SSMEI Sound of Mull Recreation and Tourism Workshop

SSMEI Sound of Mull Recreation and Tourism Workshop

28th October 2008

Present

Colin MacFarlane – Scottish Natural Heritage

Daniel MacIntyre – Highlands and Islands Enterprise

David Woodhouse – Isle of Mull Wildlife Expeditions

Douglas Grierson – Access Officer, Argyll and Bute Council

Jan Dunlop- Mull and Iona Ranger Service

Jane Dodd – Scottish Natural Heritage

Jim Traynor – TobermoryHarbour Association

Joey Gough – Royal Highland Yacht Club

Paul Bancks – The Crown Estate

Sarah Cunningham – Project Officer

Activity 1 – Sector Interactions

Before the meeting SC had collated comments received on the interactions matrix sent out summarising interactions between recreation and tourism and other sectors/interests in the Sound of Mull (SOM). The group discussed the comments made, whether the interactions identified were appropriate and relevant to the SOM and the Future Management Requirements that were suggested.

Then the group were asked to categorise the interactions in to one of 4 types:

Positive – Interest/sector has a positive effect on recreation and tourism
Neutral - Interest/sector has neither a positive or negative effect on recreation and tourism
Competitive – Interest/sector competing for the same resource (e.g. space, species) that is either managed or unmanaged
Incompatible - Interest/sector is not compatible with recreation and tourism and this is not manageable

The interactions presented in the table were replicated on large sheets of paper and pinned around the room. The group were asked to categorise each interaction into one of the 4 types by placing one relevant coloured dot against each interaction (one colour was assigned to each interaction type). A summary of the categorisation of interactions is given in Table 1.

A summary of the agreed interaction matrix is provided in Table 2 incorporating the categorisations. Where the group had not all categorised the interaction into the same category, the majority was used.

Activity 2 – Opportunities, Constraints and Mechanisms

Participants were asked to identify up to 3 opportunities and 3 contraints for recreation and tourism within the SOM, write these on post-sticks and add these to appropriately named sheets in the room.

They were also asked to identify up to 3 mechanisms that would allow these opportunities to be developed or constraints overcome.

These were collated and grouped into similar types and are given below:

Opportunities for Recreation & Tourism in the SOM

Facilities and Amenities

Rainy day facilities / wet weather eco venue
Capitalising on existing attractions
Low cost holiday accommodation / bunkhouses

Infrastructure and interpretation

On the ground interpretation and parking
Off road viewpoints
Coastal paths
Good well signed walks
Better access to shoreline
Better road and cycling infrastructure

Natural features

Lots of things of interest – wildlife, views etc
To continue scenic viewing the shores need to remain unspoiled by visually obvious development
Sheltered waters good for most recreational boating and refuge in bad weather

Transport

Local ferry connections with Morvern, Coll and Tiree
Water taxis

Other

Be part of a HebrideanIslandsNational Park
More afloat recreation

Constraints for Recreation & Tourism in the SOM

Facilities

Lack of facilities e.g. slipways, pontoons
Few parking areas for visitors
Lack of rainy day facilities
Outdoor facilities

Environmental

Weather

Transport

Access from population centres
Cost of travel
CalMac ferry fares
Limited public transport
Poor rail link
Siting of the new 2 lane road (Salen)
New 2 lane road will make visitors go very fast therefore not enjoying scenic quality of the Sound.

Other

Finance
Landownership
Support from VisitScotland
Agency red tape

Mechanisms for Recreation & Tourism in the SOM

Finance

Funding e.g. grants
Business development/diversification grants

Strategy

Strategic vision for tourism
A strategic marketing plan with a definite brand
Strategic approach for transport provision

Transport and Infrastructure

More holistic approach to design and siting of new road
Reduce ferry fares
Better infrastructure – roads, transport
More mooring/pontoon systems would help but for Salen, Craignure would require a floating breakwater – expensive

Other

National Park Board
Marine ranger service

The group was then asked their views on the following questions and these were noted on flipcharts:

Should we identify areas to be developed or in need of safeguarding in relation to recreation and tourism in the SOM?

