral.


51

Table 6.1: Compatibility of the plan objectives and SEA objectives

SEA Headline Objectives

Key:Compatible: Neutral: oPossible conflict:

RDP ObjectivesBI

OD

IVER

SIT

YT

o m

aint

ain

and

enha

nce

biod

iver

sity

WA

TER

To

mee

t en

viro

nmen

tal s

tand

ards

req

uire

d by

the

WFD

SOIL

To

prot

ect

soil

qual

ity a

nd q

uant

ity

To

cons

erve

agr

icul

tura

l lan

d

AIR

To

impr

ove

air

qual

ity (

re: p

ollu

tant

s un

der

the

EC A

ir Q

ualit

y D

irec

tives

)

AN

IMA

L W

ELFA

RE

To

mai

ntai

n an

d en

hanc

e an

imal

wel

fare

sta

ndar

ds

CLI

MA

TIC

FA

CT

OR

ST

o re

duce

con

trib

utio

n to

clim

ate

chan

ge

To

adap

t ef

fect

ivel

y to

clim

ate

chan

ge

POP.

HU

MA

N H

EALT

HT

o pr

otec

t an

d im

prov

e th

e he

alth

and

wel

lbei

ng o

f the

pop

ulat

ion

WA

ST

ET

o m

axim

ise

effic

ient

use

of r

esou

rces

To

ensu

re im

plem

enta

tion

of t

he w

aste

man

agem

ent

hier

arch

y

CU

LTU

RA

L H

ERIT

AG

E A

ND

LA

ND

SCA

PET

o pr

otec

t, co

nser

ve a

nd e

nhan

ce W

ales

’ his

tori

cen

viro

nmen

t, la

ndsc

ape

and

rur

al h

erita

ge

To

prot

ect

and

cons

erve

Wal

es’ c

ultu

ral i

dent

ity

LAN

D U

SE P

LAN

NIN

GT

o pr

omot

e su

stai

nabl

e la

nd-u

se p

lann

ing

and

deve

lopm

ent

Core RDP objectives

1. Increase competitivenesso o o o o o o o o o o o o

2. Enhance the environment andcountryside

o o

3. Enhance the quality of life andpromote diversification

o o o o o o o o o o o o o

Axis 1 – Improving the Competitiveness of the Agriculture and Forestry Sector

1.1 Performance and diversificationo o o o o o o o o o o o o

1.2 New, emerging and existingmarkets

o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

Axis 2 – Improving the Environment and the Countryside

2.1 Sustainable use of lando o


52



RDP Objectives

BIO

DIV

ERSI

TY

To

mai

ntai

n an

d en

hanc

e bi

odiv

ersi

ty

WA

TER

To

mee

t en

viro

nmen

tal s

tand

ards

req

uire

d by

the

WFD

SOIL

To

prot

ect

soil

qual

ity a

nd q

uant

ity

To

cons

erve

agr

icul

tura

l lan

d

AIR

To

impr

ove

air

qual

ity (

re: p

ollu

tant

s un

der

the

EC A

ir Q

ualit

y D

irec

tives

)

AN

IMA

L W

ELFA

RE

To

mai

ntai

n an

d en

hanc

e an

imal

wel

fare

sta

ndar

ds

CLI

MA

TIC

FA

CT

OR

ST

o re

duce

con

trib

utio

n to

clim

ate

chan

ge

To

adap

t ef

fect

ivel

y to

clim

ate

chan

ge

POP.

HU

MA

N H

EALT

HT

o pr

otec

t an

d im

prov

e th

e he

alth

and

wel

lbei

ng o

f the

pop

ulat

ion

WA

ST

ET

o m

axim

ise

effic

ient

use

of r

esou

rces

To

ensu

re im

plem

enta

tion

of t

he w

aste

man

agem

ent

hier

arch

y

CU

LTU

RA

L H

ERIT

AG

E A

ND

LA

ND

SCA

PET

o pr

otec

t, co

nser

ve a

nd e

nhan

ce W

ales

’ his

tori

cen

viro

nmen

t, la

ndsc

ape

and

rur

al h

erita

ge

To

prot

ect

and

cons

erve

Wal

es’ c

ultu

ral i

dent

ity

LAN

D U

SE P

LAN

NIN

GT

o pr

omot

e su

stai

nabl

e la

nd-u

se p

lann

ing

and

deve

lopm

ent

Halting loss of biodiversity o o o o

2.2 Protection of cultural landscapeso o o o o o o o

2.4 Management and reduction ofpollution

o o o o

2.5 Maintain and enhancewoodlands

o o o o o

2.6 Reduce contribution to climatechange

o o o o o o

2.7 Use, enjoyment and under-standing of the countryside

o o o o o o o o

2.8 Strengthen rural communitiesand businesses

o o o o o o o o o o

Axis 3 – Quality of Life in Rural Areas and Diversification of the Rural Economy

3.1 Better paid employmentopportunities

o o o o o o o o o o o o o

3.2 Raise economic activity rates o o o o o o o o o o


53



RDP Objectives

BIO

DIV

ERSI

TY

To

mai

ntai

n an

d en

hanc

e bi

odiv

ersi

ty

WA

TER

To

mee

t en

viro

nmen

tal s

tand

ards

req

uire

d by

the

WFD

SOIL

To

prot

ect

soil

qual

ity a

nd q

uant

ity

To

cons

erve

agr

icul

tura

l lan

d

AIR

To

impr

ove

air

qual

ity (

re: p

ollu

tant

s un

der

the

EC A

ir Q

ualit

y D

irec

tives

)

AN

IMA

L W

ELFA

RE

To

mai

ntai

n an

d en

hanc

e an

imal

wel

fare

sta

ndar

ds

CLI

MA

TIC

FA

CT

OR

ST

o re

duce

con

trib

utio

n to

clim

ate

chan

ge

To

adap

t ef

fect

ivel

y to

clim

ate

chan

ge

POP.

HU

MA

N H

EALT

HT

o pr

otec

t an

d im

prov

e th

e he

alth

and

wel

lbei

ng o

f the

pop

ulat

ion

WA

ST

ET

o m

axim

ise

effic

ient

use

of r

esou

rces

To

ensu

re im

plem

enta

tion

of t

he w

aste

man

agem

ent

hier

arch

y

CU

LTU

RA

L H

ERIT

AG

E A

ND

LA

ND

SCA

PET

o pr

otec

t, co

nser

ve a

nd e

nhan

ce W

ales

’ his

tori

cen

viro

nmen

t, la

ndsc

ape

and

rur

al h

erita

ge

To

prot

ect

and

cons

erve

Wal

es’ c

ultu

ral i

dent

ity

LAN

D U

SE P

LAN

NIN

GT

o pr

omot

e su

stai

nabl

e la

nd-u

se p

lann

ing

and

deve

lopm

ent

3.3 Services for the rural economy o o o o o o o o o o o o

3.3 Future economic developmento o o o o o o o o o o o

3.5 Physical environment and ruralheritage

o o o o o o o o o o o

3.6 Addressing social exclusion o o o o o o o o o o o o o

Axis 4 – LEADER

Covered by the objectives of the otherAxes


54

6.3.1. Overall comments

Generally the plan objectives and the SEA objectives are either compatible with one another orneutral, with only a few areas of possible conflict having been identified. The significance of these willlargely depend on how the RDP objectives are delivered through the individual schemes.

All the core RDP objectives are either compatible with the SEA objectives or neutral. No possibleconflicts have been identified. Given the underlying objective of the RDP to promote the economiccompetitiveness of the agricultural and forestry sector and the quality of life of the rural population itis not surprising that for two of the three core objectives no direct compatibility has been identifiedagainst most of the environmental objectives. Whereas the objective to enhancing the environmentand countryside through support for land management has been identified as positively compatiblewith most of the SEA objectives.

6.3.2. Potentially conflicting objectives and recommendations

A total of six areas of possible conflicts have been identified. These relate to two of the RDPobjectives under Axis 2 and one under Axis 3:

• Under Axis 2, the RDP objective “to contribute to the Gothenberg target of halting loss ofbiodiversity by 2010” could conflict with the SEA objective “to protect and improve the health andwellbeing of the population”. This is because the SEA objective includes a sub-objective to increaseaccess and recreation, which could detract from biodiversity. Halting loss of biodiversity isclearly an important objective for the RDP and it is not proposed that it is amended. Thispossible conflict could be avoided if the access and recreation is located and managed to avoidimpacts on biodiversity.

• Under Axis 2, the RDP objective “to contribute to public use, enjoyment and understanding ofthe countryside” could also conflict with the SEA objective “to maintain and enhance biodiversity”(for the same reason as above) and with the SEA objective “to improve air quality” as it is likelythat any additional public use of the countryside will involve additional car journeys and thereforeemissions to air. Increasing the use of the countryside should still be promoted for its widerbenefits, but steps are needed to minimise additional car journeys. Measures could beconsidered to promote walking, cycling and the use of public transport to access the countrysideand rural areas.

• Under Axis 3, the RDP objective “to help to raise economic activity rates” could conflict with(at least) three of the SEA objectives: “to improve air quality”; “to reduce contribution to climatechange”; and, “to maximise the efficient use of resources”. This is because it is considered likelyfrom past evidence that increasing economic actively will result in an increased use of motorvehicles and air pollution and carbon dioxide emissions and the generation of waste and use ofnatural resources. Clearly it is possible to seek to break the link between economic growth andnegative environmental effects, but in terms of this compatibility analysis it is a potential conflict


55

that should be emphasised. A challenge for the RDP is therefore to seek to incorporateconditions on measures/schemes aiming to raise economic activity to also increase eco-efficiencythrough reducing the amount of physical emissions or resource use per unit of economic outputby, for example, increased efficiency or a shift to less damaging products.


