Solent European Marine Sites Annual Monitoring Report 2015 Draft V3 SEMS Management Scheme 2015
Solent European Marine Sites
Annual Monitoring Report 2015
Final September 2016
Prepared by the Solent Forum on behalf of
the SEMS Management Scheme
Contents
Solent European Marine Sites Annual Monitoring Report 2015 3
BACKGROUND 3
SITE CONDITION 4
RISK CATEGORIES 4
ACTIVITIES AND ACTIONS FOR DELIVERY PLAN 5
High Risk Activities that have increased or remained elevated 6
Medium Risk Activities that have increased or remained elevated 10
Low Risk Activities that have increased or remained elevated 12
ACTIVITIES RESULTING FROM PLANS AND PROJECTS 15
MONITORING 17
APPENDIX 1 Responses to SEMS Annual Monitoring Report 2015 19
APPENDIX 2 RELEVANT AUTHORITIES AND ABBREVIATIONS 28
CONTACT 28
Solent European Marine Sites Annual Monitoring Report 2015
BACKGROUND
The Solent European Marine Sites (SEMS) Management Scheme was established under what is now Regulation 36 of the Habitats Regulations[1]. The SEMS Management Group (MG) of Relevant Authorities (RAs) runs the Management Scheme and the Solent Forum provides the secretariat. RAs are responsible for monitoring activities across the site annually, and for addressing any issues that are shown to be damaging the site. Further details on the SEMS Management Scheme can be found on the SEMS website at www.solentems.org.uk/.
INTRODUCTION
The SEMS Management Scheme for 2015
comprises three documents which can be found at www.solentems.org.uk/publications:
1 SEMS Monitoring Response Report 2015
2 SEMS Annual Monitoring Report 2015 (this report)
3 SEMS Delivery Plan 2015
The RAs each complete an online questionnaire every Spring. This survey forms the basis of the annual monitoring, and gathers details of all activities within the SEMS and of any effect that these activities are having on the condition of the SEMS. Activities are classified according to Defra’s EMS Risk Review as high, medium or low risk. 24 out of the 32 RAs who were invited to answer the questionnaire in 2015 responded. Further telephone interviews were conducted with RAs who had indicated activities that may have a detrimental effect on the SEMS, and with those who noted a possible residual impact. Full details of the on-line questionnaire results are given in the SEMS Monitoring Response Report 2015, which is available at www.solentems.org.uk/publications/.
The SEMS Annual Monitoring Report (this report) summarises and assesses the SEMS monitoring responses for 2015 (from both the on-line questionnaires and any subsequent follow-up interviews and comments) and suggests actions that can be used as the basis for the SEMS 2015 Delivery Plan. It will help the MG determine what actions to take forward in the Delivery Plan, and forms a link between the other two documents. Acronyms used for the RAs are given at the end of this report.
SITE CONDITION
The condition of component SSSIs of the SEMS is assessed every six years on a rolling programme. The most recent site condition can be found on Natural England’s Nature on the Map website. Annual monitoring of activities by the MG aims to identify threats to site condition or, at worst, early signs of any deterioration, so that timely management action can be taken to avoid damage or further evidence can be collected. In this report, therefore, site condition is only referenced where further action is needed.
RISK CATEGORIES
Risk is often defined as the combination of the probability of an event and its consequences. Risk can be either positive or negative.
Where there is a sensitive receptor, the likelihood and severity (intensity level, duration etc) of each impact is analysed and evaluated. Thus risk is not only associated with the level of activity, but also with its likelihood and the severity of its impact. Paramotors are an example of where a low level of activity can nevertheless pose a serious risk at certain times and places.
Standard risk assessment aims to identify those risks with the greatest impact and the greatest probability of occurring – these are normally addressed first, and risks with lower probability of occurrence and lower impact or threat are handled in descending order.
In this report two activities have been highlighted for discussion to assess whether they should be recommended to Defra as requiring a change in their Risk Category:
· Fishing (commercial including shellfisheries) – from high to medium risk ê
· Littering – from low to medium risk é
Blue font has been used in the relevant sections to highlight where risk level is an issue.