Safeguard: anchorages; dive sites; small bay north of Salen on Isle of Mull – common seals, otters, seabirds – accessible for public and ecotourism. Viewpoints and photo-points should be given consideration
Identification of development areas:for parking, toilet facilities, infrastructure – encourage people to stop. Plan could identify coastal and marine areas worth developing and investing in e.g. cetacean spotting interpretation – identify areas of interest. Areas on Morvern side too – need to investigate e.g. Pine martin around Drimnin. Fixed moorings at popular dive sites.

For development areas how much detail should be provided on the specifics of location and scale?

Potential to be specific for some activities and locations where information supports this
However, hard to be reflective of commercial interest and investment

Activity 3 – Plan format and Contents

The group were provided with relevant documents prior to the meeting and on the day that outline a draft of the plan content and potential format options. They were shown a draft layout of the contents of general sections which could be in the final plan, e.g. background to SSMEI, marine spatial planning, Sound of Mull. They were also shown two options of plan format – sectoral based and zone based. The group were asked the following questions and their responses were noted on flipcharts.

What plan option or combination of approaches would be best for the Sound of Mull/recreation and tourism?Are there any alternatives?

Using a combination of the two – sector and zones was felt to be the most appropriate option, however there were two trains of thought regarding the degree to which the two could be used and how:

Overview of each sector on a SOM scale plus use of zones for particular activities or areas where there are lots of actual/potential interactions. For example if there are lots of constraints/interactions within a particular area this location could be dealt with as an zone, e.g. Bloody Bay – lots going on. The GIS layers combined with the interactions study and categorisation results could be used to identify areas of interaction. However, some activities don’t lend themselves to zones e.g. some types of recreation can occur anywhere.

Overview of each sector on a SOM scale plus zoningthe whole SOM into discrete areas like Loch Fyne plan. Plan users could then either look at the sector or interest of concern to them and/or the particular area of coast that interests them. Although it may result in a larger document, it should not be too bad to use as you would generally be using it in either one of these ways. However, zones maybe repetitive as could cover same issues in multiple zones

Other comments:

For aquaculture interactions – interesting to look at the positive interactions and those that are incompatible.
What is your audience? Will vary depending on how different groups need to use it
Potential for scoring system for interactions – Prioritisation of activities where negative interactions occur
Use and learning from what other plans have been developed
Plan where need to plan and leave where it is not required
Perhaps no need for large document – the process is just as important
Large map with information on the back as an alternative with detailed mapping of small areas as an alternative.

If zones are preferred, how should they be defined?

Choosing areas based on busy places and where interaction occur and are possible – interaction zones for planning
Land planning needs to be accounted for

Contents of plan – do we need everything listed in documents? Should anything else be included?

Simple: not a lot of issues so keep as simple as possible to reflect this - don’t make it more complicated than it is.
Opportunities and constraints: note these in short direct statements
References: Use to direct people towards further information - websites and books
Cultural and socio-economicinformation: interesting for readers, historical section – physical and cultural – what has made it like it is today.
Management: what is actually needed, what do I need to do?