57

7. Assessment of alternative approaches to the RDP

7.1. Selection of alternative options

Considering the relative effectiveness and environmental impact of alternative options andprogrammes under each Axis, and the balance across the Axes, has been considered as an integralpart of the process of developing the draft RDP. It has also been undertaken with considerableconsultation with stakeholders. The SEA Directive requires an environmental report to be preparedin which:

“…the likely significant effects on the environment of implementing the plan or programme,and reasonable alternatives taking into account the objectives and the geographical scope ofthe plan or programme, are identified, described and evaluated.”Article 5 (1)

During the development of the draft RDP a range of alternatives have been considered. The draftRDP proposes a level of investment that is above the minimum levels required by the EC RDPRegulations (though this includes match funding by the Assembly, see Table 7.1)50:

Table 7.1: Proposed spending per Axis

Minimum percentage per Axis Draft RDP proposed percentage per Axis(includes Assembly match funding)

Axis 1: 10% 20%Axis 2: 25% 52%Axis 3: 10% 22%Axis 4: 5% 6%

Alternatives in the context of the RDP relate primarily to levels of investment in schemes within eachAxis, and the relative balance across the Axes. There are certain constraints on the choice ofoptions within some Axes resulting from existing contractual arrangements flowing from theprevious programming period. Because the RDP is seen as a means of helping deliver many ofWales’ other strategic objectives (e.g. sustainable development, economic, environment, health, landuse, forestry, etc), and to some extent as a consequence of the widespread consultation culturepromoted by the Welsh Assembly, certain expectations among stakeholders also help to contributeto political demands on the RDP. Axis 2 offers potentially the greatest scope for alternatives, since itis also the Axis to which most money is likely to be allocated (and with the highest minimumpercentage of investment required under the EC Regulations). However, in reality there are otherconstraints, for example contractual. Across the Axes, a decision to invest more in one Axis has aknock-on effect on the amount of investment available for other Axes. Alternatives consideredduring the development of the RDP are summarised in the following sub-sections.

50 WAG, Draft RDP consultation document, May 2006.


58

7.1.1. Axis 1

Axis 1 schemes can be grouped under three main themes:

Farm Advisory Service (FAS)Doing nothing would be difficult politically. Limited funding would greatly reduce the scope forestablishing a service that could deliver effective services, business advice and market intelligenceinformation to farmers. Limited funds could place in jeopardy the ability to provide a budgetprovision pan-Wales. The do-minimum FAS services in accordance with EC regulations would bedifficult in political or economic arenas.

Supply Chain EfficiencyIt is important that there is some form of intervention from the RDP to enable greater innovationand market/demand led added value products being produced. Limited funding would lead to a muchlower level of activity, e.g. with implementation of food quality schemes.

Processing and Marketing Grant SchemeFor the Welsh processing industry to become more competitive and rise to the challenge ofdeveloping higher and added value products that respond to consumer demand, the processingindustry will need to develop its processing facilities, gain more business opportunities and improveand rationalise marketing channels, for example, developing more niche marketing. This scheme isdesigned and geared towards providing funding support to both capital and revenue projects.Limited RDP intervention would severely hinder the prospects of the Welsh agri-food industrydeveloping regionally, nationally and internationally between 2007 and 2013. This would lead to adetrimental impact on employment availability and opportunity in many disadvantaged areas ofWales.

7.1.2. Axis 2

A range of options are possible under Axis 2, as this is the Axis with the largest proportion of theRDP spend:

a) do nothing: (no pillar 2 CAP reform - agri-environment - schemes in axis 2): rejected as simply notfeasible given the very considerable overhang of contractual commitments from the previousprogramming period;

b) do minimum: this translates as continuing to pay contractual commitments, but refusing to reopenexisting schemes and abandoning work on the top tier, including the catchment sensitive farmingpilots: rejected given the need to develop agri-environment and forestry schemes to respond tochanging circumstances;

c) continuation of existing policy: this would imply modest expansion of Tir Gofal, the Organic FarmingScheme, Better Woodlands for Wales and possibly Tir Cynnal, together with exploratory workon top tier schemes: regarded as a serious possibility since it would demonstrate a continuingcommitment to land management action, but regarded as too static a response to changingcircumstances and rejected in favour of (d) below;


59

d) continuation of existing policy in short-term plus review of Axis 2 within 2 years: would demonstratecontinuing commitment to land management action, but would also recognise the changinglandscape - with a review in 2007/08 allowing policies and schemes to be re-appraised andadjusted where necessary in the light of initial reactions within the industry to CAP reform andanalysis of the catchment sensitive farming pilots;

e) immediate implementation of top tier scheme(s): superficially attractive given the pressure for actionon catchment sensitive farming (to tackle diffuse pollution and help prepare for implementationof the Water Framework Directive) and for highly targeted action to conserve vulnerablehabitats and species, but regarded as premature until analysis of the catchment sensitive farmingpilots is possible and detailed design of other top tier schemes has been completed;

f) maximum expansion of agri-environment and forestry schemes: not justified in the absence of a fullreview of existing action, and unlikely to be feasible within the financial constraints applying tothe RDP.

7.1.3. Axis 3

The level of investment in the draft RDP for Axis 3 is already at the minimum level required underthe EC Regulations (the figures above include match funding), and so the draft plan is also the do-minimum. The Assembly Government decided that to go beyond the minimum in this Axis wouldrequire a diversion of funds from other Axes, most likely Axis 2 (agri-environment). Since Axis 2 isthe Axis most directly designed to deliver environmental benefits, any diversion of funds from thisAxis would inevitably result in fewer environmental benefits being delivered across Wales.Consequently, no alternatives to the draft RDP for Axis 3 are considered reasonable. This reflects astrategic application of the overall objectives of the RDP and an attempt to achieve a realistic balanceacross the Axes, particularly to deliver environmental benefits. There can be no continuation optionsince the equivalent to Axis 3 (Article 33 schemes) comes to an end in October 2006.

7.1.4. Axis 4

The LEADER programme is dependent on the other Axes and so the scope for developing LocalDevelopment Strategies and Local Action Groups would be affected proportionately to the otherAxes. The draft RDP proposes only to spend almost the same as the minimum requirement. Thereis no continuation option since the existing LEADER + programme is funded under the StructuralFunds.

7.2. Assessment of alternative options

For the purpose of the SEA, therefore, three key strategic alternative options have been assessed,including the draft plan. It is important to recognise that there is no realistic “zero” or “do-nothing”option with respect to the RDP, since there are existing ongoing commitments by the Assembly todelivering certain schemes, such as certain agri-environment schemes. The do-nothing option (i.e. noschemes under each Axis), was therefore rejected as not feasible given considerable contractualcommitments from the previous programming period, and therefore not appropriate to assess.


60

The first realistic alternative option is the “do-minimum” option (see sub-section 7.2.1),implementing only the minimum requirements to meet existing contractual commitment (this is stillmore than the minimum percentage investment of EU funding under the new RDP Regulations plusminimum match funding for each Axis, as specified in the European Commission guidance, since thatwould fail to meet contractual obligations). This has been developed for the purpose of the SEA onthe basis of advice from the plan-making team within the Assembly for each Axis. The second optionis the continuation of existing policy with the existing schemes under the previous RDP (2000-06),without variation, where that is possible. This also represents the likely evolution of the baselineenvironment without implementation of the new plan and is referred to below as the “ContinuationOption” (see sub-section 7.2.2).

The strategic nature of the RDP means that in practice it is not really possible to assess theenvironmental effects of fine-detail alternatives, e.g. minor variations within particular schemes, atleast with any real degree of accuracy or certainty. These two major alternatives, and the draft planitself, however, do provide a reasonable basis on which to understand the relative impact of theAssembly’s proposals for the RDP. These options were assessed against the broad headline SEAobjectives (see Table 7.2 below) whilst also bearing in mind the sub-objectives under each.

7.2.1. Option 1: the do-minimum option

This would see the following schemes under the new Regulations prioritised by the Assembly, whereonly the minimum level of investment per Axis, as required to meet existing contractualcommitments, would be implemented. This option is based on the advice of each Axis leader in theAssembly, on the basis of where investment would be likely to be prioritised. The starting point forallocation under each Axis was the extent of existing commitment that could not be broken.

Category Scheme

Axis 1 • Farm Advisory Service - severely reduced ability to provide support across the whole of Wales

• Supply chain efficiency/food quality schemes - much lower level of activity

• Processing and Marking Grant Scheme – limited scope and application

Axis 2 • No expansion of Tir Gofal

• Limited development of Tir Cynnal

• No top-tier schemes

• Risk to delivery of Better Woodlands for Wales

• No 2007-8 review, and so no new targeted schemes

• Organic Farming Scheme - pay existing agreements but no new entrants

Axis 3 • As draft RDP

Axis 4 • As draft RDP


61

7.2.2. Option 2: The continuation option

This option would see the following schemes from the existing RDP 2000-06 continue largelyunchanged:

Category Scheme

Investment in agriculturalholdings

• Farm Improvement Grant

• Farm Enterprise Grant

• Processing and Marketing Small Grant

Less Favoured Areas • Tir Mynydd

Agri-environment • Tir Gofal (modest expansion, i.e. allowing only some new entrants)

• Tir Cynnal

• Organic Farming Scheme (modest expansion)

Promoting the adaptationand development of ruralareas

• Article 33 (basic services for the rural economy, renovation and redevelopment ofvillages/conservation of rural heritage, diversification of agricultural activities, touristactivities, protection of the environment in connection with agric, forestry andlandscape conservation and animal welfare) Not possible to continue as ends inOctober 2006 (no existing contractual obligations)

Forestry • Woodland Grant Scheme

• Farm Woodland Premium Scheme

Processing and marketingof agricultural products

• Processing and Marketing Grant (East Wales only; West Wales funded underObjective 1 of the Structural Funds)

7.2.3. Option 3: the draft Plan

The schemes presented in the current draft RDP would be implemented. The assessment of thisoption in Table 7.2 draws heavily on the detailed assessment of the draft RDP in Chapter 8. Thescoring scheme also follows the same basis as described in Chapter 5.3 (and Table 5.2) above.


62

Table 7.2: Assessment of alternative options


Key

++Major

positive

+Minor

positive

0 Neutral

-Minor

negative

--Major

negative

? Uncertain

Alternative Options BIO

DIV

ERSI

TY

To

mai

ntai

n an

d en

hanc

e bi

odiv

ersi

t

WA

TER

To

mee

t en

viro

nmen

tal

stan

dard

s re

quir

ed

by

the

WFD

SOIL

To

prot

ect

soil

qual

ity a

nd q

uant

ity

To

cons

erve

agr

icul

tura

l lan

d

AIR

To

impr

ove

air

qual

ity (

re:

pollu

tant

s un

der

the

ECA

ir Q

ualit

y D

irec

tives

)

AN

IMA

L W

ELFA

RE

To

mai

ntai

n an

d en

hanc

e an

imal

wel

fare

sta

ndar

ds

CLI

MA

TIC

FA

CT

OR

ST

o re

duce

con

trib

utio

n to

clim

ate

chan

ge

To

adap

t ef

fect

ivel

y to

clim

ate

chan

ge

POP.

