Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site...

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report

Contract Reference: MB0120

Report Number: 34 Version 5

September 2015

Project Title: Marine Protected Areas Data and Evidence Co-ordination Programme Report No 34. Title: Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report Defra Project Code: MB0120 Defra Contract Manager: Carole Kelly Funded by: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) Marine Science and Evidence Unit Marine Directorate Nobel House 17 Smith Square London SW1P 3JR Authorship Sophie Green British Geological Survey [email protected] Rhys Cooper British Geological Survey [email protected] Dayton Dove British Geological Survey [email protected] Acknowledgements We thank all Cefas reviewers for advice on earlier drafts of this report and Christopher Barrio Froján for help with the final draft

Disclaimer: The content of this report does not necessarily reflect the views of Defra, nor is Defra liable for the accuracy of information provided, or responsible for any use of the report’s content. Although the data provided in this report have been quality assured, the final products - e.g. habitat maps – may be subject to revision following any further data provision or once they have been used in SNCB advice or assessments.

mailto:[email protected]

Cefas Document Control Title: Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report

Submitted to: Marine Protected Areas Survey Co-ordination & Evidence Delivery Group

Date submitted: September 2015

Project Manager: David Limpenny

Report compiled by: Sophie Green, Rhys Cooper, Dayton Dove

Quality control by: Markus Diesing, Chris Jenkins, Jo Murray, Matt Curtis, Christopher Barrio Froján

Approved by & date: Keith Weston (17/09/2015)

Version: 5

Version Control History

Author Date Comment Version

Sophie Green, Rhys Cooper, Dayton Dove

19/12/2014 Submitted for Cefas review 1


27/1/2015 Updated following Cefas review 2


03/03/2015 Submitted to MPAG for external review 3


05/07/2015 Revised following external reviewers’ comments 4

Keith Weston 17/09/2015 Revised following reviewers’ comments 5

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report i

Table of Contents

Table of Contents ........................................................................................................ i

List of Tables .............................................................................................................. iii

List of Figures ............................................................................................................. iv

1 Executive Summary: Report Card ................................................................. 1

1.1 Features proposed in the SAD for inclusion within the rMCZ designation ..... 1

1.2 Features present but not proposed in the SAD for inclusion within the rMCZ designation .................................................................................................... 2

1.3 Features identified by the dedicated surveys but not included in the SAD .... 2

1.4 Evidence of human activities occurring within the rMCZ ............................... 2

2 Introduction ................................................................................................... 3

2.1 Location of the rMCZ ..................................................................................... 3

2.2 Rationale for site position and designation .................................................... 4

2.3 Rationale for prioritising this rMCZ for additional evidence collection ........... 5

2.4 Survey aims and objectives........................................................................... 6

3 Methods ........................................................................................................ 7

3.1 Acoustic data acquisition ............................................................................... 7

3.2 Ground truth sample acquisition .................................................................... 7

3.3 Production of the updated habitat map ......................................................... 9

3.4 Quality of the updated map ......................................................................... 12

4 Results ........................................................................................................ 14

4.1 Site Assessment Document habitat map .................................................... 14

4.2 Updated habitat map based on new survey data ........................................ 14

4.3 Quality of the updated habitat map ............................................................. 16

4.4 Broadscale habitats identified ..................................................................... 16

4.5 Habitat FOCI identified ................................................................................ 17

4.6 Species FOCI identified .............................................................................. 18

4.7 Quality Assurance (QA) and Quality Control (QC) ...................................... 19

4.8 Data limitations and adequacy of the updated habitat map ......................... 19

4.9 Observations of human impacts on the seabed .......................................... 20

5 Conclusions ................................................................................................ 21

5.1 Presence and extent of broadscale habitats ............................................... 21

5.2 Presence and extent of habitat FOCI .......................................................... 21

5.3 Presence and distribution of species FOCI ................................................. 22

5.4 Evidence of human activities impacting the seabed .................................... 22

References ............................................................................................................... 23

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report ii

Data sources ............................................................................................................ 25

Annexes ................................................................................................................... 26

Annex 1. Broadscale habitat features listed in the ENG. ..................................... 26

Annex 2. Habitat FOCI listed in the ENG. ............................................................ 27

Annex 3. Low or limited mobility species FOCI listed in the ENG. ....................... 28

Annex 4. Highly mobile species FOCI listed in the ENG. ..................................... 29

Annex 5. Video and stills processing protocol. .................................................... 30

Appendices .............................................................................................................. 32

Appendix 1. Survey metadata (2ENC30914) ....................................................... 32

Appendix 2. Outputs from acoustic surveys ......................................................... 39

Appendix 3. Evidence of human activities within the rMCZ ................................. 42

Appendix 4. Species list ....................................................................................... 43

Appendix 5. Analyses of sediment samples: classification and composition ...... 54

Appendix 6. BSH/EUNIS Level 3 descriptions derived from video and stills ........ 57

Appendix 7. Example images from survey for broadscale habitats...................... 61

Appendix 8. Example images from survey for habitat FOCI ................................ 62

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report iii

List of Tables

Table 1. Broadscale habitats for which this rMCZ was proposed for designation. .... 4

Table 2. Habitat FOCI for which this rMCZ was proposed for designation. ............... 5

Table 3. Species FOCI for which this rMCZ was proposed for designation. .............. 5

Table 4. Geological features for which this rMCZ was proposed for designation. ..... 5

Table 5. Description of derivatives calculated for bathymetry using ArcGIS/Fledermaus. ........................................................................................ 10

Table 6. Broadscale habitats identified in this rMCZ. .............................................. 17

Table 7. Habitat FOCI identified in this rMCZ. ......................................................... 18

Table 8. Species FOCI identified in this rMCZ. ....................................................... 19

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report iv

List of Figures

Figure 1. Location of the Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ. ...................................... 4

Figure 2. Location of ground truth sampling sites in the Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ.. ................................................................................................................ 9

Figure 3. Backscatter mosaic generalisation/smoothing prior to autoclassification routine. ............................................................................................................. 11

Figure 4. Iso cluster maximum likelihood classification routine. .............................. 12

Figure 5. Habitat map from the Site Assessment Document. .................................. 14

Figure 6. Updated map of broadscale habitats based on newly acquired survey data. ................................................................................................................. 15

Figure 7. Overall MESH confidence score for the updated broadscale habitat map. ......................................................................................................................... 16

Figure 8. Habitat FOCI identified. ............................................................................ 18

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 1

1 Executive Summary: Report Card

This report details the findings of a dedicated seabed survey at the Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds recommended Marine Conservation Zone (rMCZ). The site is being considered for inclusion in a network of Marine Protected Areas in UK waters, designed to meet conservation objectives under the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009. Prior to the dedicated surveys of this site, the site assessment had been made on the basis of best available evidence, drawn largely from historical data, modelled habitat maps and stakeholder knowledge of the area. The purpose of the dedicated surveys was to provide direct evidence of the presence and extent of the broadscale habitats and habitat FOCI (Features of Conservation Importance) that had been detailed in the original Site Assessment Document (SAD; Net Gain, 2011).