ACTIVITIES AND ACTIONS FOR DELIVERY PLAN
Activities taking place across the SEMS were recorded in the 2015 SEMS Monitoring Response Report which is available at http://www.solentems.org.uk/publications/. Reports of elevated or increased activity, with residual impact believed to be affecting the SEMS, were followed by one to one phone calls between the SEMS secretariat and RAs.
The findings for each activity, under the risk category (high, medium or low), are summarised in this report. For each activity of concern, the following are identified:
o issue/s
o evidence
o management and monitoring
o action to be taken forward to the Delivery Plan.
The activities where it was indicated that levels have increased or remained elevated during 2015 are included in this report. They are:
o Access/Land Recreation
o Water Sports (e.g. hovercraft, kayaking and kite surfing)
o Agricultural Run-off
o Recreational Boating
o Littering
o Navigation
Fishing (Commercial including Shellfisheries) is also included in this report. The level of activity has decreased, but it is considered that fishing has not returned to a level that is unlikely to cause damage to the SEMS.
For four of the activities shown above in bold red font, there was considered to be a residual impact that may cause the condition of the SEMS to change. This red font is used in the relevant sections throughout this report.
The changes for each of these activities are summarised and the need for actions to reduce the impact on the SEMS is highlighted for each activity.
Access / Land Recreation
Access / Land Recreation is a critical issue in SEMS. The Solent Recreation Mitigation Partnership (SRMP[2]) is now in place; however this scheme only addresses the recreational disturbance effect from new housing development. The Footprint Ecology work for the Solent Disturbance and Mitigation Project (SDMP) showed that there was already an impact from existing levels of recreational disturbance, which still needs to be addressed. The SDMP report[3] includes details on which parts of the Solent EMS already exceeded the threshold number of visits for impact on the SPAs in 2012.
Hundreds of new houses were built in Chichester District in 2014 and it can be assumed that these will equate to an increase in recreational usage of Chichester Harbour. Management takes place and interpretation boards around the harbour are being renewed. Chichester Harbour Conservancy (CHC) liaise with the SRMP to inform them of key disturbance areas.
The Plans and Project section of this Report (pages 13-14) notes several thousand new dwellings proposed or built near the Solent, as well as various other plans or projects which are likely to affect access or land recreation. In 2014 the SEMS MG noted that many SRMP partners are planners and may not be aware of SEMS.
Both of the RAs who indicated that the level of access / land recreation remains elevated (CHC and NE) believe there is a residual impact on the SEMS resulting from this; one of these (NE) believes the elevated levels of ‘Access/Land Recreation’ activities may cause the condition of the SEMS to change.
Further actions already underway or being considered can be found in the Solent SIP[4] which also identifies Access / Land Recreation as a critical issue. Natural England's IPENS programme has gathered information from around the English coast in a report[5] entitled ‘Public access and disturbance theme plan’.
Action: SEMS / NEG to keep track of SRMP actions
Action: Decide what further action is needed in addition to SRMP implementation and monitoring, to maintain the condition of SEMS at pre-2012 level
Water sports (eg hovercraft, kayaking and kite surfing)
There were 3 reported increases in water sports in 2015 indicating a general and potential impact of this activity, whist 8 authorities recorded ‘no change’.
Natural England (NE) reported a general rise in water sports across SEMS due to increasing accessibility and reduced costs of equipment. Yarmouth Harbour Commissioners also had a general feeling that use of personal watercraft (particularly jet skis) has increased in their area over the last year (in summer) with many coming in for fuel, and that kayakers have been increasing in the estuary; however they were not aware of any problems.
Chichester Harbour Conservancy (CHC) figures showed an increase by kayaks of 31% between 2013 and 2014. From 2015 CHC will record the number of paddleboards that use Chichester Harbour. The Conservancy is producing a leaflet to inform all water users how they can reduce their impact and disturbance of birds using the harbour. ‘No landing’ signage on the most important bird roosts will be renewed and visits to local paddleboarding and kayaking centres in Chichester Harbour will increase awareness and understanding of these measures. Navigational bulletins are also used to target watercraft users and to keep them updated.