HU

MA

N H

EALT

HT

o pr

otec

t an

d im

prov

e th

e he

alth

and

wel

lbei

ng o

fth

e po

pula

tion

WA

STE

To

max

imis

e ef

ficie

nt u

se o

f res

ourc

es

To

ensu

re i

mpl

emen

tatio

n of

the

was

te m

anag

emen

thi

erar

chy

CU

LTU

RA

L H

ERIT

AG

E A

ND

LA

ND

SCA

PET

o pr

otec

t, co

nser

ve a

nd

enha

nce

Wal

es’

hist

oric

envi

ronm

ent,

land

scap

e a

nd r

ural

her

itage

To

prot

ect

and

cons

erve

Wal

es’ c

ultu

ral i

dent

ity

LAN

D U

SE P

LAN

NIN

GT

o pr

omot

e su

stai

nabl

e la

nd-u

se

plan

ning

an

dde

velo

pmen

t

Comments

Axis 1 – Improving the Competitiveness of the Agriculture and Forestry SectorOption 1 (Do minimum) ? - -? ? ? ? -? -? ? -? -? -? -? -?

Option 2 (Continuation) ? - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

Option 3 (Draft Plan) ? -? +? ? ? + -+? ? +? +? +? +? +? ?

See text in Chapter 7.1,Axis 1

Axis 2 – Improving the Environment and the CountrysideOption 1 (Do minimum) + ? -? -? ? o o - ? - ? ? o o o o o No expansion of schemes

Option 2 (Continuation) + ? + ? ? o o o ? ? o o + ? o ? Only modest expansion

Option 3 (Draft Plan) ++ +? + +? o? o+ ? ? o+? ? o + +? -+?

Axis 3 – Quality of Life in Rural Areas and Diversification of the Rural Economy-Axis 4 - LEADEROption 3 (Draft Plan) -? -? -? o - +? -? -? + - - + + +? = Do minimum option


63

7.3. Conclusion

From Table 7.2 it is clear that the draft plan provides the greatest opportunity for positive effects,particularly on biodiversity, soils, animal welfare, population and human health, and cultural heritageand landscape. The other options involving lower levels of investment are likely to result in highlevels of uncertainty since, for example, retention of farmers in farming may be considerably moredifficult, resulting potentially in uncertain changes in land ownership and land use. Chapter 8provides a more detailed assessment of the proposed draft RDP (Option 3).


65

8. Assessment of the proposed RDP

8.1. Introduction to the assessment

Each Axis, other than Axis 4, is assessed using a separate matrix (Table 8.1 for Axes 1 and 3 andTable 8.2 for Axis 2). Axis 4 (LEADER) differs from the other Axes in applying at the local level,developed from the bottom up through Local Action Groups (LAGs) and Local DevelopmentStrategies (LDSs). The nature of these LAGs, by definition, is not determined in advance anddepends on where they arise and in what context. The approach taken to assess Axis 4 is thereforesomewhat different to the other Axes in that examples from previous LEADER schemes have beenexamined and overview causal chains produced to understand the potential for environmental effectsarising from these local schemes which are designed to support the other Axes. The assessment istherefore text based (and illustrated by causal chains), rather than matrix based. This approach alsoprovides an illustration of the potential complexity at the local level of the potential interactionsbetween effects and the scope for small scale cumulative effects. Since LEADER supports activitieswithin the other Axes the most significant effects are already identified through the Axes matrices.The illustrations here provide further evidence on which conclusions can be drawn and mitigationmeasures can be recommended.

8.2. The assessment

The matrices, for convenience, are presented as two separate tables. Table 8.1 addresses Axes 1and 3 (Improving the Competitiveness of the Agriculture and Forestry Sector and Quality of Life inRural Areas and Diversification of the Rural Economy, respectively). Table 8.2 address Axis 2(Improving the Environment and the Countryside).

The scoring used in the assessment matrices is based on the five point significance scale described inChapter 5.3, and is presented in the matrix as both symbols and colour coded:

++Major

positive

+Minor

positive

o Neutral

-Minor

negative

--Major

negative

? Uncertain

Each score has been informed by the baseline data and the causal chains (Appendices 3 and 4 of thisAnnex respectively) and should be read in conjunction with these. Where appropriate, commentsare provided in the right hand comments column. Discussion of the key results from the assessmentis provided in Chapter 8.3 below.


66

Table 8.1: Axes 1 and 3 assessment matrix


Axis 3 – Quality of Life in Rural Areas and Diversification of the Rural Economy RDP Schemes

Key++ Major positive

+ Minor positive

0 Neutral

See Appendix 4for causal chains for eachscheme listed to the left

- Minor negative

-- Major negative

? Uncertain

SEA Objectives 1. V

ocat

iona

l tra

inin

g an

din

form

atio

n ac

tions

2. U

se o

f far

m a

nd fo

rest

ryad

viso

ry s

ervi

ces

3. M

oder

nisa

tion

of a

gric

ultu

ral

hold

ings

4. Im

prov

ing

the

econ

omic

valu

e of

fore

sts

5. A

ddin

g va

lue

to a

gric

ultu

ral

and

fore

stry

pro

duct

s

6. C

o-op

erat

ion

for

devt

of

new

PPT

s in

the

ag/

food

sec

tor

and

fore

stry

sec

tor

7. In

fras

truc

ture

rel

ated

to

the

devt

and

ada

ptat

ion

of a

g an

dfo

rest

ry

8. P

artic

ipat

ion

of fa

rmer

s in

food

qua

lity

sche

mes

9. In

form

atio

n an

d pr

omot

ion

activ

ities

1.

Supp

ort

for

busi

ness

crea

tion

and

deve

lopm

ent

2. E

ncou

rage

men

t of

tou

rism

activ

ities

3. B

asic

ser

vice

s fo

r th

eec

onom

y an

d ru

ral p

opul

atio

n

4.

Vill

age

rene

wal

an

dde

velo

pmen

t

5. C

onse

rvat

ion

and

upgr

adin

go

the

rura

l her

itage

6. P

rovi

sion

of t

rain

ing

&in

form

atio

n fo

r ec

onom

icac

tors

in A

xis

3

7. S

kills

acq

uisi

tion

and

anim

atio

n re

: a lo

cal d

evt

stra

tegy

Comments

BIODIVERSITYTo maintain and enhance biodiversity

Halt the loss of biodiversityand promote recovery +? +? +? -? o? -? -? ? ? -? - o - ? +? +?Meet the targets ofbiodiversity and habitat actionplans

+? +? +? -? o? o? -? ? ? -? -? o - ? +? +?

Enhance protected speciesand their overall population +? +? +? -? o? o? -? ? ? -? -? o - ? +? +?Enhance and protect specieswithout statutory protectionand their overall population

+? +? +? -? o? o? -? ? ? -? -? o - ? +? +?

Enhance the quality andnumber of natural and semi-natural habitats

+? +? +? -? o? o? -? ? ? -? -? o - ? ? +?

Reduce habitat fragmentationand enhance habitatconnectivity where notcausing other fragmentation

+? +? +? -? o? o? ? ? ? -? - o? - ? ? +?

Avoid damage and adverseimpacts to Priority Habitatsin Wales

+? +? +? ? o? o? ? ? ? -? ? o? - ? +? +?

Under 1,2, & 3 potential formarginal benefits; under 1&2outcome will depend on theextent to which advice isactually followed.

Under 8 (and 9) participation infood quality schemes (and theirpromotion) will have uncertaineffects for may of the SEAobjectives since the impact willdepend greatly on the nature ofthe food quality schemeISO9000 accreditation forexample says little about thenature of the quality aspired toand nothing about theenvironmental credentials ofthe producer


67




+ Minor positive

0 Neutral


- Minor negative

-- Major negative

? Uncertain

SEA Objectives 1. V

ocat

iona

l tra

inin

g an

din

form

atio

n ac

tions

2. U

se o

f far

m a

nd fo

rest

ryad

viso

ry s

ervi

ces

3. M

oder

nisa

tion

of a

gric

ultu

ral

hold

ings

4. Im

prov

ing

the

econ

omic

valu

e of

fore

sts

5. A

ddin

g va

lue

to a

gric

ultu

ral

and

fore

stry

pro

duct

s

6. C

o-op

erat

ion

for

devt

of

new

PPT

s in

the

ag/

food

sec

tor

and

fore

stry

sec

tor

7. In

fras

truc

ture

rel

ated

to

the

devt

and

ada

ptat

ion

of a

g an

dfo

rest

ry

8. P

artic

ipat

ion

of fa

rmer

s in

food

qua

lity

sche

mes

9. In

form

atio

n an

d pr

omot

ion

activ

ities

1.

Supp

ort

for

busi

ness

crea

tion

and

deve

lopm

ent

2. E

ncou

rage

men

t of

tou

rism

activ

ities

3. B

asic

ser

vice

s fo

r th

eec

onom

y an

d ru

ral p

opul

atio

n

4.

Vill

age

rene

wal

an

dde

velo

pmen

t

5. C

onse

rvat

ion

and

upgr

adin

go

the

rura

l her

itage

6. P

rovi

sion

of t

rain

ing

&in

form

atio

n fo

r ec

onom

icac

tors

in A

xis

3

7. S

kills

acq

uisi

tion

and

anim

atio

n re

: a lo

cal d

evt

stra

tegy

Comments

WATER

To meet environmental standards required by the WFDMinimise discharges to waterand any adverse effects onwater quality

+? +? + - - - +? ? ? -? -? -? - ? o o

Maintain and enhance Wales’groundwater, rivers, lakesand coastal waters

+? +? ? - - - +? ? ? -? ? -? - +? o o

Reduce point source anddiffuse pollution +? +? +? - - - +? ? ? -? -? -? - -? o oAvoid adverse impacts onwater resources throughavoidance, mitigation andeffective management

+? +? +? - - - +? ? ? -? -? -? - ? o o

Protect and maintain thequality and quantity ofsurface, groundwater anddrinking water

+? +? + - - - +? ? ? -? -? -? - ? o o

Increase water efficiency +? +? +? o -? ? +? ? ? ? ? ? ? o o o

Under 4. –veifusingfertilisers/harvesting techniques,or e.g. if Miscanthus.