This Executive Summary is presented in the form of a Report Card that compares the features predicted in the original SAD with those in the updated habitat map and new sample data acquired during the recent dedicated surveys. The comparison covers broadscale habitats and habitat FOCI. Surveys were conducted by the Environment Agency in March 2012, by Titan Environmental Surveys in March and April 2012, by Cefas in January 2013, by Gardline Geosurvey in February and March 2014, and lastly, by the Environment Agency in August and September 2014.

1.1 Features proposed in the SAD for inclusion within the rMCZ designation

Feature

Extent according

to SAD

Extent according to

updated habitat map*

Accordance between SAD and updated

habitat map

Broadscale Habitats Presence Extent

A3.1 High energy infralittoral rock 2.71 km2 0.00 km2 -2.71 km2

A3.2 Moderate energy infralittoral rock 145.71 km2 0.00 km2 -145.71 km2

A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock 11.56 km2 29.97 km2** +18.41 km2

Habitat FOCI

Subtidal Chalk 22 point records

Subtidal Chalk (modelled) 189.37 km2 29.97 km2 -159.40 km2

Species FOCI

None proposed N/A N/A N/A N/A

Geological feature

North Norfolk coast (Subtidal) 14.89 km2 N/A N/A N/A

* Note that the dedicated surveys only obtained 78% data coverage of the site, therefore area values presented here are relative to the area surveyed.

** Values are for A4 Circalittoral rock. Based on available data it was impossible to make assessment of the energy conditions necessary for further refinement of the classification.


1.2 Features present but not proposed in the SAD for inclusion within the rMCZ designation

Feature

Extent according

to SAD

Extent according to



habitat map


A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment 155.66 km2 148.23 km2 -7.43 km2

Habitat FOCI

Blue Mussel Beds Not reported

Not recorded

N/A N/A

Peat and Clay Exposures Not reported

60 point records

N/A

Subtidal Sands and Gravels

Subtidal Sands and Gravels (modelled)

Not reported

166.66 km2 166.66 km2

Geological feature

Trimmingham (Subtidal) 0.46 km2 N/A N/A N/A


1.3 Features identified by the dedicated surveys but not included in the SAD

Feature

Extent according

to SAD

Extent according to



habitat map


A5.2 Subtidal sand N/A 18.43 km2 +18.43 km2

A5.3 Subtidal mud N/A 0.40 km2 +0.40 km2

A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments N/A 49.27 km2 +49.27 km2

Habitat FOCI

Ross Worm (Sabellaria spinulosa) Reefs

N/A 20 point records

+20 point records


1.4 Evidence of human activities occurring within the rMCZ

There is evidence of anthropogenic activity on the seabed within the boundaries of the rMCZ, in the form of trawl marks, pipelines and possible areas of spoil, in addition to seven wrecks.


2 Introduction

In accordance with the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009, the UK is committed to the development and implementation of a network of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs). The network will incorporate existing designated sites (e.g., Special Areas of Conservation and Special Protection Areas) along with a number of newly designated sites which, within the English territorial waters and offshore waters of England, Wales and Northern Ireland, will be termed Marine Conservation Zones (MCZs). In support of this initiative, four regional projects were set up to select sites that could contribute to this network because they contain one or more features specified in the Ecological Network Guidance (ENG; Natural England and the JNCC, 2010). The regional projects proposed a total of 127 recommended MCZs (rMCZs) and compiled a Site Assessment Document (SAD) for each site. Each SAD summarised what evidence was available for the presence and extent of the various habitat, species and geological features specified in the ENG and for which the site was being recommended for designation.

Due to the scarcity of survey-derived seabed habitat maps in UK waters, site assessments were necessarily made using best available evidence, which included historical data, modelled habitat maps and stakeholder knowledge of the areas concerned.

It became apparent that the best available evidence on features for which some sites had been recommended as MCZs was of variable quality. Consequently, Defra initiated a number of measures aimed at improving the evidence base, one of which took the form of a dedicated survey programme, implemented and coordinated by Cefas, to collect and interpret new survey data at selected rMCZs. This report provides an interpretation of survey data collected by recent dedicated surveys of the site intended to collect new acoustic and groundtruthing data. Surveys were conducted by the Environment Agency in March 2012 (Godsell and Fraser, 2013), by Titan Environmental Surveys Ltd in March and April 2012 (Jenner, 2012), by Cefas in January 2013 (Ware, 2013), by Gardline Geosurvey in February and March 2014 (Januszewski, 2014), and by the Environment Agency in August and September 2014 (Miller and Godsell, 2014).

2.1 Location of the rMCZ

The Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ is located approximately 200 m from the north Norfolk coast, adjacent to Sheringham, Cromer, West Weybourne and Sea Palling. The depth range of the site is approximately 0-25 m (Figure 1).


Figure 1. Location of the Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ. Bathymetry is from the Defra Digital Elevation Model (Astrium, 2011).

2.2 Rationale for site position and designation

The Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ was included in the proposed network of MPAs because of its contribution to Ecological Network Guidance (ENG) criteria to broadscale habitats (BSH), and its added ecological importance. For a detailed site description see Net Gain (2011) and The Marine Conservation Zone Project: Ecological Network Guidance (Natural England and the JNCC, 2010).

2.2.1 Broadscale habitats proposed for designation

Three BSHs were included in the recommendations for designation at this site, namely ‘A3.1 High energy infralittoral rock’, ‘A3.2 Moderate energy infralittoral rock’ and ‘A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock’ (Table 1). See Annex 1 for full list of BSH features listed in the ENG.

Table 1. Broadscale habitats for which this rMCZ was proposed for designation.

EUNIS code & Broadscale Habitat Spatial extent according to the SAD

A3.1 High energy infralittoral rock 2.71 km2

A3.2 Moderate energy infralittoral rock 145.71 km2

A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock 11.56 km2


2.2.2 Habitat FOCI proposed for designation

The habitat FOCI ‘Subtidal Chalk’ was included in the recommendations for designation (Table 2). Annex 2 presents all the habitat FOCI listed in the ENG.

Table 2. Habitat FOCI for which this rMCZ was proposed for designation.

Habitat FOCI Spatial extent according to SAD

Subtidal chalk 22 point records; 189.37 km2 (modelled)

2.2.3 Species FOCI proposed for designation

No ‘Low or limited mobility species’ FOCI and no ‘Highly mobile species’ FOCI were included in the recommendations for designation of this rMCZ (Table 3). Lists of all species FOCI included in the ENG are presented in Annexes 3 and 4.

Table 3. Species FOCI for which this rMCZ was proposed for designation.

