Solent European Marine Sites Annual Monitoring Report 2013

Solent European Marine Sites Annual Monitoring Report 2013

Solent European Marine Sites

Annual Monitoring Report 2013

Prepared by the Solent Forum on behalf of

the SEMS Management Scheme

October 2013

Final

CONTENTS

BACKGROUND / 3
RELEVANT AUTHORITIES / 4
INTRODUCTION / 5
SITE CONDITION / 5
RISK CATEGORIES / 5
ACTIVITIES AND ACTIONS FOR DELIVERY PLAN / 6
High Risk Activities / 7
Medium Risk Activities / 10
Low Risk Activities / 13
PLANS AND PROJECTS / 15
MONITORING / 15
OTHER ISSUES AND GENERAL INFORMATION ON ACTIVITIES / 16
CONTACT / 17

BACKGROUND

The Solent European Marine Sites (SEMS) have a Management Scheme with an annual responsibility to monitor activities across the site and address any issues that are shown to be damaging the site. The SEMS Relevant Authorities (RAs) Management Group (MG) runs the Management Scheme. The Solent Forum provides the secretariat for the Management Scheme. The Management Scheme has been running since 1999. Further details on the SEMS Management Scheme can be found on the SEMS website at

The RAs were each asked to complete a streamlined online questionnaire for the period 2012-13. This survey, which forms the basis of the annual monitoring, was designed to gather details on all activities within the SEMS and on any effect that these activities are having on the condition of the SEMS. Activities are classified according Defra’s EMS Risk Review as high, medium or low risk. Further telephone interviews were conducted with RAs that had indicated activities that may have a detrimental effect on the SEMS, or where a possible residual impact was noted.

Full details of the on-line questionnaire results are given in the SEMS Annual Monitoring Response Report 2013, which was circulated to the MG in August 2013 and will be available at when it has been updated to incorporate subsequent comments.

RELEVANT AUTHORITIES AND ABBREVIATIONS

Authority / Code / Jurisdiction
Associated British Ports / ABP / Navigable parts of Rivers Test & Itchen, Southampton Water, Central Solent
BeaulieuRiver Management / BRM / BeaulieuRiver
BembridgeHarbour Authority / BHA / BembridgeHarbour
Chichester District Council / CDC / Chichester District
ChichesterHarbour Conservancy / CHC / Chichester Harbour AONB
CowesHarbour Commissioners / CHCo / CowesHarbour
Eastleigh Borough Council / EBC / Eastleigh Borough
Environment Agency / EA / England
Fareham Borough Council / FBC / Fareham Borough
Gosport Borough Council / GBC / Gosport Borough
Hampshire County Council / HCC / Hampshire
Havant Borough Council / HBC
Isle of Wight Council / IoWC / Isle of Wight
LangstoneHarbour Board / LHB / LangstoneHarbour up to MHW
LymingtonHarbour Commissioners / LHC / LymingtonHarbour as defined in the Lymington 1951 Pier & Harbour Order
Natural England / NE / England - territorial waters out to 12nm
New Forest District Council / NFDC / Whole of New Forest District Council area. CoastlineElingWharf to Barton-on-Sea including KeyhavenRiver
New ForestNational Park Authority / NFNPA / New ForestNational Park
Portsmouth City Council / PCC / Portsmouth city boundary (includes most of PortsmouthHarbour and approximately half of LangstoneHarbour)
PortsmouthInternationalPort / PIP
QHM Portsmouth / QHMP / DockyardPort of Portsmouth
RiverHambleHarbour Authority (Hampshire County Council) / RHHA / Hamble Estuary up to mean high water mark - from border with Southampton Water up to Botley Mill & Curdridge
Southern Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority / SoIFCA / Dorset, Hampshire and Isle of Wight coast, out to 6 nautical miles from baselines
Sussex Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority / SuIFCA / East Sussex and West Sussex County Council and Brighton and Hove City Council and seaward to 6nm. from territorial baselines
Southampton City Council / SCC / City of Southampton
Southern Water Services Ltd. / SWS / Kent, Sussex, Hampshire & Isle of Wight
TestValley Borough Council / TVBC / TestValley Borough
Trinity House Lighthouse Service / THLS / Trinity House is the General Lighthouse Authority for England, Wales, Channel Islands & Gibraltar
WestSussexCounty Council / WSCC / West Sussex
Wightlink / WL / LymingtonHarbourHarbour Pier Berth
Winchester City Council / WCC / Winchester District
YarmouthHarbour Commissioners / YHC / Western Yar Estuary and YarmouthHarbour
Total / 32