68




+ Minor positive

0 Neutral


- Minor negative

-- Major negative

? Uncertain

SEA Objectives 1. V

ocat

iona

l tra

inin

g an

din

form

atio

n ac

tions

2. U

se o

f far

m a

nd fo

rest

ryad

viso

ry s

ervi

ces

3. M

oder

nisa

tion

of a

gric

ultu

ral

hold

ings

4. Im

prov

ing

the

econ

omic

valu

e of

fore

sts

5. A

ddin

g va

lue

to a

gric

ultu

ral

and

fore

stry

pro

duct

s

6. C

o-op

erat

ion

for

devt

of

new

PPT

s in

the

ag/

food

sec

tor

and

fore

stry

sec

tor

7. In

fras

truc

ture

rel

ated

to

the

devt

and

ada

ptat

ion

of a

g an

dfo

rest

ry

8. P

artic

ipat

ion

of fa

rmer

s in

food

qua

lity

sche

mes

9. In

form

atio

n an

d pr

omot

ion

activ

ities

1.

Supp

ort

for

busi

ness

crea

tion

and

deve

lopm

ent

2. E

ncou

rage

men

t of

tou

rism

activ

ities

3. B

asic

ser

vice

s fo

r th

eec

onom

y an

d ru

ral p

opul

atio

n

4.

Vill

age

rene

wal

an

dde

velo

pmen

t

5. C

onse

rvat

ion

and

upgr

adin

go

the

rura

l her

itage

6. P

rovi

sion

of t

rain

ing

&in

form

atio

n fo

r ec

onom

icac

tors

in A

xis

3

7. S

kills

acq

uisi

tion

and

anim

atio

n re

: a lo

cal d

evt

stra

tegy

Comments

SOIL

To protect soil quality and quantityReduce contamination,and safeguard soil qualityand quantity

+? +? + ? -? -? ? ? ? ? - -? -? ? 0 0

Maintain and enhance thefunction and integrity ofsoil processes andservices

+? +? +? ? 0 0 +? ? ? ? - -? -? ? 0 0

Reduce soil erosion +? +? 0 ? 0 0 +? ? ? ? - -? -? ? 0 0Ensure the protection ofsoil structure +? +? 0 ? 0 0 0 ? ? 0 - 0 0 ? 0 0Conserve ability ofpeatland soils to act ascarbon sinks

0 0 0 ? 0 0 0 ? ? 0 - 0 0 ? 0 0

To Conserve agriculture landConserve the best andmost versatileagricultural land

0 ? 0 0 0 0 ? ? ? ? 0 0 0 0 0 0

Reduce the amount ofnitrogen fertiliser andorganic manure used

+? +? 0 ? 0 0 ? ? ? ? 0 0 0 0 0 0

Protect permanentpastures

0 +? 0 0 0 0 ? ? ? ? 0 0 0 +? 0 0

Under Axis 1, 4. – uncertain:stabilisation of soil possible, butseasonal erosion also possiblefrom harvesting


69




+ Minor positive

0 Neutral


- Minor negative

-- Major negative

? Uncertain

SEA Objectives 1. V

ocat

iona

l tra

inin

g an

din

form

atio

n ac

tions

2. U

se o

f far

m a

nd fo

rest

ryad

viso

ry s

ervi

ces

3. M

oder

nisa

tion

of a

gric

ultu

ral

hold

ings

4. Im

prov

ing

the

econ

omic

valu

e of

fore

sts

5. A

ddin

g va

lue

to a

gric

ultu

ral

and

fore

stry

pro

duct

s

6. C

o-op

erat

ion

for

devt

of

new

PPT

s in

the

ag/

food

sec

tor

and

fore

stry

sec

tor

7. In

fras

truc

ture

rel

ated

to

the

devt

and

ada

ptat

ion

of a

g an

dfo

rest

ry

8. P

artic

ipat

ion

of fa

rmer

s in

food

qua

lity

sche

mes

9. In

form

atio

n an

d pr

omot

ion

activ

ities

1.

Supp

ort

for

busi

ness

crea

tion

and

deve

lopm

ent

2. E

ncou

rage

men

t of

tou

rism

activ

ities

3. B

asic

ser

vice

s fo

r th

eec

onom

y an

d ru

ral p

opul

atio

n

4.

Vill

age

rene

wal

an

dde

velo

pmen

t

5. C

onse

rvat

ion

and

upgr

adin

go

the

rura

l her

itage

6. P

rovi

sion

of t

rain

ing

&in

form

atio

n fo

r ec

onom

icac

tors

in A

xis

3

7. S

kills

acq

uisi

tion

and

anim

atio

n re

: a lo

cal d

evt

stra

tegy

Comments

AIR

To improve air quality (re: pollutants under the EC Air Quality Directives)Reduce emissions ofatmospheric pollutantsfrom each sector

o o ? ? -? -? +? ? - -? - -? ? ? o ?

Reduce impacts on airquality from each sector o o ? ? -? -? ? ? - -? - -? ? ? o ?Minimise the demand fortravel (particularly byprivate car)

-? -? o -? o? o? o ? - -? -- ? +? -? o ?

Reduce acidification o o? +? ? ? ? +? ? - -? - ? ? ? o ?Reduce impacts onhabitats from all sectors +? +? ? +? ? ? ? ? - -? - ? ? ? o ?

ANIMAL WELFARE

To Maintain and enhance animal welfare standardsImprove farm animalwelfare and health status +? +? ++ o o o o ? ? ? o o o o o oImprove marketing ofanimal productsproduced to higherwelfare standards

o? o o o o o o ? ? +? o o o o o +?

Improve farm animalwelfare standards o o o o o o o ? ? o o o o o o oEnsure that improvedanimal welfare standardsdo not result in reducedcompetitiveness fromthird country imports

o o + o o o o ? ? ? o o o o o +?


70




+ Minor positive

0 Neutral


- Minor negative

-- Major negative

? Uncertain

SEA Objectives 1. V

ocat

iona

l tra

inin

g an

din

form

atio

n ac

tions

2. U

se o

f far

m a

nd fo

rest

ryad

viso

ry s

ervi

ces

3. M

oder

nisa

tion

of a

gric

ultu

ral

hold

ings

4. Im

prov

ing

the

econ

omic

valu

e of

fore

sts

5. A

ddin

g va

lue

to a

gric

ultu

ral

and

fore

stry

pro

duct

s

6. C

o-op

erat

ion

for

devt

of

new

PPT

s in

the

ag/

food

sec

tor

and

fore

stry

sec

tor

7. In

fras

truc

ture

rel

ated

to

the

devt

and

ada

ptat

ion

of a

g an

dfo

rest

ry

8. P

artic

ipat

ion

of fa

rmer

s in

food

qua

lity

sche

mes

9. In

form

atio

n an

d pr

omot

ion

activ

ities

1.

Supp

ort

for

busi

ness

crea

tion

and

deve

lopm

ent

2. E

ncou

rage

men

t of

tou

rism

activ

ities

3. B

asic

ser

vice

s fo

r th

eec

onom

y an

d ru

ral p

opul

atio

n

4.

Vill

age

rene

wal

an

dde

velo

pmen

t

5. C

onse

rvat

ion

and

upgr

adin

go

the

rura

l her

itage

6. P

rovi

sion

of t

rain

ing

&in

form

atio

n fo

r ec

onom

icac

tors

in A

xis

3

7. S

kills

acq

uisi

tion

and

anim

atio

n re

: a lo

cal d

evt

stra

tegy

Comments

CLIMATE FACTORS (INCLUDING ENERGY)

To reduce contributions to climate changeReduce the concentrationof greenhouse gases -? -? o ? - - +? ? - -? - -? +? -? o? ?Increase the use ofrenewable/ low carbonenergy consistent withwider environmental andrural objectives

o o o + -? -? + ? -? o o o o o o ?

Encourage the recoveryof energy from waste [aspart of the wastehierarchy]

o o o o ? ? +? ? o o o o o o o ?

To adapt effectively to climate changeRespond to predictedclimatic change throughadaptation

o +? o o o o +? ? ? o o o o ? o ?

Ensure access to housingwith good environmentalstandards and ensurehigh environmentalstandards are met forbuildings

o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o ?

Reduce flood risk and theeffects of drought o +? o? ? ? ? +? ? -? -? - -? ? ? o ?

Under 1 – potential fortransport related effects


71




+ Minor positive

0 Neutral


- Minor negative

-- Major negative

? Uncertain

SEA Objectives 1. V

ocat

iona

l tra

inin

g an

din

form

atio

n ac

tions

2. U

se o

f far

m a

nd fo

rest

ryad

viso

ry s

ervi

ces

3. M

oder

nisa

tion

of a

gric

ultu

ral

hold

ings

4. Im

prov

ing

the

econ

omic

valu

e of

fore

sts

5. A

ddin

g va

lue

to a

gric

ultu

ral

and

fore

stry

pro

duct

s

6. C

o-op

erat

ion

for

devt

of

new

PPT

s in

the

ag/

food

sec

tor

and

fore

stry

sec

tor

7. In

fras

truc

ture

rel

ated

to

the

devt

and

ada

ptat

ion

of a

g an

dfo

rest

ry

8. P

artic

ipat

ion

of fa

rmer

s in

food

qua

lity

sche

mes

9. In

form

atio

n an

d pr

omot

ion

activ

ities

1.

Supp

ort

for

busi

ness

crea

tion

and

deve

lopm

ent

2. E

ncou

rage

men

t of

tou

rism

activ

ities

3. B

asic

ser

vice

s fo

r th

eec

onom

y an

d ru

ral p

opul

atio

n

4.

Vill

age

rene

wal

an

dde

velo

pmen

t

5. C

onse

rvat

ion

and

upgr

adin

go

the

rura

l her

itage

6. P

rovi

sion

of t

rain

ing

&in

form

atio

n fo

r ec

onom

icac

tors

in A

xis

3

7. S

kills

acq

uisi

tion

and

anim

atio

n re

: a lo

cal d

evt

stra

tegy

Comments

POPULATION AND HUMAN HEALTH AND WELL-BEING

To protect and improve the health and wellbeing of the populationPromote healthy livingand reduce healthinequalities

o o o o o o o ? ? o + ? +? +? ? ?

Promotion of farmerhealth and welfare +? +? +? o o +? o +? +? o +? o +? o ? ?Ensure greater access tothe countryside andoutdoor recreationactivities

o o o o o o o o o o ++ ? + ? o ?

