Treat peat depth, peat condition and peatland habitat as related but different evidence.

Depth probing shows peat thickness at sampled points. Habitat surveys describe vegetation and ecological condition. Hydrological and geotechnical work addresses water movement and stability. One dataset should not be assumed to answer all three questions.

Check probe density around actual infrastructure.

Compare peat-depth figures with turbine bases, tracks, crane hardstandings, borrow pits, substations, compounds and drainage. Sparse data in the places where excavation is proposed can create uncertainty even if the wider site contains many probes.

Check how peat volumes are calculated.

Review assumptions for excavation, reuse, temporary storage, restoration and surplus. Ask whether the Peat Management Plan reconciles excavated volumes with credible reuse destinations.

Check avoidance before reuse.

For carbon-rich soils and peatland, avoiding high-quality or deep peat through design can be materially different from excavating it and proposing later reuse. Compare layout evolution with the peat evidence.

Read peat-slide risk spatially.

Identify areas of instability, slope, drainage and infrastructure. Check whether mitigation relies on detailed design after consent and whether the assessment explains how identified risks are avoided or controlled.

Cross-check peat with hydrology, ecology and carbon assessment.

Peat excavation can affect habitat, water and carbon calculations. Inconsistent assumptions between chapters can be more important than a disagreement within the peat chapter alone.

Sources and further information

Scottish Government - Information to be included in an EIA Report

NatureScot - Pre-application guidance for onshore wind farms

Last checked: 26 September 2026