Species FOCI Spatial extent according to SAD

Low or limited mobility species FOCI

None proposed N/A

Highly mobile species FOCI

None proposed N/A

2.2.4 Geological features proposed for designation

One geological feature was included in the recommendations for designation of this rMCZ, namely ‘North Norfolk Coast (subtidal)’ (Table 4).

Table 4. Geological features for which this rMCZ was proposed for designation.

Geological feature Spatial extent according to SAD

North Norfolk Coast (subtidal) 14.89 km2

2.3 Rationale for prioritising this rMCZ for additional evidence collection

Prioritisation of rMCZ sites for further evidence collection was informed by a gap analysis and evidence assessment. The prime objective was to elevate the confidence status for as many rMCZs as feasible to support designation in terms of the amount and quality of evidence for the presence and extent of BSHs and habitat FOCI and, where possible, species FOCI and any other listed features. The confidence status was originally assessed in the SADs according Technical Protocol E (Natural England and the JNCC, 2012).

The confidence score for the presence and extent of broadscale habitats and habitat FOCI reported for the Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ was Low (JNCC and Natural England, 2012). This site was therefore prioritised for additional evidence collection.


2.4 Survey aims and objectives

Primary Objectives

To collect acoustic and groundtruthing data to allow the production of an updated map which could be used to inform the presence of BSHs and habitat FOCI, and allow estimates to be made of their spatial extent within the rMCZ.

Secondary Objectives

To provide evidence, where possible, of the presence of species FOCI listed within the ENG (Annexes 3 and 4) within the rMCZ.

To report evidence of human activity occurring within the rMCZ found during the course of the survey.

It should be emphasised that surveys were not primarily designed to address the secondary objectives under the current programme of work.

Whilst the newly collected data will be used for the purposes of reporting against the primary objectives of the current programme of work (given above), it is recognised that these data will be valuable for informing the assessment and monitoring of condition of given habitat features in the future.


3 Methods

3.1 Acoustic data acquisition

Three of the five dedicated surveys of the Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ were commissioned to collect acoustic data (see Appendix 2 for extent covered by the separate acoustic surveys). The first acoustic survey was undertaken during March and April 2012 by Titan Environmental Surveys Ltd on board the survey catamaran Titan Endeavour. A Geoacoustics Geoswathe system was used to collect detailed swathe bathymetry and acoustic backscatter data. Processing of the bathymetry data was carried out using the GeoSwath processing suite, GS+ 3.50. This survey targeted the foreshore area designated as Priority 1 for survey and partially covered the Priority 2 area, at its western extent (Jenner, 2012).

The second acoustic survey was conducted by Cefas in January 2013 on board the RV Cefas Endeavour. This survey was originally intended to collect full coverage acoustic data from the entire site. However, due to time and weather constraints, this survey targeted the site area further offshore, to the north east of the site, and survey lines were conducted with a larger-than-intended line spacing of approximately 320 m (Ware, 2013). Multibeam bathymetry and backscatter data were acquired using the Kongsberg EM2040 system, operated at 300 kHz. Multibeam echosounder (MBES) data were processed using CARIS HIPS software. Backscatter data were processed with Fledermaus Geocoder Toolbox.

The final acoustic survey was conducted in February and March 2014 by Gardline Geosurvey using a hull mounted Kongsberg Simrad EM3002 system on board the MV Confidante. Data were processed using CARIS HIPS/SIPS with final visualisation deliverables processed with QPS Fledermaus. This survey targeted the Priority 3 area of the rMCZ (Januszewki, 2014).

All bathymetry data were collected and processed in accordance with the International Hydrographic Organisation (IHO) Standards for Hydrographic Surveys - Order 1 (Special Publication 44, Edition 4) (see Appendix 2 for images derived from acoustic data and acoustic survey locations).

3.2 Ground truth sample acquisition

Groundtruthing was conducted during three of the five dedicated surveys of the Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ, between 2012 and 2014.

The first groundtruthing survey was conducted in March 2012 using the Briggs Marine Coastal Survey Vessel Humber Guardian. Sampling stations were selected using an equilateral triangle grid overlain on the predicted BSH map and Admiralty Charts (to identify hazards). No sediment grabs were taken on this survey as no sublittoral sediment BSHs were believed to be present in the area targeted (Godsell and Fraser, 2013). Instead, video samples were taken using a Drop Camera (DC) system, comprising a rectangular frame fitted with a video camera and a capability to capture still images. Illumination was provided by two high intensity LED spotlights and a flash unit. The camera was fitted with a four-spot laser-scaling device to provide a reference scale in the video image. Set-up and operation followed the MESH ‘Recommended Operating Guidelines (ROG) for underwater video and


photographic imaging techniques’ (Coggan et al., 2007). Video was recorded simultaneously to a Sony GV-HD700 DV tape recorded and a computer hard drive. A video overlay was used to provide station metadata, time and GPS position (of the vessel) in the recorded video image.

DC deployments lasted a minimum of 10 minutes, with the vessel executing a controlled drift at c. 0.5 knots (c. 0.25 m s-1) across a 50 m ‘bullring’ centred on the sampling station. Still images were captured at regular one-minute intervals and opportunistically if specific features of interest were encountered. The camera was deployed from the side gantry, amidships, with the height of the camera off the seabed controlled by a winch operator with sight of the video monitor.

Seabed imagery was also collected during a second survey aboard the RV Cefas Endeavour (cruise code: CEND0113). Sampling stations were selected based on the processed MBES data collected prior to the groundtruthing survey. The same sample acquisition methodology detailed for the 2012 cruise was applied (Ware, 2013).

The third and final groundtruthing survey was conducted in August and September 2014, using the Briggs Marine Coastal Survey Vessels Humber Guardian and Thames Guardian. This survey collected both seabed imagery and sediment grabs. The SRT SeaSpyder camera system was deployed from the stern of the survey vessels. Real-time navigation data acquisition and manual position fixing when the gear contacted the seabed were captured via HYDROpro software. Images of the seabed were captured approximately every 10 to 15 m over a distance of >150 m. Extra photographs were taken in heterogeneous areas of BSH and when particular habitat FOCI were observed. The camera deployment was extended if a BSH habitat boundary was detected, for estimating spatial extent. The drop frame depth was controlled via a winch operator receiving instructions from the survey cabin.

Stations were selected for grab sampling if suitable sublittoral sediment was observed in at least 50% of the seabed images collected. Stations were avoided if rocky habitat and/or delicate epifauna were observed. Generally, a position fix from the mid-point of the drop camera survey line was used as the target for grab deployment. However, if a mixture of habitat types was observed during the camera transect, the most appropriate target position was chosen. A mini-Hamon grab, with a sampling area of 0.1 m2, was deployed from the stern gantry of the vessels to collect sediment from the seabed, as described by Ware and Kenny (2011). Sampling positions were recorded using HYDROpro data acquisition software when the gear contacted the seabed. Once recovered, the sample was emptied into a suitable container, photographed, and the sample volume measured. A sub-sample (approx. 500 ml) of sediment was removed for particle size analysis (PSA). The remaining sample was washed over a 1 mm mesh sieve, photographed and preserved in a buffered 8% formaldehyde solution.