Maximise the use ofwoodlands for learningand recreation

o o o o o o o o o o + o o ? +? o

Increase opportunities fornon-recreational walkingand cycling

o o o o o? o o o o +? o ? +? o o ?

Increase access to quality,nutritious food. o o o o ? ? o + +? +? ? +? o o o ?Increase access to locallysourced food andincreasing use of localfood in school andtourism businesses

o o o o +? +? o + + +? +? +? o +? o ?


72




+ Minor positive

0 Neutral


- Minor negative

-- Major negative

? Uncertain

SEA Objectives 1. V

ocat

iona

l tra

inin

g an

din

form

atio

n ac

tions

2. U

se o

f far

m a

nd fo

rest

ryad

viso

ry s

ervi

ces

3. M

oder

nisa

tion

of a

gric

ultu

ral

hold

ings

4. Im

prov

ing

the

econ

omic

valu

e of

fore

sts

5. A

ddin

g va

lue

to a

gric

ultu

ral

and

fore

stry

pro

duct

s

6. C

o-op

erat

ion

for

devt

of

new

PPT

s in

the

ag/

food

sec

tor

and

fore

stry

sec

tor

7. In

fras

truc

ture

rel

ated

to

the

devt

and

ada

ptat

ion

of a

g an

dfo

rest

ry

8. P

artic

ipat

ion

of fa

rmer

s in

food

qua

lity

sche

mes

9. In

form

atio

n an

d pr

omot

ion

activ

ities

1.

Supp

ort

for

busi

ness

crea

tion

and

deve

lopm

ent

2. E

ncou

rage

men

t of

tou

rism

activ

ities

3. B

asic

ser

vice

s fo

r th

eec

onom

y an

d ru

ral p

opul

atio

n

4.

Vill

age

rene

wal

an

dde

velo

pmen

t

5. C

onse

rvat

ion

and

upgr

adin

go

the

rura

l her

itage

6. P

rovi

sion

of t

rain

ing

&in

form

atio

n fo

r ec

onom

icac

tors

in A

xis

3

7. S

kills

acq

uisi

tion

and

anim

atio

n re

: a lo

cal d

evt

stra

tegy

Comments

WASTE

To maximise efficient use of resourcesMinimise and wherepossible eliminate thegeneration of waste

+? +? +? o o? o? o ? ? ? - -? ? ? o ?

Maximise the use ofwaste as a resource +? +? +? o o? o? o ? ? ? - o o o o ?

To ensure implementation of the waste management hierarchyReduce the amount ofwaste disposed throughlandfill in each sector

+? +? o o ? ? o ? ? ? - - o ? o ?

Increase recycling andcomposting of waste +? +? +? o o o o ? ? ? o o o o o ?


73




+ Minor positive

0 Neutral


- Minor negative

-- Major negative

? Uncertain

SEA Objectives 1. V

ocat

iona

l tra

inin

g an

din

form

atio

n ac

tions

2. U

se o

f far

m a

nd fo

rest

ryad

viso

ry s

ervi

ces

3. M

oder

nisa

tion

of a

gric

ultu

ral

hold

ings

4. Im

prov

ing

the

econ

omic

valu

e of

fore

sts

5. A

ddin

g va

lue

to a

gric

ultu

ral

and

fore

stry

pro

duct

s

6. C

o-op

erat

ion

for

devt

of

new

PPT

s in

the

ag/

food

sec

tor

and

fore

stry

sec

tor

7. In

fras

truc

ture

rel

ated

to

the

devt

and

ada

ptat

ion

of a

g an

dfo

rest

ry

8. P

artic

ipat

ion

of fa

rmer

s in

food

qua

lity

sche

mes

9. In

form

atio

n an

d pr

omot

ion

activ

ities

1.

Supp

ort

for

busi

ness

crea

tion

and

deve

lopm

ent

2. E

ncou

rage

men

t of

tou

rism

activ

ities

3. B

asic

ser

vice

s fo

r th

eec

onom

y an

d ru

ral p

opul

atio

n

4.

Vill

age

rene

wal

an

dde

velo

pmen

t

5. C

onse

rvat

ion

and

upgr

adin

go

the

rura

l her

itage

6. P

rovi

sion

of t

rain

ing

&in

form

atio

n fo

r ec

onom

icac

tors

in A

xis

3

7. S

kills

acq

uisi

tion

and

anim

atio

n re

: a lo

cal d

evt

stra

tegy

Comments

CULTURAL HERITAGE AND LANDSCAPE

To protect, conserve and enhance Wales’ historic environment, landscape and rural heritageConserve and enhancethe Welsh landscape,including statutorydesignated areas

o? o? 0 -? -? -? ? ? ? ? +? - ? + + +?

Protect Wales’geodiversity. Avoiddamage to protectedearth science sites(including SSSIs,limestone pavements,peatlands) and RIGS

o? o? o o? o? o? ? o? o? ? +? -? ? + + +?

Strengthen and maintainWelsh rural heritage andidentity

+? +? o o +? +? o + + + + + + ++ + +?

Preserve, enhance andpromote the historicenvironment, includingarchaeological heritage

o? o? o o o? o? o? o? o? ? + -? +? + + +?

Promote the sharing ofecological and heritagedata

+ + o o o o o +? + o + o ? + + +?

To protect and conserve Wales’ cultural identityStrengthen and maintainthe Welsh language o o o o +? o o +? + +? + +? + ++ + +?


74




+ Minor positive

0 Neutral


- Minor negative

-- Major negative

? Uncertain

SEA Objectives 1. V

ocat

iona

l tra

inin

g an

din

form

atio

n ac

tions

2. U

se o

f far

m a

nd fo

rest

ryad

viso

ry s

ervi

ces

3. M

oder

nisa

tion

of a

gric

ultu

ral

hold

ings

4. Im

prov

ing

the

econ

omic

valu

e of

fore

sts

5. A

ddin

g va

lue

to a

gric

ultu

ral

and

fore

stry

pro

duct

s

6. C

o-op

erat

ion

for

devt

of

new

PPT

s in

the

ag/

food

sec

tor

and

fore

stry

sec

tor

7. In

fras

truc

ture

rel

ated

to

the

devt

and

ada

ptat

ion

of a

g an

dfo

rest

ry

8. P

artic

ipat

ion

of fa

rmer

s in

food

qua

lity

sche

mes

9. In

form

atio

n an

d pr

omot

ion

activ

ities

1.

Supp

ort

for

busi

ness

crea

tion

and

deve

lopm

ent

2. E

ncou

rage

men

t of

tou

rism

activ

ities

3. B

asic

ser

vice

s fo

r th

eec

onom

y an

d ru

ral p

opul

atio

n

4.

Vill

age

rene

wal

an

dde

velo

pmen

t

5. C

onse

rvat

ion

and

upgr

adin

go

the

rura

l her

itage

6. P

rovi

sion

of t

rain

ing

&in

form

atio

n fo

r ec

onom

icac

tors

in A

xis

3

7. S

kills

acq

uisi

tion

and

anim

atio

n re

: a lo

cal d

evt

stra

tegy

Comments

LAND USE PLANNING

To promote sustainable land-use planning and developmentMinimise land-take andpromote re-use ofpreviously developed landand buildings

+? +? +-? - - o? - ? ? - - - - ++ ? ?

Reduce adverse impactson environmental, visualand cultural quality

+? +? ? - -? o? - ? ? - - - - + +? ?

Increase the proportionof land under agri-environmental andorganic management

+ + o o o? o o ? ? ? o o o o + ?

Avoid and reduce visual,noise and light intrusion o o -? - -? o -? ? ? - - - - ? o ?Protect rights of way,open space, common landand registered villagegreens and maintainaccess to the countryside

? ? o ? ? o ? ? ? ? + ? ? + ? ?

Under Axis 1, 3. effectsmay be positive in that mayhelp reduce adverseimpacts of poorlymaintained holdings, butuncertain due to newbuildings, which may have anegative or positive visualimpact, and may helpeliminate excessive odoureffects.


75

Table 8.2: Axis 2 assessment matrix

Axis 2 - Improving the Environment and the Countryside RDP SchemesKeys

++ Major Positive

+ Minor Positive

o Neutral

See Appendix 4For causal chains for each schemelisted to the left

- Minor Negative

-- Major Negative

? Uncertain

SEA Objectives AX

IS 2

1. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-T

ir C

ynna

l

2. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-T

ir G

ofal

3. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-H

ighe

r le

vel s

chem

e

4. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-O

rgan

ic F

arm

ing

Sche

me

5. B

ette

r W

oodl

ands

for

Wal

es (

BWW

) Fi

rst

affo

rest

atio

n of

6. B

WW

Fir

staf

fore

stat

ion

of n

on-

agri

cultu

ral l

and

7. B

WW

For

est-

envi

ronm

ent

paym

ents

8. B

WW

Res

tori

ngfo

rest

ry p

oten

tial a

ndin

trod

ucin

g pr

even

tion

9. B

WW

Sup

port

for

non

prod

uctiv

e in

vest

men

ts(fo

rest

ry),

Comments

BIODIVERSITY

To maintain and enhance biodiversity

Halt the loss of biodiversity and promoterecovery + + + + ? + ++ + ?Meet the targets of biodiversity and habitataction plans + + + +? + + ++ +? ?Enhance protected species and their overallpopulation ? + + ? ? ? + + ?Enhance and protect species withoutstatutory protection and their overallpopulation

+ + + + + + + ?

Enhance the quality and number of naturaland semi-natural habitats

+ + + + +? + ++ + ?

Reduce habitat fragmentation and enhancehabitat connectivity where not causing otherfragmentation

+? + ++? +? + + + ? -?

Avoid damage and adverse impacts toPriority Habitats in Wales ? + + ? +? +? + ++ o

Agri-environment and BWW schemesgenerally likely to be positive forbiodiversity, highly positive were thescheme is particularly geared todelivering biodiversity benefits.

Under 5 – priority habitats may befarmland based and thereforenegatively affected by afforestation,others could be enhanced by newwoodland.