Sector / Interaction with RECREATION & Tourism / interaction category
Positive / Neutral / Compet / Incompat
Inshore fisheries
Nephrops trawl, Scallop dredging, Creel, Diving / Potential for boats to compete for space with other vessels1 / 8
Potential for inexperienced recreational boat users being unaware of marine navigation and safety rules1,3,5 / 2 / 5
Potential for fishing to deplete stocks of interest to sea anglers (e.g. common skate and spurdog) and other non target species removal, habitat damage1,5 / 1 / 5 / 1
Unmarked creels are navigation hazard e.g. on ferry routes, harbour entrances 1,5 / 2 / 5
Wash from powered vessels can pose a risk to creel boats retrieving gear1,5 / 4 / 2
Potential for mobile gear to damage seabed and habitats of interest to divers1, / 6 / 2
Opportunities for diversification of fishermen1,5 / 9
Removal of species e.g. scallops by divers who are now able to target deeper areas through rebreathers and mixed gas diving. Problem of consuming and passing on untested product.5 / 6
Aquaculture
Finfish, Shellfish / Potential competition for anchorage areas in sheltered waters with easy shore access1 / 1 / 6
Potential for collisions betweenvessels and farm structures/vessels 1 / 7 / 1
Potential for not all bottom equipment (moorings etc) to be removed when sites relinquished5 / 1 / 1 / 1 / 4
Sector / Interaction with RECREATION & Tourism / interaction category
Positive / Neutral / Compet / Incompat
Aquaculture
Finfish, Shellfish / Discharge of waste from yachts/power boats, especially at groups of moorings or anchorages, in proximity to farms, especially shellfish farms can be detrimental1 / 6 / 1
Use of moorings/tying off to farm equipment around farms by yachts, angling boats (with and without permission)5 / 7
Presence of dive sites can constrain aquaculture development3,5 / 6 / 1 / 1
Shipping
Cargo,Tankers,Ferries / Effects on visual amenity / 7 / 1
Potential to compete for space with other vessels1 / 2 / 1 / 5
Potential for inexperienced recreational boat users being unaware of marine navigation and safety rules1,3 / 6 / 1
Potential for jet skiing to affect shipping e.g. ferries1 / 2 / 4
Infrastructure & Anchorages
Marinas/harbours, Piers/jetties/pontoons
Slipways, Moorings / Ferry/shipping washes adjacent to slipways/jetties/moorings or anchorage areas, e.g. wash from ferries takes 30mins to hit Tobermory1,5 / 8 / 1
Presence of infrastructure and parking of mutual benefit to all recreational users but need for greater provision1,5 / 1 / 6 / 1
Cables & Pipelines
Electricity & Telecoms / Potential for inconsiderate behaviour at access points – parking inappropriately, litter, changing and toilet facilities5 / 1 / 8
Sector / Interaction with RECREATION & Tourism / interaction category
Positive / Neutral / Compet / Incompat
Natural environment Intertidal, Sea bed
Bird areas, Mobile species
Coastal habitats,
Landscape/seascape / Management of areas for habitats and species beneficial to recreation as long as unnecessary restrictions are not placed on navigation or access1 / 6 / 1 / 2
Potential for disturbance to marine and coastal wildlife from behaviour of those undertaking recreational activities1,3,5 / 1 / 7 / 1
Potential for disturbance to marine and coastal wildlife from individual visitors and tours 1,5 / 5 / 3
Potential for disturbance of sensitive seabed habitats and cultural heritage sites from anchoring and scouring action of mooring chains1,3 / 9
Road kills of otters at Salen by road traffic5 / 2 / 5
Cultural Heritage
Coastal monuments & archaeology, Marine archaeology / Potential for cumulative disturbance to coastal and marine archaeological sites from recreation, individual visitors and tours e.g. erosion, removal of artefacts, litter1,5 / 4 / 4
Water quality & Waste
Biological/bacterial/ chemical quality, Trade effluent, Sewage effluent, Litter / Management of water quality beneficial - poor water quality, including the presence of effluent and litter can be detrimental to marine and coastal recreation, e.g. clean beaches, water sports 1,5 / 1 / 6
Sector / Interaction with RECREATION & Tourism / interaction category
Positive / Neutral / Compet / Incompat
Water quality & Waste
Biological/bacterial/ chemical quality, Trade effluent, Sewage effluent, Litter / Potential for reduced water quality due to discharge of untreated sewage from vessels3,5 / 1 / 6
Litter from vessels, shore angling and those accessing marine environment from shore5 / 5 / 2
Recreation
Sailing, power boats, jet skiis, kayaking, sailing, sea angling, diving / Potential competition for space1 / 1 / 1 / 6
Potential competition for access to marine environment3,5 / 2 / 1 / 4
Potential for powered vessels and jet skiis to cause nuisance and safety risk1 / 1 / 4 / 3
Potential for inexperienced recreational boat users being unaware of marine navigation and safety rules1,3 / 1 / 6
Tourism
Wildlife/Scenic Tours / Potential for competition for space/resource e.g. Salen coast – public and operators stopping for wildlife watching1,5 / 7 / 1
MOD
Diving, Submarine exercise areas / Potential to compete for space with other vessels1 / 8
Marine Renewable Energy / Competition for space and impedance to navigation and access to sites1 / 5 / 2
Potential for marine wind farms to act artificial reefs of benefit to sea angling and divers1 / 4 / 3 / 1

Table 2. Subgroup agreed interaction matrix with changes and Future Management Recommendations incorporated. Interaction categories are indicated by a coloured square: Positive Neutral Competition Incompatible . Where the group had not all categorised the interaction into the same category, the majority was used and where a majority decision was not evident (there were equal votes for two categories) both categorises are indicated.

