Scottish MPA Project

Management Options Paper

FIRTH OF FORTH BANKS COMPLEX POSSIBLE MPA

JULY 2013

This is a working draft that has been produced to support initial discussions with stakeholders about management of activities in this possible MPA. The development of site management is an ongoing process which will continue after the conclusion of the formal consultation. We will make changes to reflect any relevant information that becomes available e.g. through stakeholder discussions.

This paper covers a range of different activities and developments but is not exhaustive. It focuses on where we consider there could be a risk in terms of achieving the conservation objectives of the proposed protected features. The paper does not attempt to cover all possible future activities or eventualities (e.g. as a result of accidents), and does not consider likely cumulative effects that could result from different types of activities being carried out within the possible MPA. Instead, the paper should be considered as the starting point for discussions about management relating to the possible MPA. The following documents provide further information about the features, evidence and assessment of the possible MPA and should be read alongside this Management Options Paper:

Site Summary Document

Data Confidence Assessment

Detailed assessment against the MPA Selection Guidelines These documents are available at www.jncc.defra.gov.uk/scottish-mpa-consultation

2

Document version control

Version Date Author Reason / Comments

Version 0.1 15/02/2013 Beth Henshall First draft

Version 0.2 21/02/2013 Beth Henshall Incorporated amendments

Version 0.3 21/02/2013 Megan Linwood Further review

Version 0.4 22/02/2013 Beth Henshall Further revisions

Version 0.5 22/02/2013 Megan Linwood Review

Version 0.6 22/02/2013 Beth Henshall/ Tom Blasdale

Further revisions

Version 0.7 26/02/2013 Declan Tobin Fisheries input

Version 0.8 27/02/2013 Jon Davies Review of document

Version 0.9 28/02/2013 Beth Henshall Incorporating comments from TomBlasdale

Version 0.91 01/03/2013 Pete Chaniotis Minor track changes and response to Beth‟s comments

Version 0.92 01/02/2013 Beth Henshall Further revisions in light of comments

Version 0.93 01/03/2013 Megan Linwood Review of changes

Version 0.94 01/03/2013 Beth Henshall Incorporate Pete Chaniotis and Tom Blasdale comments

Version 1.0 01/03/2013 Megan Linwood Final review prior to release to MPA Sub Group

Version 1.1 15/03/2013 Beth Henshall Incorporation of Sub Group comments

Version 1.2 09/04/2013 Beth Henshall Adjustments to reflect new template

Version 1.3 09/04/2013 Declan Tobin Review

Version 1.4 09/04/2013 Tom Blasdale Further review

Version 1.5 09/04/2013 Beth Henshall & Megan Linwood

Incorporation of comments

Version 1.6 10/04/2013 Pete Chaniotis Incorporation of geodiversity information and review

Version 1.7 10/04/2013 M McLeod & S Howell

Review of paper

Version 1.8 03/05/2013 Beth Henshall Further revisions

Version 1.9 13/05/2013 Beth Henshall Inclusion of Sub Group comments and template update