Flyboarding, which involves a "jet pack" powered by a personal water craft, was observed in Langstone Harbour for the first time during 2014. Although currently an irregular and infrequent activity, flyboarding could become a disturbing presence in the harbour if it gained popularity; Langstone Harbour Board has no regulatory mechanism for control of flyboarding.
The Hovercraft Club of Great Britain remain discontent with the decision by the Department for Transport that recreational hovercraft continue to require permission from the Harbourmaster to operate within Langstone Harbour.
NE believe there is a residual impact on SEMS that may cause the condition of SEMS to change; their concern is that unmanaged water sports activities in sensitive areas impact on breeding and non-breeding bird features of the SEMS.
Action: NEG to carry out the further action identified in 2014 in light of student literature reviews and latest evidence, including convening a Recreation Sub-Group
Fishing (commercial including shellfisheries)
There have been recent changes to the management of commercial fisheries, which are now treated in a similar way to plans or projects. The risk matrix approach now used to assess existing and new fisheries activity will reduce, and should eventually eliminate, damage to SEMS.
The Southern Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority (SoIFCA) reported a decrease in fishing following the introduction of byelaws, a temporary restriction and increased enforcement in the Solent area. A further shellfish byelaw is being developed by SoIFCA. Sussex IFCA extended their oyster dredging emergency byelaw in Chichester Harbour and consulted on an Oyster Permit byelaw in early summer 2015.
The public continue to report capture of undersized or illegal fish and shellfish in Langstone Harbour.
Since April 2015, Prinstead in Chichester Harbour has been designated Class C for C Edule (common cockle) and Tapes spp (clam). There is a potential risk that hand collection activity for these species may increase.
Despite the measures that have been taken, and the decrease in fishing activity, SoIFCA consider that fishing has not returned to a level that is unlikely to cause damage to the SEMS.
SoIFCA believe that the classification for this activity should be decreased from high to medium risk.
Action: No action due to Defra approach to commercial fisheries which are now treated as a ‘plan or project’
Bait digging
Normally this report only highlights activities where an increase is reported, or where the activity level remains elevated. However in the case of bait digging in 2015, a decline or no change was recorded. Ten authorities provided responses for bait digging. Of these 8 reported no change, one unknown and one a decrease. The decrease was noted by Southampton City Council (SCC) who received anecdotal evidence from local bait diggers that the number of ragworms had dropped sharply at Weston shore and that very little bait digging was occurring.
It is not clear at present whether this is part of a natural population cycle or a result of other factors. The apparent decline in lugworm levels was reported to Portsmouth University; Gordon Watson believes the ‘crash’ could be a normal population fluctuation.
The decline has been noted here as lugworm populations are suffering a reduction from unknown cause/s; this could affect the condition of the SEMS.
It will be important to link activities such as bait digging to the SEMS condition assessment. At present Natural England are revising the methodology for condition assessment.
Action: More information is needed on how widespread the decline in lugworms is
Action: Track the trend of levels of invertebrates in SEMS
Action: Discuss further with Gordon Watson the extent and cause of decline in lugworms
Agricultural run-off
No specific change is reported, however Natural England (NE) note that levels of Dissolved Inorganic Nitrogen (DIN) and opportunistic macroalgae remain high in the estuarine water bodies of the Solent and many are not meeting Water Framework Directive (WFD) requirements for Good Ecological Status/Potential; failure to meet these standards will also result in a failure to meet Favourable Conservation Status for the European sites. The following water bodies / estuaries are particularly affected: Portsmouth Harbour, Langstone Harbour, Chichester Harbour, Hamble Estuary, Newtown Harbour, Eastern Yar, Western Yar, Wootton Creek.
The Environment Agency (EA) have completed modelling of nutrient inputs to Solent Harbours to identify the main sources of nutrients, including agricultural run-off. This has confirmed that agricultural diffuse pollution is a major source of nutrient enrichment in coastal waters of the Solent. This information can help identify where to target land management issues. The EA have helped Natural England scope their project to assess the uptake and success of certain agricultural measures in reducing diffuse nitrogen pollution in the Solent area.