Sector / Interaction with RECREATION & Tourism / current management / future management recommendations
Inshore fisheries
Nephrops trawl, Scallop dredging, Creel, Diving / Potential for boats to compete for space with other vessels1 / International Regulations for Prevention of Collision at sea, UK regulations, Merchant Shipping Regulations, MCA, AIS tracking for ships over 300GT /

Current measuressufficient

Potential for inexperienced recreational boat users being unaware of marine navigation and safety rules1,3,5 / International Regulations for Prevention of Collision at sea, SOLAS V, Merchant Shipping regulations, MCA /

National approach required but difficult to target these groups. Licensing system or a voluntary scheme backed by insurance companies
Signs at access points that indicate places to get qualifications
Development of leaflet detailing how to behave, where to get training, access points and facilities – could be distributed through clubs and at access points, e.g. Firth of Forth users leisure leaflet

Potential for fishing to deplete stocks of interest to sea anglers (e.g. common skate and spurdog) and other non target species removal, habitat damage1,5 / European Common Fisheries Policy quotas, local liaison between common skate taggers and commercial mobile gear vessels around Mull - majority of local trawlers put skate back. /

Potential to liaise withMull and Small Isles IFG – awareness raising

Unmarked creels are navigation hazard e.g. on ferry routes, harbour entrances 1,5 / The Sea Fishing (marking and identification of passive fishing gear and beam trawls) Scotland Order 2006
Best practice to avoid shipping lanes /

Not felt to be an issue in SOM
Education and information via associations and at ports/harbours if issue develops.
Liaison with Mull and Small Isles IFG

Sector / Interaction with RECREATION & Tourism / current management / future management recommendations
Inshore fisheries
Nephrops trawl, Scallop dredging, Creel, Diving / Wash from powered vessels can pose a risk to creel boats retrieving gear1,5 / Voluntary speed restriction in Tobermory of 4 knots adhered to by around 95% of people and if asked will comply /

Tobermory Harbour Association unable to make byelaw because not a harbour authority
All that can be done is being done - not much more that can be achieved

Potential for mobile gear to damage seabed and habitats of interest to divers1, /

Not felt to be an issue in SOM – wrecks are focus of most dives and scenic sites used are rocky and therefore not targeted by mobile gear

Opportunities for diversification of fishermen1,5 /

Examples already evident in SOM e.g. ex-fisherman running charter boat

Removal of species e.g. scallops by divers who are now able to target deeper areas through rebreathers and mixed gas diving. Problem of consuming and passing on untested product.5 / European Common Fisheries Policy quotas - illegal to collect commercial quantities without quota /

Not felt to be an issue in SOM – Mull and Small Isles IFG if develops
Nothing that can be done for those collecting for their own consumption

Aquaculture
Finfish, Shellfish / Potential competition for anchorage areas in sheltered waters with easy shore access1 / Section 34 of the Coast Protection Act and The Town and Country Planning (Marine Fish Farming) (Scotland) Order 2007, The Crown Estate seabed consent, Moorings have statutory protection /

Current measures sufficient
Development of Aquaculture framework plan

Potential for collisions betweenvessels and farm structures/vessels 1 / International Regulations for Prevention of Collision at sea, UK regulations, MCA, marker buoys as required by Northern Lighthouse Board who also have ongoing programme of inspection and reporting on lighting and education programme, Operators required to inform Hydrographic Office to update charts /

Charts need to be updated more regularly and method developed potentially to reflect the cyclic nature of aquaculture.

Sector / Interaction with RECREATION & Tourism / current management / future management recommendations
Aquaculture
Finfish, Shellfish / Potential for not all bottom equipment (moorings etc) to be removed when sites relinquished5 / Condition of Crown Estate lease and certain statutory consents /

Where it is not possible to remove all equipment e.g. anchors, relevant sailing bodies should be notified and added to charts as foul area
Companies will remove if notified