Version 1.91 15/05/2013 Pete Chaniotis Review of document

Version 1.92 15/05/2013 Beth Henshall Incorporation of comments

Version 1.93 24/05/2013 Tom Blasdale Review of fisheries options

Version 1.94 28/05/2013 Beth Henshall Incorporation of comments

Version 1.95 05/06/2013 Beth Henshall Incorporation of comments from Mark Tasker

3

Version 1.96 06/06/2013 Megan Linwood Review of document

Version 1.97 14/06/2013 Beth Henshall Update to template

Version 1.98 14/06/2013 Megan Linwood Revised text

Version 1.99 17/06/2013 Beth Henshall Incorporation of comments

Version 1.991 21/06/2013 Mark Tasker Review

Version 1.992 28/06/2013 Beth Henshall Update to template

Version 1.993 04/07/2013 Neil Ellis Document proof read

Version 2.0 08/07/2013 Beth Henshall Incorporation of comments

Version 2.1 10/07/2013 Declan Tobin Review of fisheries text

Version 2.2 11/07/2013 Beth Henshall Update to template

Version 3.0 24/07/2013 Beth Henshall Finalisation of document for public release

Distribution list

Format Version Issue date Issued to

Electronic 1.0 01/03/2013 MPA Sub Group

Electronic 1.5 09/04/2013 Marine Scotland

Electronic 1.99 17/06/2013 Marine Scotland

Electronic 2.0 08/07/2013 Marine Scotland

Electronic 3.0 24/07/2013 Uploaded to JNCC website

4

DEVELOPMENT OF MANAGEMENT OPTIONS FOR THE FIRTH OF FORTH BANKS COMPLEX POSSIBLE MPA Management Options Summary The following table summarises the management options for the Firth of Forth Banks Complex possible MPA. The options are being considered in order to eliminate or manage the risk of not meeting the conservation objective to conserve the proposed protected features within the possible MPA. For more detail on these options, please read the full Management Options Paper below. It is recommended that discussions take place between sea users, scientists and managers to determine which of these management options is the most appropriate.

Activity Management options

Fishing activity: Bottom contacting mobile gear (e.g. otter trawling, demersal seine netting, mechanised dredging and scallop dredging)

No additional management: There is a risk of not achieving the conservation objectives for ocean quahog aggregations and offshore subtidal sands and gravels. Reduce/limit pressures: This option would reduce, but not entirely eliminate, the risk of not achieving the conservation objectives for ocean quahog aggregations and offshore subtidal sands and gravels. Appropriate management for ocean quahog could include restrictions on gears known to impact the species, such as scallop and hydraulic dredging.

Appropriate management for offshore subtidal sands and

gravels could include closure of a proportion of the features area to damaging gears, and there may be a greater requirement for restrictions on gears that penetrate deeply into the sediment. The location of areas to be covered by management restrictions would be decided in consultation with fishers. Restrictions could be permanent in some cases or temporary/adaptive in others. Remove/avoid pressures: This option would minimise the risk of not achieving the conservation objectives for ocean quahog aggregations and offshore subtidal sands and gravels to the lowest possible levels. This is likely to include restrictions on gears that could impact the features, such as otter trawling as well as scallop and hydraulic dredging.

Fishing activity: Bottom contact static gear (e.g. creeling and potting)

No additional management: It is unlikely that any additional management of creeling and potting activities will be required, as the risk of not achieving the conservation objectives for ocean quahog aggregations and offshore subtidal sands and gravels associated with these activities

is minimal. However, if static gear fishing activities were to increase or monitoring showed evidence of detrimental effects, it may be necessary to apply limits in the future.

5

Licensed activities: (e.g. Round 3 Wind Farm Licensed Area) The management options outlined here indicate some of the considerations that could apply to new licence applications, or variations to licences, for activities taking place within, or in proximity, to the possible MPA. Ministry of Defence activity

No additional management or reduce/limit pressure: These two options are likely to be similar in their effect on the features achieving their stated conservation objectives. Before issuing a license the licensing authority would need to be satisfied (by the applicant) that there is no significant risk of the activity hindering the offshore subtidal sands and gravels and ocean quahog features achieving their conservation objective. Early dialogue with Marine Scotland and relevant statutory nature conservation body would help identify and resolve any issues at an early stage. Remove/avoid pressures: This option would reduce the risk of not achieving the conservation objectives for offshore subtidal sands and gravels and ocean quahog aggregations to the lowest possible levels.

No additional management: This activity is unlikely to interact with the proposed protected features and therefore no additional management is thought to be required. Should seabed activities occur in future, it is envisaged that management will be coordinated through the Ministry of Defence Environmental Protection Guidelines.

6

Introduction The Firth of Forth Banks Complex possible Marine Protected Area (MPA) is located in offshore waters to the east of Scotland, and includes the Berwick, Scalp and Montrose Banks and the Wee Bankie. Strongly influenced by water currents, the mosaic of different types of sands and gravels create a unique mix of habitats that overlie the underwater banks and mounds within the site. The area of the Firth of Forth Banks Complex possible MPA is 2,130 km2. Further details on the possible MPA can be found in the Firth of Forth Banks Complexsite summary document.