INTRODUCTION

This report summarises and assesses the SEMS monitoring responses (from both the on-line questionnaires and any subsequent follow-upinterviews and comments) for 2013 and suggests actions that have been used as the basis for the accompanying SEMS 2013Delivery Plan. It will help the MG determine what actions to take forward in the delivery plan, and forms a link between the other two reports. The SEMS Management Scheme for 2013 thus comprises three documents:

1This Summary Report

2The SEMS Annual Monitoring Response Report 2013

3The SEMS Delivery Plan 2013

SITE CONDITION

The condition of component SSSIs of the SEMS is assessed every six years on a rolling programme. The most recent condition can be found on Natural England’s Nature on theMap 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 isoften 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 three activities have been highlighted for discussion to assess whether they should be recommended to Defra as requiring a change in their Risk Category (as defined by Defra):

• Airborne Sports– from medium to high risk- p11
• Recreational Boating again – from medium to high risk – p12
• Grazing - from low to mediumrisk – p13

ACTIVITIES AND ACTIONS FOR DELIVERY PLAN

Activitiestaking place across the SEMS were recorded in the 2013Annual Monitoring Response Report which will be available soon at 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 the relevant authorities (RAs).

The findings are summarised below and any activity of concern is presented under the risk category (high, medium or low) to which Defra had originally classified them. For each activity of concern, asequence of questions is asked to show:

• issue/s
• evidence
• management and monitoring
• actionto be taken forward to the Delivery Plan.

In summary, in 2013 the activities that are believed to have a residual impact and that may cause the condition of the SEMS to change are:

• Access/Land Recreation
• Fishing
• Bait Digging
• Water Sports (eg hovercraft, kayaking and kite surfing)
• Agricultural Runoff
• Airborne Sports
• Oil Spill and Clean Up
• Recreational Boating
• Angling
• Littering
• Boat Repair and Maintenance
• Education / Scientific studies
• Grazing
• Moorings (management)
• Navigation (maintenance of infrastructure)
• Slipway cleaning and maintenance

The responses to each of these activities are summarised, and actions are recommended in this report.
High risk activities that have increased or remain elevated in 2013

Access / Land Recreation

Demand for access to the coast remains high and focused on areas where there is public access to the foreshore. Levels of this activityremain elevatedon the Isle of Wight (IoWC), in Portsmouth (PCC) and inChichesterHarbour(CDC and CHC), particularly in the summer but also throughout the year.

All five of the above RAs believe there is a residual impact on the SEMS from this activity, and three (NE, CHC, CDC) believe it may cause the condition of the SEMS to change. Results of the Solent Disturbance and Mitigation Project (SDMP) Phase II Report indicate that there are current impacts from disturbance, at least for Southampton Water, atexisting levels of activity. This issue is being addressed through management in some areas, and by the SDMP Phase IV,however some RAs consider that mitigation for future developments is unlikely to address all pre-existing impacts. Nevertheless several RAs agree that we should await implementation and monitoring of the SDMP before taking further action, except where there are known issues at specific locations which should be addressed by the appropriate Relevant Authority.