76


++ Major Positive

+ Minor Positive

o Neutral


- Minor Negative

-- Major Negative

? Uncertain

SEA Objectives AX

IS 2

1. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-T

ir C

ynna

l

2. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-T

ir G

ofal

3. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-H

ighe

r le

vel s

chem

e

4. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-O

rgan

ic F

arm

ing

Sche

me

5. B

ette

r W

oodl

ands

for

Wal

es (

BWW

) Fi

rst

affo

rest

atio

n of

6. B

WW

Fir

staf

fore

stat

ion

of n

on-

agri

cultu

ral l

and

7. B

WW

For

est-

envi

ronm

ent

paym

ents

8. B

WW

Res

tori

ngfo

rest

ry p

oten

tial a

ndin

trod

ucin

g pr

even

tion

9. B

WW

Sup

port

for

non

prod

uctiv

e in

vest

men

ts(fo

rest

ry),

Comments

WATER

To meet environmental standards required by the WFD

Minimise discharges to water and anyadverse effects on water quality o? +? + ? + ? ? o o?Maintain and enhance Wales’ groundwater,rivers, lakes and coastal waters ? +? + ? ? ? ? o oReduce point source and diffuse pollution + + + -? + ? o o -Avoid adverse impacts on water resourcesthrough avoidance, mitigation and effectivemanagement

o o? ? 0 - ? ? o o

Protect and maintain the quality andquantity of surface, groundwater anddrinking water

? +? + +-? ? ? ? o o

Increase water efficiency o o o o o o o o o

+ under 5. depends if use inputs suchpesticides, herbicides-? Manure use; - from access- depends where plant and types oftrees


77


++ Major Positive

+ Minor Positive

o Neutral


- Minor Negative

-- Major Negative

? Uncertain

SEA Objectives AX

IS 2

1. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-T

ir C

ynna

l

2. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-T

ir G

ofal

3. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-H

ighe

r le

vel s

chem

e

4. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-O

rgan

ic F

arm

ing

Sche

me

5. B

ette

r W

oodl

ands

for

Wal

es (

BWW

) Fi

rst

affo

rest

atio

n of

6. B

WW

Fir

staf

fore

stat

ion

of n

on-

agri

cultu

ral l

and

7. B

WW

For

est-

envi

ronm

ent

paym

ents

8. B

WW

Res

tori

ngfo

rest

ry p

oten

tial a

ndin

trod

ucin

g pr

even

tion

9. B

WW

Sup

port

for

non

prod

uctiv

e in

vest

men

ts(fo

rest

ry),

Comments

SOIL

To protect soil quality and quantity

Reduce contamination, and safeguard soilquality and quantity o? ? +? + + + + +? o?Maintain and enhance the function andintegrity of soil processes and services o? +? +? + + + + + o?Reduce soil erosion o? +? + + + + +? +? -?Ensure the protection of soil structure o? ? + + + + +? +? -?Conserve ability of peatland soils to act ascarbon sinks o o+? o+? ? -? -? o o o

To conserve agricultural landConserve the best and most versatileagricultural land +? +? +? +? +? o o o oReduce the amount of nitrogen fertiliser andorganic manure used +? +? +? +? + ? o o oProtect permanent pastures +? + + + ? o o o o

Under 3. locally positiveUnder 3. locally positiveUnder 5. re: peatland soils – uncertainnegative, as planting will release carbon,though trees will store it subsequently.


78


++ Major Positive

+ Minor Positive

o Neutral


- Minor Negative

-- Major Negative

? Uncertain

SEA Objectives AX

IS 2

1. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-T

ir C

ynna

l

2. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-T

ir G

ofal

3. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-H

ighe

r le

vel s

chem

e

4. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-O

rgan

ic F

arm

ing

Sche

me

5. B

ette

r W

oodl

ands

for

Wal

es (

BWW

) Fi

rst

affo

rest

atio

n of

6. B

WW

Fir

staf

fore

stat

ion

of n

on-

agri

cultu

ral l

and

7. B

WW

For

est-

envi

ronm

ent

paym

ents

8. B

WW

Res

tori

ngfo

rest

ry p

oten

tial a

ndin

trod

ucin

g pr

even

tion

9. B

WW

Sup

port

for

non

prod

uctiv

e in

vest

men

ts(fo

rest

ry),

Comments

AIR

To improve air quality (re: pollutants under the EC Air Quality Directives)

Reduce emissions of atmospheric pollutantsfrom each sector o o o +? o o o o oReduce impacts on air quality from eachsector o o o +? o+ o+ o+? o+? oMinimise the demand for travel (particularlyby private car) o o o o o o o o -Reduce acidification o o o o ? ? ? o? oReduce impacts on habitats from all sectors o o o o ? ? ? +? ?

Under 4. ? local transport increase inemissions versus reduced importsUnder 5. depends on tree type andhumus productionUnder 5. pollution absorption

ANIMAL WELFARE

To maintain and enhance animal welfare standards

Improve farm animal welfare and healthstatus o o o + o o o o oImprove marketing of animal productsproduced to higher welfare standards o o o + o o o o oImprove farm animal welfare standards o o o + o o o o oEnsure that improved animal welfarestandards do not result in reducedcompetitiveness from third country imports

o o o o o o o o o

Most agri-environmental schemes havelittle effect on animal welfare, otherthan the organic farming scheme,where animal welfare is integral to thestandard


79


++ Major Positive

+ Minor Positive

o Neutral


- Minor Negative

-- Major Negative

? Uncertain

SEA Objectives AX

IS 2

1. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-T

ir C

ynna

l

2. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-T

ir G

ofal

3. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-H

ighe

r le

vel s

chem

e

4. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-O

rgan

ic F

arm

ing

Sche

me

5. B

ette

r W

oodl

ands

for

Wal

es (

BWW

) Fi

rst

affo

rest

atio

n of

6. B

WW

Fir

staf

fore

stat

ion

of n

on-

agri

cultu

ral l

and

7. B

WW

For

est-

envi

ronm

ent

paym

ents

8. B

WW

Res

tori

ngfo

rest

ry p

oten

tial a

ndin

trod

ucin

g pr

even

tion

9. B

WW

Sup

port

for

non

prod

uctiv

e in

vest

men

ts(fo

rest

ry),

Comments

CLIMATIC FACTORS (INCLUDING ENERGY)

To reduce contributions to climate change

Reduce the concentration of greenhousegases o o o -? + + + +? -?Increase the use of renewable/low carbonenergy consistent with wider environmentaland rural objectives

o o o o o o o o o

Encourage the recovery of energy fromwaste [as part of the waste hierarchy] o o o o o? o? o? o o

To adapt effectively to climate changeRespond to predicted climatic changethrough adaptation +? ? +? +? +? o + + oEnsure access to housing with goodenvironmental standards and ensure highenvironmental standards are met forbuildings

o o o o o o o o o

Reduce flood risk and the effects of drought o? o? + +? ? ? ? +? ?

Under 4. farm animals and convertingexisting stock/creating new and expansion;0? Wood fuel? Under 9. Access andtransport.

In themselves, agri-environmental schemes,including forestry schemes, are unlikely tocontribute significantly to reductions inGHGs. Afforestation may help inabsorption of CO2..

Under 1 re: habitats, 2. promoting existingpriorities through protected sites; 3. helpingto protect those most at risk of climatechange; 7. management for adaptation; 8.protect from exotic pests and diseaseUnder 4. soil compaction reduced andorganic content increased; under 5&6 canimprove periodicity of flow, though maycause drought


80


++ Major Positive

+ Minor Positive

o Neutral


- Minor Negative

-- Major Negative

? Uncertain

SEA Objectives AX

IS 2

1. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-T

ir C

ynna

l

2. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-T

ir G

ofal

3. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-H

ighe

r le

vel s

chem

e

4. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-O

rgan

ic F

arm

ing

Sche

me

5. B

ette

r W

oodl

ands

for

Wal

es (

BWW

) Fi

rst

affo

rest

atio

n of

6. B

WW

Fir

staf

fore

stat

ion

of n

on-

agri

cultu

ral l

and

7. B

WW

For

est-

envi

ronm

ent

paym

ents

8. B

WW

Res

tori

ngfo

rest

ry p

oten

tial a

ndin

trod

ucin

g pr

even

tion

9. B

WW

Sup

port

for

non

prod

uctiv

e in

vest

men

ts(fo

rest

ry),

Comments

POPULATION AND HUMAN HEALTH AND WELL-BEING

To protect and improve the health and wellbeing of the population

Promote healthy living and reduce healthinequalities o o o o o o o o ?Promotion of farmer health and welfare ? ? ? + ? o o o oEnsure greater access to the countrysideand outdoor recreation activities o + + o ? ? ? o ++Maximise the use of woodlands for learningand recreation o ? ? o o o o o +Increase opportunities for non-recreationalwalking and cycling o o o o o o o o oIncrease access to quality, nutritious food. o o o +? o o o o oIncrease access to locally sourced food andincreasing use of local food in school andtourism businesses

o o o + o o o o o

Under 5. reduction in pesticide use?Under 7. access consistent withrecreation (p/42 UK ForestryStandard).


81


++ Major Positive

+ Minor Positive

o Neutral


- Minor Negative

-- Major Negative

? Uncertain

SEA Objectives AX

IS 2

1. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-T

ir C

ynna

l

2. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-T

ir G

ofal

3. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-H

ighe

r le

vel s

chem

e

4. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-O

rgan

ic F

arm

ing

Sche

me

5. B

ette

r W

oodl

ands

for

Wal

es (

BWW

) Fi

rst

affo

rest

atio

n of

6. B

WW

Fir

staf

fore

stat

ion

of n

on-

agri

cultu

ral l

and

7. B

WW

For

est-

envi

ronm

ent

paym

ents

8. B

WW

Res

tori

ngfo

rest

ry p

oten

tial a

ndin

trod

ucin

g pr

even

tion

9. B

WW

Sup

port

for

non

prod

uctiv

e in

vest

men

ts(fo

rest

ry),

Comments

WASTE

To maximise efficient use of resources

Minimise and where possible eliminate thegeneration of waste +? +? +? ? ? o o o -Maximise the use of waste as a resource o o o + o o o o o

To ensure implementation of the waste management hierarchy

Reduce the amount of waste disposedthrough landfill in each sector o o o o ? ? o o -?Increase recycling and composting of waste o o o +? o ? o o o

Uncertain re: first afforestation cfformer agricultural landNegative under non-productiveinvestment re: visitors and litterUse of manure under organic farming


82


++ Major Positive

+ Minor Positive

o Neutral


- Minor Negative

-- Major Negative

? Uncertain

SEA Objectives AX

IS 2

1. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-T

ir C

ynna

l

2. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-T

ir G

ofal

3. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-H

ighe

r le

vel s

chem

e

4. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-O

rgan

ic F

arm

ing

Sche

me

5. B

ette

r W

oodl

ands

for

Wal

es (

BWW

) Fi

rst

affo

rest

atio

n of

6. B

WW

Fir

staf

fore

stat

ion

of n

on-

agri

cultu

ral l

and

7. B

WW

For

est-

envi

ronm

ent

paym

ents

8. B

WW

Res

tori

ngfo

rest

ry p

oten

tial a

ndin

trod

ucin

g pr

even

tion

9. B

WW

Sup

port

for

non

prod

uctiv

e in

vest

men

ts(fo

rest

ry),

Comments

CULTURAL HERITAGE AND LANDSCAPE

To protect, conserve and enhance Wales’ historic environment, landscape and rural heritage

Conserve and enhance the Welsh landscape,including statutory designated areas + + + + + + ++ + oProtect Wales’ geodiversity. Avoid damageto protected earth science sites (includingSSSIs, limestone pavements, peatlands) andRIGS

+? + + +? ? ? ? o? ?