A number of activities take place within the Firth of Forth area. Boat dredging for king scallops is the principle mobile gear fishery overlapping the possible MPA, and otter trawling also takes place supporting a mixed demersal species fishery. There is good anecdotal evidence of a widespread creel fishery in the area. In the past, a large sandeel fishery overlapped the sandbanks within the possible MPA, but the region has been closed to sandeel fisheries since 2000, in order to protect this food sources for dependent predators. The possible MPA overlaps a Ministry of Defence practice area and a Round 3 wind farm licence area. This document has been produced to provide background information on the development of management for the Firth of Forth Banks Complex possible MPA. It will be used during discussions as part of the formal consultation. The aim of these discussions is to explore current activities and the potential interactions that these may have with the proposed protected features. Future activities may also be considered. The document describes the known location and extent of the proposed protected features and the current knowledge of where activities take place. It also presents the management options for each of those activities that are considered capable of having an effect on the proposed protected features. The document provides those with an interest in the area a chance to provide input into the early stages of the development of appropriate management of activities that will ensure the Firth of Forth Banks Complex possible MPA makes a genuine and long-lasting contribution to the protection of Scotland‟s marine environment.

Options in the network At the request of Marine Scotland, science-based alternatives to the features being considered for protection within the Firth of Forth Banks Complex possible MPA have been identified, as shown in Map 2. Although already a possible MPA proposed for the protection of sandeels, Turbot Bank possible MPA has been identified as an alternative to the Firth of Forth Banks Complex for offshore subtidal sands and gravels and shelf banks and mounds. The Norwegian Boundary Sediment Plain possible MPA has been proposed as an alternative for the representation of ocean quahog aggregations. However, JNCC has concluded that these two possible MPAs do not make equivalent contributions to the network to that made by the Firth of Forth Banks Complex possible MPA. As such; the Firth of Forth Banks Complex is JNCC‟s preferred possible MPA to go forward for designation.

7

Map 1 Location of the Firth of Forth Banks Complex possible MPA

Map 2 Locations of the Turbot Bank and Norwegian Boundary Sediment Plain possible MPAs, in relation to the Firth of Forth Banks possible MPA

8

Roles The role of JNCC is to advise Scottish Government on management options for the Firth of Forth Banks Complex possible MPA. In doing this, we aim to ensure that the conservation objectives for the proposed protected features are met. Marine Scotland will lead the discussions on management with stakeholders, will consider JNCC‟s advice, and will lead on the development of specific management measures. Marine Scotland will also be responsible for making recommendations to Scottish Ministers on these measures. Scottish Ministers will decide whether to implement these measures. It is expected that licensed activities taking place within, or nearby, the possible MPA will continue to be managed through the existing licensing system. For MPAs in offshore waters, the expectation is that the Common Fisheries Policy process that is already in place for delivering any fisheries management requirements for Special Areas of Conservation will be followed. Stakeholders can provide additional evidence to support the development of management options including local knowledge of the environment and of activities. Discussions with stakeholders will be one way of highlighting the implications of any management options to JNCC, Scottish Government and other regulators. This will contribute to the development of well-designed and effective management measures. Proposed protected features and conservation objectives The Firth of Forth Banks Complex possible MPA is being considered as part of a network of new Nature Conservation MPAs, which are being established to help conserve a range of Scotland‟s important marine habitats, wildlife, geology and landforms. The Firth of Forth Banks Complex possible MPA is being considered for the following proposed protected features, which are shown in Map 3:

Ocean quahog aggregations

Offshore subtidal sands and gravels

Shelf banks and mounds*

Geodiversity feature - moraines**

*On the basis of available evidence, JNCC considers that shelf bank and mounds features

are unlikely to be impacted by marine activities taking place in the possible MPA1. As such, there is not considered to be a significant risk to the feature achieving its conservation objective and so the feature has not been assessed further in the context of the management options presented below.

**The moraines geodiversity feature overlaps with the composition of offshore subtidal sands

and gravels in the possible MPA. It is considered that the management options presented for offshore subtidal sands and gravels will be similar to those that would be appropriate for these geodiversity interests. As such, the geodiversity feature has not been reported further in the context of the management options presented below. Conservation objectives set out the desired quality of the proposed protected features within each possible MPA. They will form part of the designation order for Nature Conservation MPAs and will therefore be in place at the time that a site is formally designated. It has been recommended that the conservation objectives for the proposed protected features within the Firth of Forth Banks Complex possible MPA are „conserve’ for all features. The condition of the features has not been verified so the conservation objectives are uncertain, in acknowledgement of the uncertainty in feature condition. Improved evidence on the condition of these features as part of the six-year reporting cycle required under the Marine

1 Brooks, A.J., (2013). Assessing the sensitivity of geodiversity features in Scotland‟s seas to pressures

associated with human activities. Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 590.