Underwater camera samples were taken at 196 stations, and the grab sampler was deployed at 70 stations (Figure 2; Appendix 1). Further details on ground truth sample collection are provided in the respective survey reports (Godsell and Fraser; 2013; Ware, 2013; Miller and Godsell, 2014).


Figure 2. Location of ground truth sampling sites in the Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ. Bathymetry is from the Defra Digital Elevation Model (Astrium, 2011).

3.3 Production of the updated habitat map

All new maps and their derivatives have been based on a WGS84 datum. A new habitat map for the site was produced by analysing and interpreting the available acoustic data and the newly acquired ground truth data. The process is a combination of two approaches, auto-classification (image analysis) and expert interpretation, as described below. The routine for auto-classification is flexible and dependent on site-specific data, allowing for the application of a bespoke routine to maximise the acoustic data available.

ArcGIS was used to perform an initial unsupervised classification on the acquired backscatter image. The single band backscatter mosaic was filtered and smoothed prior to the application of an Iso cluster/maximum likelihood classification routine. Python scripting language was used to automate the workflow. Each stage in the process is numbered and described in detail below.

Stage 1. Data Preparation

Prior to analysis, the bathymetry and backscatter data were re-sampled onto a common grid at 2 m resolution. This data preparation results in a spatial grid with a single value for bathymetry (depth) and a single value for backscatter (acoustic reflectance) in each 2 x 2 m grid cell, and it is these data values that were used in the rest of the process.


Stage 2. Derivatives calculated

From the two primary acoustic datasets, bathymetry and backscatter, a range of derivatives were calculated, as detailed in Table 5.

Table 5. Description of derivatives calculated for bathymetry using ArcGIS/Fledermaus.

Derivative Description

Slope The slope in degrees using the maximum change in elevation of each cell and its 8 neighbours (3*3)

Roughness/Rugosity Calculated as the difference between the maximum and minimum value of each cell and its 8 neighbours (3*3)

Aspect Identifies the downslope direction of the maximum rate of change in value from each cell to its neighbours. It can be thought of as the slope direction.

Stage 3. Unsupervised classification

The following steps outline the routine performed using standard ArcGIS 10.1 functionality to classify automatically the single band backscatter mosaic. This functionality was accessed and performed using a single Python script.

Smoothing/generalisation of the backscatter image

This step involved the generalisation and smoothing of the single band backscatter mosaic prior to application of the classification tools, to remove the influence of noise and ‘striping’ from within the backscatter image. This makes the production of smooth, topologically correct, ‘realistic’ polygons easier for later modification and attribution during the manual phase.

The raster was down-sampled to a 20 m resolution. Focal statistics were used to populate the cell values of a new 3 m resolution grid based on the mean of a 3 x 3 cell neighbourhood. The focal statistic command was repeated up to 10 times to ensure a smooth, noise free grid, as illustrated in Figure 3. The initial coarse resolution ensures the removal of any striping whilst maintaining the general trend. Converting back to a finer resolution is essential for the production of smooth, realistic vector output. The choice of cell size combination is crucial in determining feature size to be preserved. The cell size is chosen to attain the most appropriate scale of mapping in order to maximise the removal of noise from the data set, whilst preserving the required feature visibility.


Original Image

Resample to 20 m

FocalStats back to 3 m

FocalStats *10

Figure 3. Backscatter mosaic generalisation/smoothing prior to autoclassification routine.

ArcGIS Iso Cluster Unsupervised Classification Tool

This tool is part of the classification toolset available on the image classification toolbar within ArcGIS 10.1. The Iso cluster tool was chosen as it produced the best results from the single band image of backscatter intensity. The tool uses an iterative clustering procedure, also known as a migrating means technique, to find the natural groupings of cells and produce a signature file to be used as an input requirement for the maximum likelihood tool. The analyst chooses an unrealistically high number of potential sediment classes to group each cell into. The algorithm separates each cell into one of these clusters/groupings by calculating an arbitrary mean for each and assigning a cell to the most suitable cluster based on the shortest Euclidean distance. The mean of each group is then recalculated based on this first iteration of groupings. The process is repeated for the number of iterations specified, which should be greater than the number of classes and enough to ensure that the movement of cells across classes has become stable.

The maximum likelihood classification tool uses the output signature file from the Iso cluster procedure to create a classified raster. The tool will consider the variance and covariance of the class signature when assigning each cell to one of the classes. With the assumption that the distribution of a class sample is normal, a class can be characterised by the mean vector and the covariance matrix. The statistical probability is computed for each class to determine the membership of


cells to a class. An a priori probability weighting option is the default value of the maximum likelihood routine, whereby each cell is assigned to the class to which it has the highest probability of being a member.

Raster to polygon to conversion

The classified raster obtained from the above steps is converted to a vector polygon shapefile to produce a final fully attributed, topologically clean, smooth vector dataset (Figure 4).

Result of FocalStats/

Generalising

Iso Cluster Tool

Raster to Polygon

Figure 4. Iso cluster maximum likelihood classification routine.

The resultant classified output represents a numeric, thematic map. The number of classes created is simply an over-estimation of the potential number of sediment types present in the study area. The analyst can analyse the resulting map and change the number of classes until satisfied all likely changes in seabed substrate have been represented.

Stage 4. Expert judgement

The vectorised output of the semi-automated process is reviewed manually to assign sedimentological classifications in accordance with the EUNIS habitat classification system. An appreciation of the geological characteristics of the area also means that the analyst can ‘sense check’ the outputs. Polygons can be amended, modified and merged to best represent the acoustic data, groundtruthing samples with the influence of geological judgement.

The newly acquired acoustic data covered approximately 78% of the site area, mapping was therefore restricted to this area only.

3.4 Quality of the updated map

The technical quality of the updated habitat map was assessed using the MESH Confidence Assessment Tool1, originally developed by an international consortium of marine scientists working on the MESH (Mapping European Seabed Habitats) project. This tool considers the provenance of the data used to make a biotope/habitat map, including the techniques and technology used to characterise the physical and biological environment and the expertise of the people who had made the map. In its original implementation, it was used to make an auditable judgement of the confidence that could be placed in a range of existing, local biotope

1 http://emodnet-seabedhabitats.eu/confidence/confidenceAssessment.html [Accessed 18/12/2014]

http://emodnet-seabedhabitats.eu/confidence/confidenceAssessment.html


maps that had been developed using different techniques and data inputs, but were to be used in compiling a full coverage map for north-west Europe. Where two of the original maps overlapped, that with the highest MESH confidence score would take precedence in the compiled map.