Action: No further action identified. Await outcome of SDMP implementation and monitoring

Fishing (commercial including shellfisheries)

The collapse of the wider Solent oyster fishery, and the partial recovery of the Chichester fishery, has resulted in displacement into ChichesterHarbour. Sussex and Southern IFCA note the commencement of the classification (as edible) of clam shellfish beds in Chichester Harbour, which will drive an increase in hand gathering of this species (noting that an IFCA byelaw restricts dredging for this species in this Harbour, but does not preclude collection by hand). This classification may now have been suspended. Increased fishing effort, albeit short lived, was observed by SuIFCA in Chichester in 2012, and CHC have concerns about displacement.

An increase in fishing activity has been noted in BembridgeHarbour.

NE and EA are concernedaboutcertain modes of commercial fishing on sensitive habitats (seagrass and reef habitats).LHB note that the number of fishing vessels observed in LangstoneHarbour remained constant in 2012 although it is impossible to estimate fishing effort. LHB also note that fishing vessels continue to tow gear over the seagrass beds within LangstoneHarbour despite the IFCA’s Code of Conduct which they have helped to implement. Evidence shows that the seagrass beds in LangstoneHarbour have not yet recovered from previous damage.

The IFCAs have commenced a process of risk management. SuIFCA say that that there are no known interactions between particularly vulnerable sub features and fishing operations at this time, whereas there is interaction in Southern IFCA jurisdiction and they are implementing a Bottom Towed Gear Byelaw in SEMS to prohibit fishing on reef and seagrass in 2013. Any increase in activity on intertidal areas will be looked into by the IFCA, and SoIFCA have consulted on a hand gathering byelaw to protect seagrass in Chichester.

NE, the MMO and IFCAs are considering impacts, implementing Art. 6(2) management interventions and working on byelaws. Until all fishing types and the success of management measures can be fully reviewed and evaluated, it is believed that there remains a residual impact on the SEMS. Both NE and LHB believe that fishing may cause the condition of the SEMS to change. It is considered that no escalation or investigation is required for this aspect at this time, we should let the revised approach to fisheries within EMS work run its course.

The EA note that illegal fishing of migratory fish is an on-going issue both within and beyond EMS and they will continue to monitor this and to enforcement action if necessary.

Last year it was reported that NE are investigating the impacts of clam dredging and hand clamming on intertidal mud, and the Solent Oyster Group Initiative is developingan evidence base to support the sustainable management of native oysters in the Solent. Results of these projects will be circulated when available.

Action: No further action identified

Bait digging

Bait digging activities remain elevated and widespread across the Solent, particularly in PortsmouthHarbour, Eling foreshore, ChichesterHarbour and the Ryde foreshore. Bait digging causes disturbance to birds, perturbation of mudland and a change in the infaunal communities. Bait collection remains elevated throughout the year in ChichesterHarbour, particularly at Dell Quay, with apparent commercial activity occurring.

SoIFCAs bait digging working group is looking to understand and manage bait digging activity to reduce impact upon SEMS. This should continue however it may be appropriate to improve links between the SEMS MG and the SoIFCA Bait Digging working group and offer support where needed/appropriate.

SoIFCA is implementing a byelaw (2013) which will restrict bait collection (including digging) in seagrass beds in the SEMS.

A joint project between NE and the Crown Estateis being undertaken by PortsmouthUniversityto quantify the impact of bait digging and assess the effectiveness of different management methods. The findings of this project will indicate the scale of the damage and will inform possible management options for the future.

CHC believe there is a residual impact on the SEMS and NE believe that, until the bait digging working group has proposed and implemented management measures, there remains a residual impact on the SEMS.

Action: Await PortsmouthUniversityoutput and results of bait digging working group actions

Water sports (eg hovercraft, kayaking and kite surfing)

Water sports are increasing and are widespread across the SEMS. NE is receiving an increasing number of requests for consents for kite surfing, windsurfing and kayaking, and they apply conditions to assents as appropriate. Generally it is becoming easier and cheaper to purchase the equipment required for watersports, making them more accessible, and so usage is likely to increase further in future.