9

(Scotland) Act 2010 and the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009, or through provision of other evidence, may result in modifications to recommendations for management to support

the achievement of the feature conservation objectives. Map 3 The distribution of proposed protected features within the Firth of Forth Banks

Complex possible MPA

Overview of activities Table 1 below lists the activities2 which take place within or close to the Firth of Forth Banks Complex possible MPA. Further discussions with those who use the area are required to improve our understanding of these activities (e.g. distribution and intensity etc.). Those activities to which the proposed protected features are sensitive are explored in detail in the next section. Activities to which the proposed protected features are not thought to be sensitive (i.e. any interaction between the activity and the features is considered to be minimal) will not be considered further within this document. Future or other activities not identified within the table would need to be considered on a case-by-case basis.

2 Initial lists do not include <15 m vessel activity. Information on fishing activity from the <15 m fleet is not

routinely recorded and we are keen to improve our understanding of relevant activity with this possible MPA through discussions with stakeholders

10

Table 1: Overview of existing activities believed to take place within or close to the Firth of Forth Banks Complex possible MPA

Activities considered capable of affecting the protected features

Activities not considered capable of affecting the protected features

Fishing activity Demersal Seine netting (minimal activity)

Otter trawling

Mechanised dredging

Scallop dredging

Creeling and potting

Licensed activities

Renewable energy – Round 3 license area

Ministry of Defence

Seabed, sea surface and sub-surface activity

Fishing activity* Pelagic trawling and purse seining

Shipping

Commercial shipping

*Only the specific examples of the activity listed have been excluded, rather than the broad activity types.

Development of management options Management options are being developed for each possible MPA where it is considered that some form of management may be necessary to achieve the conservation objectives for each proposed protected feature. The approach to identifying management options for each activity will be risk-based i.e. advice will be focused on where it is believed there is a risk to achieving the conservation objective for the proposed protected features. To do this, we are using existing data and information on proposed protected features and relevant activities, and also our understanding of the relationships between the proposed protected features and activities. The management options may be informed by discussion with stakeholders. If new information becomes available during the consultation, the management options may be revised. Management options are focussed on the activities that cause pressure(s) that a proposed protected feature is sensitive to. Pressures can be physical (e.g. abrasion of the seabed), chemical or biological. Different activities may cause the same pressure, e.g. fishing using bottom gears and aggregate dredging both cause abrasion which can damage the surface of the seabed. The proposed protected features of a possible MPA are considered sensitive to activities that could adversely affect them (because of the associated pressures) especially if they are unable to or are very slow to recover. The online sensitivity tool (see Marine Scotland‟s website) reflects current understanding of the interactions between activities, pressures and features and supports the first steps of the assessment of risk to the features in the possible MPAs. The tool highlights that activities can give rise to a range of pressures, to which the proposed protected features of the possible MPA may be sensitive. The online tool provides more detailed information including the evidence that has been used in developing these recommendations. Risks to achieving the conservation objective have been identified where there is an overlap between proposed protected features and activities associated with pressures the features are sensitive to. We have recommended management options to manage this risk. Specific details of the recommended management options for each activity are provided in the following sections. The overlap between different activities/planned developments and the

11

proposed protected features is described and where appropriate, mapped. The text focuses on interactions in terms of physical overlap but the assessment of risk in the future should also take account of the intensity and frequency of activities within the possible MPA. The following range of management options have been identified, including:

- no additional management required - management to reduce/limit pressures - management to remove/avoid pressures

All of the management options provided are based on knowledge of the existing activities taking place within the possible MPA. The options do not preclude introducing management in the future for new activities, or future management where there is an increased intensity of activities beyond levels currently taking place. We recognise that stakeholders can provide local environmental knowledge and more detailed information on activities, including in relation to intensity, frequency, and methods. This additional information may help to develop more specific management options, focussed on interactions between features and activities. Management options Management options have been considered by activity. Please click on the activities below to be directed to the relevant section: 1. Fishing Activity