Subsequent to the MESH project, the confidence assessment tool has been applied to provide a benchmark score that reflects the technical quality of newly developed habitat/biotope maps. Both physical and biological survey data are required to achieve the top mark of 100 but, as the current rMCZ exercise requires the mapping of broadscale physical habitats not biotopes, it excludes the need for biological data. In the absence of biological data, the maximum score attainable for a purely physical map based on physical data alone is 88.

In applying the tool to the current work, none of the weighting options were altered; that is, the tool was applied in its standard form, as downloaded from the internet.


4 Results

Lists of benthic taxa found in the grab and video samples are presented in Appendix 4; in total, 358 infaunal and 146 epifaunal taxa were recorded.

A summary of the PSA data acquired from the grab samples is given in Appendix 5. Of the 70 samples analysed, coarse sediment was recorded at 40 stations, sand at 16 stations, mixed sediments at 9 stations and mud at 5 stations.

Results from the analysis of video and still samples are summarised in Appendix 6. Example images of the BSHs and habitat FOCI recorded in the video samples are given in Appendices 7 and 8 respectively.

4.1 Site Assessment Document habitat map

The SAD habitat map (Figure 5) was produced using modelled data from the UKSeaMap (McBreen, 2010). For further detail see Net Gain (2011).

Figure 5. Habitat map from the Site Assessment Document.

4.2 Updated habitat map based on new survey data

The updated habitat map resulting from an integrated analysis of data from all dedicated surveys is presented in Figure 6.


Figure 6. Updated map of broadscale habitats based on newly acquired survey data.


4.3 Quality of the updated habitat map

The newly produced map attained a score of 81 from the MESH Confidence Assessment Tool (Figure 7), which is good, given that the maximum possible score for a map produced from purely physical data is 88.

Figure 7. Overall MESH confidence score for the updated broadscale habitat map.

4.4 Broadscale habitats identified

The mapped area is characterised by chalk close to shore, with sediments present further offshore. Due to lack of distinct acoustic signature associated with the different sediment textures present, and limited groundtruthing data, difficulties arose in delineating boundaries, particularly between mixed and coarse sediments. The predominant habitats were therefore mapped, placing a higher weighting on the bathymetry data and PSA to classify seabed textures.

The following BSHs have been recorded and mapped: ‘A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment’, ‘A5.2 Subtidal sand’, ‘A5.3 Subtidal mud’, and ‘A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments’. In addition ‘A4 Circalittoral rock’ has been identified, but it has not been possible to refine the classification to EUNIS Level 3 with the available data.

‘A4 Circalittoral rock’ is the parent habitat to the BSH ‘A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock’ listed in the SAD for this site. It is present in the shallowest part of the site, proximal to the coastline. However, it is difficult to make a distinction between high and moderate energy conditions based on the available data. The distinction between these classes is usually made on the basis of the benthic


assemblages present. However, in this case these data are inconclusive and therefore all subtidal rock is mapped as ‘A4 Circalittoral rock’.

The BSH ‘A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment’ is the most widespread of all the BSHs identified, occupying 60% of the mapped area of the rMCZ (Figure 6, Table 6). The BSH ‘A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments’ occupies 20% of the mapped area and BSH ‘A4 Circalittoral rock’ occupies just over 10% the area. The BSH ‘A5.2 Subtidal sand’ is also identified, occupying 7% of the mapped area. A small area of the site (<1%) is classified as the BSH ‘A5.3 Subtidal mud’.

The BSH ‘A5.2 Subtidal sand’ is present in the east of the site in the inshore section and at the western extent of the site, both inshore and offshore. The BSH ‘A5.3 Subtidal mud’ is identified towards the north-western extent of the area, occupying localised depressions in the seabed. The BSHs ‘A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments’ and ‘A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment’ are found across the remainder of the mapped area. PSA data suggest the presence of mixed sediments at the eastern extent of the site with coarse sediment covering the majority of the central site area (Figure 6).

Table 6. Broadscale habitats identified in this rMCZ.

Broadscale habitat type (EUNIS Level 3)

Spatial extent according to the SAD

Spatial extent according to the updated habitat map*

A4 Circalittoral rock (EUNIS Level 2) N/A** 29.97 km2

A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock 11.56 km2 N/A**

A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment 155.66 km2 148.23 km2

A5.2 Subtidal sand Not recorded 18.43 km2

A5.3 Subtidal mud Not recorded 0.40 km2

A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments Not recorded 49.27 km2


** It was not possible to distinguish between energy conditions associated with circalittoral rock habitats, therefore the values reported for A4.2 in the SAD map and A4 in the updated map are not strictly comparable, although A4.2 will be part of A4.

4.5 Habitat FOCI identified

The habitat FOCI ‘Subtidal Chalk’ identified in the SAD and proposed for designation of this site (Table 7), has been identified as occupying 12% of the mapped area of the rMCZ (Figure 8). The majority of the mapped area (67%), however, is classified as the habitat FOCI ‘Subtidal Sands and Gravels’. This habitat FOCI is also mentioned in the SAD but it is not in the list of features proposed for designation. A further two habitat FOCI are identified from the photographic stills, namely ‘Peat and Clay Exposures’ and ‘Ross Worm (Sabellaria spinulosa) Reefs’. ‘Peat and Clay Exposures’ is also mentioned in the SAD but not proposed for designation, whereas ‘Ross Worm (Sabellaria spinulosa) Reefs’ is not mentioned in the SAD. Due to the patchy nature of these habitat FOCI at a small spatial scale, it has not been possible to map their full extent using the available data. Sixty stills are classified as ‘Peat and Clay Exposures’, located in the north-western section of the site. The exposures appear to be associated with the slopes of localised depressions of the seabed. Similarly, 20 stills indicate the presence of ‘Ross Worm (Sabellaria spinulosa) Reefs’ in the western part of the rMCZ. These data points are located on the boundary of the data available for the site (Figure 8).


The SAD reports the presence of the habitat FOCI ‘Blue Mussel Beds’ in the rMCZ, although it is not proposed as a feature for designation. The extent or location of this feature is not reported in the SAD. This habitat FOCI was not observed by the recent dedicated surveys of this site.

Figure 8. Habitat FOCI identified.

Table 7. Habitat FOCI identified in this rMCZ.

Habitat FOCI Spatial extent

according to the SAD

Spatial extent according to the updated habitat

map*

Subtidal Sands and Gravels

Subtidal Sands and Gravels (modelled) Not reported 166.66 km2

Subtidal Chalk 22 point records

Subtidal Chalk (modelled) 189.37 km2 29.97 km2

Blue Mussel Beds Not reported Not recorded

Peat and Clay Exposures Not reported 60 point records

Ross Worm (Sabellaria spinulosa) Reefs N/A 20 point records


4.6 Species FOCI identified

No species FOCI were recorded from samples taken during the recent dedicated surveys (Table 8). The list of taxa identified from grab and video samples collected by the dedicated surveys is presented in Appendix 4.