Kayaking/canoeing and stand up paddleboarding has increased as an activity around ChichesterHarbour. It is most frequent in the summer months, but is increasingly becoming a year round activity. The entire harbour is used, but the east coast of HaylingIsland and Chichester Channel are the main areas. It is difficult to define the increase or intensity, but it has increased significantly over the last few years, in particular stand up paddleboarding. Due to the shallow draft there is concern that they are disturbing seabird colonies and wader roosts.

Water sports have also increased in Portsmouth Harbourwith more users,and management is increasing accordingly;also in Bembridge Harbour where engagement is under way regarding the use of fly board jet packs – a novel activity also popular in Poole Harbour - and jet skis. More kayaks have been observed on the River Beaulieu, possibly due to promotion on web sites, and management is in place.

Water skis and jet skis require a permit in LangstoneHarbour. Permits sold decreased from 2011 to 2012. No recreational hovercraft have been given permission to operate in Langstone Harbour on environmental grounds, but hovercraft clubs continue to put pressure on the DfT to force LHB to allow the activity under a managed access scheme. NE have stated they do not believe recreational hovercraft to be compatible with the conservation objectives of LangstoneHarbour.

NFDC report that public safety is being compromised and noise pollution has increased, with an increase in complaints relating to these impacts from the use of personal power craft, especially jet skis at Calshot; they will address this in a forthcoming management plan.

NE perceives that there has been an increase in water sport activities within the Solent but it is difficult to provide evidence of usage or numbers of users. However, there may be a residual impact due to the widespread nature of the activities and their potential to have significant disturbance impacts on bird features of the SEMS including seabird colonies and wader roosts. Seabird colonies are under considerable pressure from a range of issues and cannot tolerate an additional burden. Both NE and CHC believe water sports activity may cause the condition of the SEMS to change.

The 2012 SEMS Annual Monitoring Report concluded that evidence is needed before considering further action such as whether the personal use of certain craft could or should be managed across the SEMS. NEG asked MSc students to prepare literature reviews on the impacts of hovercraft, paramotors, kayaks and canoes and paddleboarding on the SEMS features of interest. There is a general lack of evidence in the literature, however there is general agreement among researchers that the effects of increased watercraft use at a critical time of year can have devastating effects. The results of student projects on such evidence will be circulated before, and discussed at, the SEMS MG meeting on 18th September 2013.

Action: Discuss and progress in light of 2012-13 literature reviews.

Medium risk activities that have increased or remain elevated in 2013

Agricultural run-off

Diffuse pollution remains an issue particularly in the Harbours and Southampton Water (NE and EA). Nutrient enrichment from nitrogen continues to impact marine and coastal waters; this is caused by inappropriate land management practices in rural locations (EA).

Diffuse pollution is a large scale problem and is difficult to regulate and police. NE and EA are working with others to implement actions in the Solent Diffuse Water Pollution Plan(DWPP).

The DWPP was updated in 2012 but actions need to be implemented if this issue is to be addressed. A bid to IPENS for a Solent Nitrate Management Plan was not successful, and NE will bid for WFD funding in September 2013 instead.

The EA and others are working on a project to tackle faecal contamination from boats in Solent harbours. NE continue to support the RYA Green-Blue campaign.

The EA is working with land owners and managers to implement appropriate management practices to mitigate or avoid pollution from nutrients and suspended solids. This is risk based and prioritised depending on the sensitivities of the environment. EA actions are also under way to address this issue in high risk areas, including modelling of proportional nitrate contributions in an upper catchment by a partnership project including the EA and South Downs Partners. In the New Forest, Pond Conservation (Naomi Ewald) has done walkovers of several upper catchments measuring various parameters, but NFNPA are not aware if any issues have been reported in SEMS coastal or estuarine waters that surround the Forest.