RSPB seeks stronger bird safeguards for Neshion wind farm

Eight wind turbines up to 200m tall, battery storage and associated infrastructure are proposed for Neshion Energy Park near Mossbank, according to Shetland Islands Council’s record for a Section 36 consultation under the Electricity Act.

The council record was received on 5 August 2026 and lists its status as “Unknown”. No decision appears in the current dossier, and the material reviewed here does not establish whether Scottish Ministers have issued a consent decision.

RSPB Scotland’s consultation response says the northern edge of the site overlaps Yell Sound Special Area of Conservation and Yell Sound Site of Special Scientific Interest, with internationally important marine and coastal habitats immediately adjacent. It names red-throated diver, whimbrel, curlew and great skua among the birds using the wider area.

The charity says the applicant’s environmental assessment reports collision-risk uncertainty values exceeding 200–400% for several species, including whimbrel, great skua, merlin, golden plover and arctic skua. The response attributes much of the uncertainty to natural ecological variation, but says the estimates are imprecise and higher bird mortality cannot be ruled out. It recommends post-construction monitoring with thresholds that would trigger additional mitigation.

The connection to the electricity network is also unresolved in the material RSPB reviewed. The response says both private-wire and grid connection routes are unknown and would be consented separately. It argues they should be considered alongside the wind farm because they could add habitat loss, water crossings and risks to birds.

RSPB welcomes the peatland-restoration opportunities but says the outline measures are not detailed or secured enough. Citing the applicant’s outline plan, its response refers to about 247.9 hectares of restoration and calls for a detailed habitat plan with measurable objectives, monitoring and long-term funding.

These are a consultee’s comments on a proposal, not a consent decision. RSPB says the authority should be satisfied about effects on protected sites and recommends that any consent secure further safeguards.