Mobile bottom contact gear

Otter trawling

Demersal seine netting

Mechanised dredging

Scallop dredging Static bottom contact gear

Creeling and potting

2. Licensed activities

Round 3 Wind License Area 3. Ministry of Defence activity

Practice area

Fishing activity JNCC has evaluated management options to support achievement of the conservation objectives for the proposed protected features of the Firth of Forth Banks Complex possible MPA. A gradient of management options has been considered to reduce exposure to pressures; these have been described under three potential management option categories below. Proposed protected features may require a combination of these options to ensure they achieve their conservation objectives. a) No additional management

b) Additional management to reduce/limit pressures – where fisheries managers may wish to consider a range of measures that could be used to reduce the risk to features by reducing fishing pressure or preventing its increase to unacceptably high levels. These could include:

12

- Area restrictions (e.g. permanently closing some or the entire extent of the feature) - Temporal restrictions (e.g. closing parts of the extent of the feature on a rotational

basis) - Seasonal restrictions - Gear restrictions (eg. restriction on the use of more damaging gears)

Ideally, any measures would generally apply only to the part of the site where the feature is present. However, there may be circumstances in which it could be desirable to extend management measures beyond the known area of feature distribution, for example, where conditions are suitable for a feature to exist but there are insufficient data to confirm its presence. c) Additional management to remove/avoid pressures – where fishing activities known to adversely affect the feature would be excluded and prevented from occurring in the future. Such exclusion would generally apply only to the part of the site where the feature is present, unless it was necessary to apply to the whole MPA. The likely effects on the feature condition and the risk to the conservation objectives were assessed using the evidence described in the JNCC/SNH MPA fisheries management guidance. An estimation of fishing activity taking place within the region of the possible MPA was derived from Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) data, with an average 2 hourly ping rate. VMS data for UK vessels were linked to skipper logbook information, which was used to determine the location of the ping and the fishing gear being employed. For non-UK registered vessels where logbook information was not available, information on fishing gear employed was obtained from the „primary gear‟ listed on the EU vessel register. All data were filtered using a simple speed rule of between 1 and 6 knots to indicate fishing activity for all gear types. Between 2006 and 2009, generalised values for intensity of effort were estimated by aggregating VMS data to a 0.05 x 0.05 decimal degree grid scale. This method has the advantage of enabling the quantification of effort at a discrete spatial scale (hours per grid per year), however, it precludes analysis of patterns of activity below the resolution of the pre-defined grid. As a result, independent “pings” were analysed for the period 2009 to 2011. To ensure anonymity of the data source, discrete VMS ping data is presented only in instances where it is not considered disclosive to do so (i.e. there are multiple vessels operating in the same area).

13

Fishing activity: Mobile bottom contact gear Otter trawling

Over 15m otter trawling takes place across the possible MPA. In 2009-2011, effort was mainly concentrated on the shallow western Wee Bankie component, whereas, between 2006 and 2009 activity was greatest in the southern component (maximum effort in any grid – 214 hours), as shown in Map 4. There is evidence of under-15m demersal otter trawling in the region, primarily targeting squid although the distribution of effort within the possible MPA is less certain than for the over 15m fleet. Currently there is no non-UK otter trawling within the possible MPA, but prior to the East of Scotland sandeel closure in 2000, Wee Bankie was an area of considerable importance to the Danish industrial sandeel fishery.

Map 4: Location of otter trawling activity in relation to proposed protected features

14

Demersal seine netting

Demersal seine netting effort is negligible across the possible MPA (i.e. less than 6 hours effort in any grid during 2006 to 2009), as shown in Map 5. All available activity records indicate this to be Scottish seine netting (flyshooting) which uses a floating marker buoy rather than an anchor to secure the leading rope.

Map 5: Location of demersal seine netting activity in relation to proposed protected features

15

Mechanised dredging

Mechanised dredging takes place in all three components of the Firth of Forth Banks Complex possible MPA, although the principal concentration of activity (maximum effort of 59 hours in any grid between 2006 and 2009) focused on the Wee Bankie, as shown in Map 6. Mechanised dredges in this area mainly target razor clams.

Map 6: Location of mechanised dredging activity in relation to proposed protected features

16

Scallop dredging

Scallop dredging activity by over 15m vessels takes place in all three components of the Firth of Forth Banks Complex possible MPA, although the greatest activity occurred on the western edge of the Wee Bankie. Up to 756 hours effort in a single grid was recorded between 2006 and 2009. However, the majority of the scallop dredge fishery over this period occurred outside the boundary of the possible MPA within the 12nm territorial waters limit, as shown in Map 7. There is also good anecdotal evidence of under-15m vessels scallop dredging in all three components of the Firth of Forth Banks Complex possible MPA.