Table 8. Species FOCI identified in this rMCZ.

Species FOCI Previously recorded

within rMCZ Identified during evidence

gathering survey

Low or Limited Mobility Species FOCI

None observed N/A N/A

Highly Mobile Species FOCI

None observed N/A N/A

4.7 Quality Assurance (QA) and Quality Control (QC)

4.7.1 Acoustic data

Acquisition and processing of the bathymetry data complied with the International Hydrographic Organisation (IHO) Standards for Hydrographic Surveys – Order 1 (Special Publication 44, Edition 4). The accompanying multibeam backscatter data were reviewed and processed by specialist Cefas staff to ensure these data were suitable for use in the subsequent interpretations and production of the updated habitat map.

4.7.2 Particle Size Analysis of sediments

PSA was carried out by Cefas following standard laboratory practice and the results checked by specialist Cefas staff following the recommendations of the National Marine Biological Analytical Quality Control (NMBAQC) scheme (Mason, 2011). Results of the PSA are shown in Appendix 5.

4.7.3 Infaunal samples from grabs

Infaunal samples were processed by APEM Ltd following standard laboratory practices and results checked following the recommendations of the NMBAQC scheme (Worsfold et al., 2010).

4.7.4 Video and still images and analysis

Video and photographic stills collected by the EA survey in August 2014 were processed by Marine Ecosol, and video collected by Cefas in January 2014 was processed by RSS Marine Ltd in accordance with the guidance documents developed by Cefas and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) for the acquisition and processing of video and stills data (Coggan and Howell, 2005; JNCC, in prep.; summarised in Annex 5).

4.8 Data limitations and adequacy of the updated habitat map

The quality of the updated habitat map, which covers 78% of the site, is assessed to be High (MESH assessment tool). A source of potential misclassification of habitats arises from the location of groundtruthing samples in relation to habitat types.

The survey has provided substantial, robust evidence for the presence of the mapped habitats. However, as it is impractical (and undesirable) to sample the entire area of the site with grabs and video, there is a chance that a BSH or FOCI


may exist within the site but has not been recorded, especially if it was limited in extent.

The precise location of the boundaries between the broadscale habitats depicted on the map should be regarded as indicative, not definitive. In nature, such boundaries are rarely abrupt. Instead it is typical for one BSH to grade into another across a transitional boundary, especially between sedimentary habitats. In contrast, the mapped boundaries are abrupt and have been placed using best professional judgment. This may have implications when calculating the overall extent of any of the mapped BSHs or FOCI.

4.9 Observations of human impacts on the seabed

There is evidence from the acoustic data of anthropogenic activity within the boundaries of the rMCZ. Evidence includes possible trawl marks, pipelines and potential areas of spoil, in addition to seven wrecks (Appendix 3).


5 Conclusions

5.1 Presence and extent of broadscale habitats

5.1.1 Presence

The 2012-2014 dedicated surveys of this rMCZ reported the presence of the EUNIS Level 2 habitat ‘A4 Circalittoral rock’. The SAD included the BSH ‘A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock’ in the recommendations for designating this site as an MCZ, which is a descendant habitat of A4. There was insufficient evidence to refine the classification of ‘A4 Circalittoral rock’.

The dedicated surveys have not confirmed the presence of the BSHs ‘A3.1 High energy infralittoral rock’ and ‘A3.2 Moderate energy infralittoral rock’, which were included in the recommendations made by the SAD for designating this site as an MCZ.

The dedicated surveys have reported the presence of the BSHs ‘A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment’, ‘A5.2 Subtidal sand’, ‘A5.3 Subtidal mud’ and ‘A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments’.

5.1.2 Extent

The spatial extent of the ‘A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment’ BSH on the updated habitat map is 148.23 km2. This is 7.43 km2 less than its spatial extent in the SAD habitat map. However, the recalculated value is based on 78% data coverage of the rMCZ.

The spatial extent of the ‘A5.2 Subtidal sand’ BSH on the updated habitat map is 18.43 km2, based on 78% data coverage of the site. This was not identified in the SAD habitat map.

The spatial extent of the ‘A5.3 Subtidal mud’ BSH on the updated habitat map is 0.40 km2, based on 78% data coverage of the site. This was not identified in the SAD habitat map.

The spatial extent of the ‘A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments’ BSH on the updated habitat map is 49.27 km2, based on 78% data coverage of the site. This was not identified in the SAD habitat map.

The spatial extent of the habitat ‘A4 Circalittoral rock’ on the updated habitat map is 29.97 km2.

5.2 Presence and extent of habitat FOCI

5.2.1 Presence

The 2012–2014 dedicated surveys have confirmed the presence of the habitat FOCI ‘Subtidal Chalk’ that was included in the recommendations made by the SAD for designating this site as an rMCZ.


The dedicated surveys have confirmed the presence of two habitat FOCI, ‘Peat and Clay Exposures’ and ‘Subtidal Sands and Gravels’, which were mentioned in the SAD but not included in the recommendations for designation of this site as an MCZ.

The dedicated surveys have not identified the presence of the habitat FOCI ‘Blue Mussel Beds’ which was mentioned in the SAD but not put forward as a recommendation for designating this site as an MCZ.

The dedicated surveys have identified the habitat FOCI ‘Ross Worm (Sabellaria spinulosa) Reefs’ within the rMCZ boundary. This habitat FOCI

was not listed in the SAD.

5.2.2 Extent

The spatial extent of the habitat FOCI ‘Subtidal Chalk’ on the updated habitat map is 29.97 km2, based on 78% data coverage. This is 159.40 km2 less than its spatial extent in the SAD habitat map.

The spatial extent of the habitat FOCI ‘Subtidal Sands and Gravels’ on the updated habitat map is 166.66 km2, based on 78% data coverage. No area for this habitat FOCI was reported in the SAD as it was not included on the features proposed for designation.

The habitat FOCIs ‘Peat and Clay Exposures’ and ‘Ross Worm (Sabellaria spinulosa) Reefs’ were recorded within the rMCZ boundary. It was not possible to calculate the extent of these features.

5.3 Presence and distribution of species FOCI

5.3.1 Low or limited mobility species

No low or limited mobility species FOCI were recorded at this site by the dedicated surveys. These observations are consistent with the evidence presented in the SAD.

5.3.2 Highly mobile species FOCI

No highly mobile species FOCI were recorded at this site by the dedicated surveys. These observations are consistent with the evidence presented in the SAD.

5.4 Evidence of human activities impacting the seabed

There is abundant evidence for human impacts on the seabed from the multibeam bathymetry and backscatter images. Seven wrecks can be identified along with numerous trawl marks and pipelines and an area of possible spoil.


References

Astrium (2011). Creation of a high resolution Digital Elevation Model (DEM) of the British Isles continental shelf: Final Report. Prepared for Defra, Contract Reference: 13820. 26 pp.