Strengthen and maintain Welsh ruralheritage and identity + + + + o o o o o?Preserve, enhance and promote the historicenvironment, including archaeologicalheritage

+ + + + +? +? +? +? o

Promote the sharing of ecological andheritage data o o o o o o o o o

+? As part of UK Forestry standard

To protect and conserve Wales’ cultural identityStrengthen and maintain the Welsh language +? +? +? ? 0 0 0 0 +

+? By helping to keep farmers on theland+ signage


83


++ Major Positive

+ Minor Positive

o Neutral


- Minor Negative

-- Major Negative

? Uncertain

SEA Objectives AX

IS 2

1. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-T

ir C

ynna

l

2. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-T

ir G

ofal

3. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-H

ighe

r le

vel s

chem

e

4. A

gri-e

nvir

onm

ent

paym

ents

-O

rgan

ic F

arm

ing

Sche

me

5. B

ette

r W

oodl

ands

for

Wal

es (

BWW

) Fi

rst

affo

rest

atio

n of

6. B

WW

Fir

staf

fore

stat

ion

of n

on-

agri

cultu

ral l

and

7. B

WW

For

est-

envi

ronm

ent

paym

ents

8. B

WW

Res

tori

ngfo

rest

ry p

oten

tial a

ndin

trod

ucin

g pr

even

tion

9. B

WW

Sup

port

for

non

prod

uctiv

e in

vest

men

ts(fo

rest

ry),

Comments

LAND USE PLANNING

To promote sustainable land-use planning and development

Minimise land-take and promote re-use ofpreviously developed land and buildings o o o o -- --? ? o o?Reduce adverse impacts on environmental,visual and cultural quality o o o o ? ? + + o-?Increase the proportion of land under agri-environmental and organic management + + + + + + + + +Avoid and reduce visual, noise and lightintrusion o o o o ? ? o o ?Protect rights of way, open space, commonland and registered village greens andmaintain access to the countryside

o + + o o? o? + ? +

-- removes agricultural land; cumulativeimpacts on downstream interests inindividual catchments--? Possible re-use of land? could take land when enlarge


84

AXIS 4 LEADER

As the LEADER programme is based on Local Action Groups and Local Development Strategiessupporting the other three Axes at local level, a matrix-based assessment is not appropriate and inany case the key issues are captured by the other Axes. Instead, two examples have been selectedfrom one of the LEADER + programmes (Menter Môn in Anglesey) to illustrate the potentialrelationships and environmental effects at the local level of schemes likely to be implemented underAxis 4 of the draft RDP. The causal chains below do not purport to be comprehensive in theircoverage of potential effects, rather they are intended to provide an overview of the kind of effectspossible from the sort of schemes that may be funded under the LEADER programme. It should benoted that the current LEADER + programme is funded under the Structural Funds, not the RDP,but the Axis 4 LEADER proposals will follow essentially the same principles as LEADER +. As can beseen LEADER programmes have the potential to put in place mitigation strategies to help minimisepotential adverse environmental impacts of increased economic activity.


Mona Heritage Interpretation (Aglesey)The project is designed to improve the experience of visiting Ynys Môn and to add value to those factors which differentiate it from other rural areas, factors which are currentlyhidden and undervalue. The project will continue work started in phase 1 of this LEADER+ project.

Baseline: Cultural and hdemand within the short age. The island has the h

Improve ameni lue andaccessibility o ations

Improved visitor safety

Improve cultural, natural and

Potential to increase touristsnumbers and length of stay

Habitat disturbancebiodiversity loss

Support projecthospitality and tour

Project

Prepare a seriinterpretation le

linking rele

Locate interpretsuitable

Support projeincreasing the invo

people in pldevelopment of

ty vaf loc

85

istorical interpretation in situ is poor. Visitin es is awkward and the interpretation is in need of improvement. There is increasingbreak market for experiences which the island ubstantially positioned to offer. Most interpretation material is low cost and showing itsighest concentration of archaeological feature r square kilometre in the UK.

built environmentIncreased noisepollution from

Increased wastecreation

Soil, water and airpollution from access

Increase in Soilerosion

Meet demand for tourismproducts and services

roved visitorxperience

s betweenism operators

es of themedaflets aimed atvant sites

ation panels at sites

cts aimed atlvement of local

anning and interpretation

Increase communityawareness of the island's

heritage product

Increase and improvecommunity invol nt

Potential to regular tourismprovision according to local

need/capacity of area

Prevention of tourismassociated degradation

Improve local welfare

g sit is ss pe

veme

Impe


86

Mono Agricultural Innovation

The project was established under phase 1 of LEADER + and will continue to provide support for individual farming families or groups of farmers to test theviability of new or alternative crops, or of substantial changes to agricultural practice. Applicable on an experimental basis for one year, though can be extendedto two years where farmer groups are participating. Trials will be 100% funded.

Baseline: Farming is the most important industry on Ynys Môn and its success or failure will have a significant impact on the future identity of the island. Manypeople leave the industry as family farms are not able to support them; as a result the average age of a farmer is now almost 60. Many farmers are being forcedto seek to diversify income sources. Many farmers would welcome the co-operative funding to try out new ideas and share the results. The island is over relianton grazing and primary meat production. The majority of farmers failed to seize the opportunity to grow genuinely innovative crops in phase one of this project.

Specialist support for farmers,including husbandry and agronomy

support

Increased farmer knowledgeand/or skill base

Growth of new crops

Commission farmers to grow newand innovative crops

Potential to develop bio-fuel crops

Local air quality impacts

Transport to market Sale of new crop

Advice on accessing markets

Project

Support for monitoring andrecording success/failure of new

Increased take-up of funding/growth of products

Awareness raising campaign Specialist open days Feedback on project


87

8.3. Key impacts of the draft RDP and proposed mitigation measures

As noted in Chapter 6, there is potential for conflict from certain RDP objectives with SEA headlineobjectives, and this is reflected also in the assessment of certain schemes against the SEA sub-objectives.

However, many aspects of the RDP are generally very positive, which is not particularly surprisinggiven the environmental focus of the RDP and the overall objectives, particularly of the agri-environment schemes. Compared to the alternatives studied in Chapter 7, the draft RDP overallappears to be more positive towards more aspects of the environment. However, from the matricesthere are some key areas where there is considerable uncertainty, and where there is potential fornegative effects. The assessment raises concerns over the cumulative effects from relatively smallscale negative impacts arising from multiple schemes across a range of the SEA objectives. Here,further specification of the schemes will be necessary to ensure that suitable environmentalconditions are in place to avoid and minimise the potential for damaging effects. The causal chainsprovide a useful overview of the key effects of each scheme and therefore help in identifying possiblemitigation measures and the opportunities for positive enhancement.

8.3.1. Key areas where adverse cumulative effects are possible

Informed by the causal chain analysis (Appendix 4) and using the significance criteria (Table 5.2), theThe assessment matrices (Table 8.1 and Table 8.2) highlight potential SEA objectives wherecumulative effects are possible resulting from multiple schemes:

• Biodiversity: potential for possible negative effects at local level from Axis 1 and Axis 3schemes in particular, as a result of development of infrastructure and greater economic activityin agriculture and forestry.

• Water: potential for cumulative effects on discharges, water quality and quantity from forestryand tourism activity in particular.

• Soil: tourism activities funded under Axis 3 have the potential for locally small scale cumulativeeffects on soil erosion and soil processes.

• Air quality: significant potential for cumulative effects to arise from locally small scale emissionsto air from increased transport resulting from increased economic activity in the agricultural andforestry sectors, and in tourism in particular.

• Climate change: while there are potential benefits from, for example, forestry, there is theclear potential for small scale contributions to carbon dioxide emissions from increasedeconomic activity, transport and tourism.

• Land use planning: this is a key area where multiple schemes may have negative or possiblenegative effects across many schemes in Axis 1 and Axis 3, but also Axis 2 resulting particularly inland take and impacts on wider environmental, visual and cultural amenity.

These effects are considered further with regard to mitigation and monitoring below.


88

8.3.2. Proposed mitigation measures

Mitigation measures are likely to be needed in relation to the following schemes taking into account,from the assessment, the potential for uncertainty, negative effects and/or for potential cumulativeeffects discussed above:

Axis 1

• Training and information provision. The extent of implementation of the advice is critical toits outcome. While the RDP requires monitoring against a range of output and result indicatorsthe way in which participants respond to such advice may be rather more subtle than can bepicked up by the usual indicators. It is not, for example, just whether farmers enter into foodquality schemes. The nature of the food quality scheme, and the way individual farmersimplement the scheme, may make a significant difference to the overall environmental effectsthey have. Mid-term evaluations provide an opportunity to gain a better understanding of thevalue of training and information provision through interviews.

• Modernisation of agricultural holdings. The environmental benefits likely to accrue frommodernisation will depend to a significant extent on how support is targeted. ‘Clean-up’ ofpoorly managed farm holdings is likely to result in the greatest environmental outcome possible,but farmers with such holdings may be least likely to apply for support. Mechanisms shouldtherefore be explored to target these hard to reach farmers, including the nature of the trainingand information provisions available under this Axis.