Map 7: Location of scallop dredging activity in relation to proposed protected features

Management Options Bottom contact towed gear: (e.g. otter trawling, demersal seine netting, scallop and hydraulic dredging)

No additional management: There is a risk of not achieving the conservation objectives for ocean quahog aggregations and offshore subtidal sands and gravels. Reduce/limit pressures: This option would reduce, but not entirely eliminate, the risk of not achieving the conservation objectives for ocean quahog aggregations and offshore subtidal sands and gravels. Appropriate management for ocean quahog could include restrictions on gears known to impact the species, such as scallop and hydraulic dredging.

Appropriate management for offshore subtidal sands and

gravels could include closure of a proportion of the features area to damaging gears, and there may be a greater requirement for restrictions on gears that penetrate deeply into the sediment. The location of areas to be covered by management restrictions would be decided in consultation with fishers. Restrictions could be permanent in some cases or temporary/adaptive in others.

17

Remove/avoid pressures: This option would minimise the risk of not achieving the conservation objectives for ocean quahog aggregations and offshore subtidal sands and gravels to the lowest possible levels. This is likely to include restrictions on gears that could impact the features, such as otter trawling as well as scallop and hydraulic dredging.

Fishing activity: Static gear

Creeling and potting There is good anecdotal evidence of an under-15m vessel creel fishery active in all three components of the Firth of Forth Banks Complex possible MPA, although it is likely that most effort is concentrated on the Wee Bankie. In providing advice on management options for static gear fishing activities, the focus has been on what we know about the sensitivities of the proposed protected features to this type of fishing activity i.e. the geographic overlap between features and fishing activities has not been assessed. This is because the information available on fishing activity of under-15m vessels within and adjacent to the Firth of Forth Banks possible MPA is limited. Discussions with those involved with fishing within or adjacent to the possible MPA will help improve understanding of the interactions between different gear types and the proposed protected features.

Management Options Bottom contact towed gear: (e.g. creeling and potting)

No additional management: It is unlikely that any additional management of creeling and potting activities will be required, as the risk of not achieving the conservation objectives for ocean quahog aggregations and offshore subtidal sands and gravels associated with these activities is minimal. However, if static gear fishing activities were to increase or monitoring showed evidence of detrimental effects, it may be necessary to apply limits in the future.

Licensed Activities Licensed activities taking place within, or in close proximity to, the possible MPA, will continue to be managed through the licensing process. Developers will be required to assess the possible impacts of proposed licensed activities on protected features through existing processes, such as Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). If it can be established that the act is not capable of affecting (other than insignificantly3) the possible MPA, then no further assessment will be necessary in terms of considering the effects on the possible MPA. If this cannot be established, then assessment of the potential effects of the activity on the proposed protected features and achievement of the features conservation objectives must be undertaken. Regulators will be required to demonstrate that in the course of performing their duties (i.e. issuing a licence for a specific activity) they further the conservation objectives stated for the proposed protected features within the possible MPA, or where this is not possible, ensures the development is undertaken in a manner which least hinders the achievement of those objectives. A gradient of management options has been outlined for licensed activities to demonstrate how the proposed protected features exposure to pressures from the activity could be reduced; these have been described under three potential management option categories. Existing licensed operations are normally expected to continue as consented within possible

3 Further information and definitions are available in the Management Handbook –

www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/marine/marine-environment/mpanetwork/engagement/ManagementHandbook

18

MPAs. The management options outlined identify options that could apply to new licence applications, or variations to licences, for activities taking place within, or in proximity, to the possible MPA. The management options discussed in this paper for activities managed through the licensing process provide an indication of some of the considerations that could be recommended when planning a development project; however, applications will still continue to be considered on a case-by-case basis through the existing licensing process.