Coggan, R., Mitchell, A., White, J. and Golding, N. (2007). Recommended operating guidelines (ROG) for underwater video and photographic imaging techniques. www.searchmesh.net/PDF/GMHM3_video_ROG.pdf [Accessed 18/12/2014]

Coggan, R. and Howell, K. (2005). Draft SOP for the collection and analysis of video and still images for groundtruthing an acoustic basemap. Video survey SOP version 5. 10 pp.

Godsell, N. and Fraser, M. (2013), Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ, C5784A. 38 pp.

Januszewski, L. (2014). Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds Survey Report. 17 pp.

Jenner, M. (2012). Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Acoustic Survey: End of Cruise Report, CS0349/R1/V3. 180 pp.

JNCC (in prep.). Video/Stills Camera Standard Operating Procedure for Survey and Analysis: for groundtruthing and classifying an acoustic basemap, and development of new biotopes within the UK Marine Habitat Classification. JNCC Video and Stills Processing SOP v2. 6 pp.

JNCC and Natural England (2012). Marine Conservation Zone Project: JNCC and Natural England's advice to Defra on recommended Marine Conservation Zones. Peterborough and Sheffield. 1455 pp.

Mason, C. (2011). NMBAQC’s Best Practice Guidance Particle Size Analysis (PSA) for Supporting Biological Analysis.

McBreen, F. (2010). UKSeaMap 2010 EUNIS model Version 3.0. UKSeaMap 2010: Predictive seabed habitat map (v5). JNCC.

Miller, C. and Godsell, N. (2014) Draft version- Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ, C5784A. 227 pp.

Natural England and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (2010). The Marine Conservation Zone Project: Ecological Network Guidance. Sheffield and Peterborough, UK.

Natural England and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (2012). SNCB MCZ Advice Project-Assessing the scientific confidence in the presence and extent of features in recommended Marine Conservation Zones (Technical Protocol E).

Net Gain (2011). Final Recommendations Submission to Natural England and JNCC, Version 1.1. 880 pp.

Ware, S. (2013). Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Survey Report, C5785. 50 pp.

http://www.searchmesh.net/PDF/GMHM3_video_ROG.pdf


Ware, S. and Kenny, A. (2011). Guidelines for the conduct of benthic studies at marine aggregate extraction sites – 2nd edition. Marine Aggregate Levy Sustainability Fund. 80 pp.

Worsfold, T.M., Hall, D.J. and O’Reilly, M. (2010). Guidelines for processing marine macrobenthic invertebrate samples: a processing requirements protocol version 1 (June 2010). Unicomarine Report NMBAQCMbPRP to the NMBAQC Committee. 33 pp.


Data sources

All enquiries in relation to this report should be addressed to the following e-mail address: [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


Annexes

Annex 1. Broadscale habitat features listed in the ENG.

Broadscale Habitat Type EUNIS Level 3 Code

High energy intertidal rock A1.1

Moderate energy intertidal rock A1.2

Low energy intertidal rock A1.3

Intertidal coarse sediment A2.1

Intertidal sand and muddy sand A2.2

Intertidal mud A2.3

Intertidal mixed sediments A2.4

Coastal saltmarshes and saline reed beds A2.5

Intertidal sediments dominated by aquatic angiosperms A2.6

Intertidal biogenic reefs A2.7

High energy infralittoral rock* A3.1

Moderate energy infralittoral rock* A3.2

Low energy infralittoral rock* A3.3

High energy circalittoral rock** A4.1

Moderate energy circalittoral rock** A4.2

Low energy circalittoral rock** A4.3

Subtidal coarse sediment A5.1

Subtidal sand A5.2

Subtidal mud A5.3

Subtidal mixed sediments A5.4

Subtidal macrophyte-dominated sediment A5.5

Subtidal biogenic reefs A5.6

Deep-sea bed*** A6

* Infralittoral rock includes habitats of bedrock, boulders and cobble which occur in the shallow subtidal zone and typically support seaweed communities ** Circalittoral rock is characterised by animal dominated communities, rather than seaweed dominated communities *** The deep-sea bed broadscale habitat encompasses several different habitat sub-types, all of which should be protected within the MPA network. The broadscale habitat deep-sea bed habitat is found only in the south-west of the MCZ project area and MCZs identified for this broadscale habitat should seek to protect the variety of sub-types known to occur in the region.


Annex 2. Habitat FOCI listed in the ENG.

Habitat Features of Conservation Importance (FOCI)

Blue Mussel Beds (including Intertidal Beds on Mixed and Sandy Sediments)**

Cold-Water Coral Reefs ***

Coral Gardens***

Deep-Sea Sponge Aggregations***

Estuarine Rocky Habitats

File Shell Beds***

Fragile Sponge and Anthozoan Communities on Subtidal Rocky Habitats

Intertidal Underboulder Communities

Littoral Chalk Communities

Maerl Beds

Horse Mussel (Modiolus modiolus) Beds

Mud Habitats in Deep Water

Sea-Pen and Burrowing Megafauna Communities

Native Oyster (Ostrea edulis) Beds

Peat and Clay Exposures

Honeycomb Worm (Sabellaria alveolata) Reefs

Ross Worm (Sabellaria spinulosa) Reefs

Seagrass Beds

Sheltered Muddy Gravels

Subtidal Chalk

Subtidal Sands and Gravels****

Tide-Swept Channels

* Habitat FOCI have been identified from the ‘OSPAR List of Threatened and/or Declining Species and Habitats’ and the ‘UK List of Priority Species and Habitats (UK BAP)’. ** Only includes ‘natural’ beds on a variety of sediment types. Excludes artificially created mussel beds and those which occur on rocks and boulders. *** Cold-Water Coral Reefs, Coral Gardens, Deep-Sea Sponge Aggregations and File Shell Beds currently do not have distributional data which demonstrate their presence within the MCZ project area. **** Subtidal Sands and Gravels are considered to be adequately protected by its component habitat features subtidal sand and/or subtidal coarse sediment, and is no longer included within MCZ designations


Annex 3. Low or limited mobility species FOCI listed in the ENG.