• The assessment identified considerable uncertainty in relation to food quality schemes. Qualitystandards in themselves may be relatively meaningless in environmental terms. For example,ISO9000 has no environmental requirements, and accreditation to it is essentially little more thanagreeing to meet your own objectives, however lax they may be. Food quality schemestherefore would benefit by focusing on those schemes which have significant environmentalcomponents. ISO9000 would seem to be a very modest goal. Those food schemes relating tolocality (i.e. Protected Designation of Origin and Protected Geographical Indication - PDO/PGI)may have potential to bring environmental benefits (e.g. reduced transport effects) if taken upand profiled locally, for example, through local markets and tourism initiatives under Axis 3 and4.

Axis 2

• Afforestation has considerable potential to bring about positive environmental gains, particularlywith respect to biodiversity and in its contribution providing a carbon sink, if used appropriately.However, new forest planting can remove agricultural land from production, and also may resultin land take of non-agricultural land which might have other value, including for biodiversity.New woodland planting also has the potential to have negative effects on water quality andquantity, depending on the tree species and where they are planted. Targeting of the BetterWoodlands for Wales schemes, and the full use of EIA at the project level, will be necessary tohelp ensure that wider biodiversity and environmental objectives are met, and to maximise


89

opportunities for enhancement. There is also the potential for visual/landscape effects and theseissues should be either incorporated into EIA and/or within forest management plans asappropriate. Consultation and engagement with stakeholders should also form an integral part ofsuch assessments.

Axis 3

• Schemes promoting added economic value and the development of new products, by theirvery nature, encourage greater levels of economic development and activity. This means thatgreat care is needed in implementation at scheme level, to minimise potential negative impactsand maximise the potential positive aspects. The support for infrastructure and building, evenwhere undertaken sensitively, is still economic development and therefore has the potential tohave significant effects, particularly cumulatively.

• The encouragement of tourism activities has the potential to bring increased traffic (andassociated emissions), increased access (trampling, disturbance, litter, noise), buildings, visitorcentres and other infrastructure (land-take and visual impacts on the environment, waste,emissions to water). Most small scale and farm-based tourism development is unlikely to besubject to environmental impact assessment (EIA), though much will be subject to planningconsent. However, the potential for these impacts needs to be considered in the detailed RDPscheme design, so that wider environmental impacts are minimised from the beginning. Thepromotion of public transport and local markets could help to reduce food miles and thereforehelp to reduce transport emissions, for example. Management plans for protected areas andsensitive sites will need to play an important role in facilitating increased access to such sites in asustainable way.

• Village renewal offers potential for positive benefits to the wider environment, particularlywhere support is given to public transport provision. This can be linked to the developments oftourism activity above, where greater emphasis could be placed on local bus and rail basedtourism, rather than car used. LEADER programmes can have an important role in facilitatingenvironmentally acceptable tourism initiatives based around local activity, heritage or produce(e.g. the Monmouthshire Food Trail).

Axis 4

As mentioned above LEADER programmes can help facilitate environmentally beneficial outcomesfrom support across the other Axes, by encouraging community involvement at the local level insupporting more environmentally sustainable economic activity and environmental projects. Thecausal chains for Axis 4 above illustrate the potential complexity of the interactions and theopportunities for mitigating potential adverse effects through local activity, including small scaleeffects that may be cumulative across the Axes. Critical to this will be to ensure that whereverpossible the potential for small impacts upon biodiversity, water quality and quantity, soil, air quality,climate change and land use planning (the cumulative effects identified above) are recognised andefforts made to take these into account in LEADER local development strategies and local action


90

groups. The use of causal chain analysis in developing these local strategies is a simple methodologythat may help LAGs better understand the potential implications of individual projects they arepromoting.


91

9. Monitoring proposals

9.1. Monitoring in relation to the assessment

The EC Rural Development Regulations require a range of output and result indicators to bemonitored, but these are largely performance-based indicators (e.g. numbers of holdings receivingsupport within a particular scheme, areas under particularly types of land management). These willbe reported on during mid-term evaluations.

Monitoring the significant environmental effects of implementing the RDP is an important andongoing element of the SEA process. Given the inherent long-term nature of delivering the schemes,monitoring the implementation of the RDP from an environmental perspective will ensure that actualprogress against the environment objectives, which formed the core of this assessment, can bemeasured. Where negative effects are identified, appropriate remedial actions can be identified andimplemented.

This environmental monitoring process is likely to take as its starting point the objectives, andsupporting indicators, developed for the SEA assessment and the key negative environmental effectspredicted. However, the monitoring required is likely to draw significantly on existing monitoringprogrammes, for example undertaken by the Welsh Assembly and other organisations (such asCCW and Environmental Agency Wales), rather than require additional monitoring. The majority ofthe indicators used will be from readily available data sources. It is envisaged that the monitoring ismost likely to be on an annual basis, although updates of some indicators will not be available thatfrequently. The difficulty with such monitoring and deciding on any remedial actions is determiningthe relative contribution of the RDP to changes in indicators, as opposed to the wide range of otheractivities that can also effect such measures.

It will be important that the SEA monitoring of significant effects is integrated, as far as possible, intothe monitoring of the implementation of the RDP and the environmental monitoring is incorporatedinto the reporting mechanisms required on the RPD. At this stage those monitoring arrangementshave not been fully developed and it will be important to define the monitoring process andtimeframe in more detail and also establish clear responsibilities for monitoring. This will be includedin the SEA post adoption statement.


92

Table 9.1: Proposed monitoring of key significant and cumulative negative effectsidentified in the SEA



SEA Theme


Biodiversity

Axis 3, Schemes 1, 2, & 4

• Cumulative effects: potential for possiblenegative effects at local level from Axis 1 and3 schemes in particular, as a result ofdevelopment of infrastructure and greatereconomic activity in agriculture and forestry.

• Area and condition of protected areas

• Status of BAP species/habitats

• Trends in natural and a semi-natural habitats;area and condition

• Biodiversity index: species indicators –widespread breeding birds

Water

Axis 1, Schemes 4, 5, & 6Axis 2, Schemes 5 & 9Axis 3, Schemes 4

• Cumulative effects: potential for cumulativeeffects on discharges, water quality andquantity from forestry and tourism activity inparticular.

• Quality of rivers and freshwater bodies

• % of water bodies likely to comply withWater Framework Directive environmentalobjectives

• Distribution of nitrate concentrations

Soil

Axis 3, Scheme 2

• Cumulative effects: tourism activities fundedunder Axis 3 have the potential for locallysmall scale cumulative effects on soil erosionand soil processes.



Air quality

Axis 1, Scheme 9Axis 2, Scheme 9Axis 3, Scheme 2 (specifically major significanteffect on minimising demand to travel)

• Cumulative effects: significant potential forcumulative effects to arise from locally smallscale emissions to air from increasedtransport resulting from increased economicactivity in the agricultural and forestrysectors, and in tourism in particular.

• Number of days of air pollution (rural areas)




• Amount and type of fuel used in transport

Climatechange

Axis 1, Schemes 4, 5 & 9Axis 3, Scheme 2

• Cumulative effects: while there arepotential benefits from e.g. forestry, there isthe clear potential for small scalecontributions to carbon dioxide emissionsfrom increased economic activity, transportand tourism

• Total greenhouse gas emissions

• Carbon equivalent emissions by sector





93



SEA Theme


Land useplanning

Axis 1, Schemes 4, 5 & 7Axis 2, Schemes 5 & 6Axis 3, Schemes 1,2, 3 & 4

• Cumulative effects: this is a key area wheremultiple schemes may have negative orpossible negative effects across manyschemes, Axis 1 and 3 but also Axis 2resulting particularly in land take and impactson wider environmental, visual and culturalamenity.

• Distribution of land use by type

• Area under agri-environment schemes

• Landscape character maps (available for Englandonly)

• Tranquil area maps (available for England only)

Other significant negative effects

Waste

Axis 2, Scheme 9Axis 3, Schemes 2 & 3

• Rates of waste arising

• % waste arising by sector going to recycling,composting, energy recovery, landfill

Culturalheritage andlandscape

Axis 3, Scheme 3 • Extent and condition of designated areas,buildings and archaeological sites

• Protection afforded to the historicenvironment by sympathetic farmmanagement regimes (e.g. Tir Gofal, TirCynnal: from WENDI database)

9.2. Relationships with other assessments

Other forms of environmental assessment exist at lower levels of decision making where a numberof the key issues identified can be picked up and assessed in more detail. Most notable is theapplication of environmental impact assessment (EIA) for Forestry (under the Environmental ImpactAssessment (Forestry) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 (SI 1999/2228), but also EIA withrespect to land drainage and unimproved land. Other areas identified as having potential for adverseimpacts, such as tourism activities, the building of visitor centres and village renewal schemes, even ifunlikely to be subject to EIA by virtue of their scale and nature (Town and Country Planning (EIA)(England and Wales) Regulations, 1999), will nevertheless be subject to normal planning consentprocesses and therefore certain effects are likely to be picked up as part of the approval process andwhere necessary planning conditions imposed.

SEAs and/or sustainability appraisal (SA) will be required for other plans and programmes, forexample, land use plans (Regional Spatial Strategies (adjacent in England), Wales Spatial Strategy,unitary development plans and new local development plans, etc.), river basin managementplans/programmes of measures under the WFD (once implemented in 2010), Shoreline ManagementPlans, Catchment Flood Management Plans, etc.. The assessments of these plans are likely to be bestplaced to pick up cumulative effects of particular schemes at the local/regional level that would notbe picked up by individual planning applications and/or EIAs.


94

There is an issue of the lack of formal assessments for each individual scheme (i.e. at the programmelevel). However, the framework/SEA objectives developed here could be used at the individualscheme level on a voluntary basis, informed by more local information/data.

Appropriate Assessment (AA) is required under the Habitats Directive (Article 6), for certain typesof plans and projects affecting protected areas under the Birds and Habitats Directive - SpecialProtection Areas (SPAs) and Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) respectively. The strategicnature of the draft RDP would make it difficult (if not impossible) to determine how a particularprogramme might impact on a particular designated area at the local level, in terms of itsconservation status. There is, however, likely to be scope for interaction of the Habitats DirectiveAA requirement with individual programmes within the RDP, for example, specific elements of theagri-environment schemes, Better Woodlands for Wales, etc.. The Assembly will need to considerthe extent to which it needs to undertake AAs in relation to these individual schemes, or at theindividual ‘project’ level.

ex-ante evaluation of the wales 2007-13 rural … sea.pdf · 1.2. sea steps prior to this report...

Documents