Round 3 Wind Farm Licence Area

The possible MPA overlaps with a Round 3 Licence Area for offshore wind development, as shown in Map 8. All three phases of the project have been scoped and the developer submitted an application for Phase 1 of the development in October 2012. If consented, construction is planned to start in 2015. Advice on any future licence applications for developments within the possible MPA will be considered on a case-by-case basis. In order to reduce the risk of not achieving the conservation objectives, some of the considerations that could be recommended when planning a development project include:

Careful consideration of the location of the activity in order to avoid impacts to the most sensitive features, and support representation of the range of component protected habitats present within the possible MPA;

Minimising or, avoiding (in particularly sensitive areas) the introduction of materials that alter the seabed habitat type;

Appropriate treatment and disposal of waste products associated with activity;

Adoption of industry best practice;

Early discussions regarding any activities, including the decommissioning/removal of infrastructure.

Map 8: Location of Round 3 Wind Farm Licence Area in relation to proposed protected features

19

Management Options Licensed activities:

No additional management or reduce/limit pressure: These two options are likely to be similar in their effect on the features achieving their stated conservation objectives. Before issuing a license the licensing authority would need to be satisfied (by the applicant) that there is no significant risk of the activity hindering the offshore subtidal sands and gravels and ocean quahog features achieving their conservation objective. Early dialogue with Marine Scotland and relevant statutory nature conservation body would help identify and resolve any issues at an early stage. Remove/avoid pressures: This option would reduce the risk of not achieving the conservation objectives for offshore subtidal sands and gravels and ocean quahog aggregations to the lowest possible levels.

20

Ministry of Defence activity

A Ministry of Defence (MOD) Military Practice Area overlaps with a small part of the south of the Wee Bankie component and to the west of the Berwick Bank component of the possible MPA, as shown in Map 9. Although 2010 data on military activities within Military Practice Areas suggests seabed, surface and sub-surface activities occurred in the region, discussion with the Ministry of Defence suggests this area is primarily used for surface activities such as vessel transiting and so is unlikely to interact with the proposed protected features. The MOD will incorporate Nature Conservation MPAs into their Environmental Protection Guidelines (Maritime) of their Marine Environmental and Sustainability Assessment Tool, and will use these guidelines to manage their activities in a way that will not affect the features achieving their conservation objectives. Map 9: Location of the MOD practice area in relation to proposed protected features

Management options MOD activity: (e.g. practice areas)

No additional management: This activity is unlikely to interact with the proposed protected features and therefore no additional management is thought to be required. Should seabed activities occur in future, it is envisaged that management will be coordinated through the Ministry of Defence Environmental Protection Guidelines.

21

Conclusions and further recommendations Before any firm recommendations are made, discussions should be held with stakeholders to ensure that there is a good understanding of the features present and the likely interactions of these features with prevailing activities. Marine Scotland will lead the discussions on management with stakeholders. These discussions will start during the formal consultation and, if necessary, may continue after the consultation. Following the consultation Scottish Ministers will make a decision on how best to represent features in the network including whether the science-based-alternative to the Firth of Forth Banks Complex possible MPA are included. The discussions should lead to an improved understanding of the risk to the proposed protected features. The options presented here will then be reviewed by JNCC and a preferred way forward may be recommended. This will form the basis of advice from JNCC to Marine Scotland on management requirements for this possible MPA should it be designated as a Nature Conservation MPA. Marine Scotland will be responsible for making recommendations to Scottish Ministers on any management measures that may be required. These measures will be developed through discussion with stakeholders during and after the formal consultation on the possible MPA. Any statutory measures will be subject to consultation and the processes normally required by the legislation being utilised. Where fisheries management measures are necessary and the Nature Conservation MPA is located where Scottish Ministers do not have exclusive competence then the intention is that an application will be made for measures using the mechanisms of the Common Fisheries Policy. This process will include consultation on the measures at the EU level.

Further information

The following documents are available for background information:

SNH and JNCC MPA network advice (December 2012) – www.jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-5510

Marine Scotland Report to Parliament on progress in establishing an MPA network - www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/marine/marine-environment/mpanetwork/MPAParliamentReport

The MPA Management Handbook - www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/marine/marine-environment/mpanetwork/engagement/ManagementHandbook

The online sensitivity matrix tool - www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/marine/marine-environment

JNCC and SNH Fisheries guidance – www.jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-6498 The following documents about the possible Firth of Forth Banks Complex possible MPA are also available at www.jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-6480:

Site summary

Data confidence assessment

Detailed assessment against the MPA Selection Guidelines