Group Scientific name Common Name

Brown Algae Padina pavonica Peacock’s Tail

Red Algae Cruoria cruoriaeformis

Grateloupia montagnei

Lithothamnion corallioides

Phymatolithon calcareum

Burgundy Maerl Paint Weed

Grateloup’s Little-Lobed Weed

Coral Maerl

Common Maerl

Annelida Alkmaria romijni**

Armandia cirrhosa**

Tentacled Lagoon-Worm**

Lagoon Sandworm**

Teleostei Gobius cobitis

Gobius couchi

Hippocampus guttulatus

Hippocampus hippocampus

Giant Goby

Couch’s Goby

Long Snouted Seahorse

Short Snouted Seahorse

Bryozoa Victorella pavida Trembling Sea Mat

Cnidaria Amphianthus dohrnii

Eunicella verrucosa

Haliclystus auricula

Leptopsammia pruvoti

Lucernariopsis campanulata

Lucernariopsis cruxmelitensis

Nematostella vectensis

Sea-Fan Anemone

Pink Sea-Fan

Stalked Jellyfish***

Sunset Cup Coral

Stalked Jellyfish

Stalked Jellyfish

Starlet Sea Anemone

Crustacea Gammarus insensibilis**

Gitanopsis bispinosa

Pollicipes pollicipes

Palinurus elephas

Lagoon Sand Shrimp**

Amphipod Shrimp

Gooseneck Barnacle

Spiny Lobster

Mollusca Arctica islandica

Atrina pectinata

Caecum armoricum**

Ostrea edulis

Paludinella littorina

Tenellia adspersa**

Ocean Quahog

Fan Mussel

Defolin’s Lagoon Snail**

Native Oyster

Sea Snail****

Lagoon Sea Slug**

* Species FOCI have been identified from the ‘OSPAR List of Threatened and/or Declining Species and Habitats’, the ‘UK List of Priority Species and Habitats (UK BAP)’ and Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act. ** Those lagoonal species FOCI may be afforded sufficient protection through coastal lagoons designated as SACs under the EC Habitats Directive. However, this needs to be assessed by individual regional projects. *** The stalked jellyfish Haliclystus auricula is now referred to as Haliclystus species for the purpose of MCZ protection to account for potential presence of Haliclystus octoradiatus that has not been consistently differentiated within scientific records. The species are therefore considered jointly as an MCZ feature. **** The sea snail (Paludinella littorina) has been removed from Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act. This means that it is no longer a Feature of Conservation Importance (FOCI) so has been removed as a feature for MCZ designation.


Annex 4. Highly mobile species FOCI listed in the ENG.

Group Scientific name Common Name

Teleostei Osmerus eperlanus

Anguilla anguilla

Smelt

European Eel

Elasmobranchii Raja undulata Undulate Ray

* Species FOCI have been identified from the ‘OSPAR List of Threatened and/or Declining Species and Habitats’, the ‘UK List of Priority Species and Habitats (UK BAP)’ and Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act.


Annex 5. Video and stills processing protocol.

The purpose of the analysis of the video and still images is to identify which habitats exist in a video record, provide semi-quantitative data on their physical and biological characteristics and to note where one habitat changes to another. A minimum of 10% of the videos should be re-analysed for QA purposes.

Video Analysis

The video record is initially viewed rapidly (at approximately 4x normal speed) in order to segment it into sections representing different habitats. The start and end points of each segment are logged, and each segment subsequently subject to more detailed analysis. Brief changes in habitat type lasting less than one minute of the video record are considered as incidental patches and are not logged.

For each segment, note the start and end time and position from the information on the video overlay. View the segment at normal or slower than normal speed, noting the physical and biological characteristics, such as substrate type, seabed character, species and life forms present. For each taxon record an actual abundance (where feasible) or a semi quantitative abundance (e.g. SACFOR scale).

Record the analyses on the video pro-forma provided (paper and/or electronic), which is a modified version of the Sublittoral Habitat Recording Form used in the Marine Nature Conservation Review (MNCR) surveys.

When each segment has been analysed, review the information recorded and assign the segment to one of the broadscale habitat (BSH) types or habitat FOCI listed in the Ecological Network Guidance (as reproduced in Annexes 1 and 2 above). Note also any species FOCI observed (as per Annex 3 above).

Stills analysis

Still images should be analysed separately, to supplement and validate the video analysis, and provide more detailed (i.e. higher resolution) information than can be extracted from a moving video image.

For each segment of video, select three still images that are representative of the BSH or FOCI to which the video segment has been assigned. For each image, note the time and position it was taken, using information from the associated video overlay.

View the image at normal or greater than normal magnification, noting the physical and biological characteristics, such as substrate type, seabed character, species and life forms present. For each taxon record an actual abundance (where feasible) or a semi quantitative abundance (e.g. SACFOR scale).

Record the analysis on the stills pro-forma provided (paper and/or electronic), which is a modified version of the Sublittoral Habitat Recording Form used in the MNCR surveys. Assign each still image to the same BSH or habitat FOCI as its ‘parent’ segment in the video.


Taxon identification

In all analyses, the identification of taxa should be limited to a level that can be confidently achieved from the available image. Hence, taxon identity could range from the ‘life form’ level (e.g. sponge, hydroid, anemone) to the species level (e.g. Asterias rubens, Alcyonium digitatum). Avoid the temptation to guess the species identity if it cannot be determined positively from the image. For example, Spirobranchus sp. would be acceptable, but Spirobranchus triqueter would not, as the specific identification normally requires the specimen to be inspected under a microscope.


Appendices

Appendix 1. Survey metadata (2ENC30914)

Date Stn No Stn Code Gear Latitude Longitude

06/08/2014 1 CSCB063 DC SoL 52.99552 1.12296

06/08/2014 1 CSCB063 DC EoL 52.99407 1.12673

06/08/2014 2 CSCB073 DC SoL 52.98678 1.17417

06/08/2014 2 CSCB073 DC EoL 52.98698 1.17714

06/08/2014 3 CSCB006 DC SoL 52.97076 1.21638

06/08/2014 3 CSCB006 DC EoL 52.96978 1.2251

06/08/2014 4 CSCB009 DC SoL 52.9559 1.27028

06/08/2014 4 CSCB009 DC EoL 52.95455 1.27155

06/08/2014 5 CSCB013 DC SoL 52.9513 1.31958

06/08/2014 5 CSCB013 DC EoL 52.95093 1.32341

06/08/2014 6 CSCB038 DC SoL 52.93565 1.38765

06/08/2014 6 CSCB038 DC EoL 52.93473 1.38909

07/08/2014 7 CSCB026 DC SoL 52.83798 1.53703

07/08/2014 7 CSCB026 DC EoL 52.83915 1.53498

07/08/2014 8 CSCB022 DC SoL 52.85282 1.49107

07/08/2014 8 CSCB022 DC EoL 52.85281 1.48966

07/08/2014 9 CSCB021 DC SoL 52.85821 1.49686

07/08/2014 9 CSCB021 DC EoL 52.85807 1.49525

07/08/2014 10 CSCB024 DC SoL 52.87745 1.50716

07/08/2014 10 CSCB024 DC EoL 52.87824 1.50426

07/08/2014 11 CSCB023 DC SoL 52.88618 1.48939

07/08/2014 11 CSCB023 DC EoL 52.88728 1.48767

07/08/2014 12 CSCB020 DC SoL 52.89761 1.44947

07/08/2014 12 CSCB020 DC EoL 52.89683 1.4489

07/08/2014 13 CSCB018 DC SoL 52.89878 1.42577

07/08/2014 13 CSCB018 DC EoL 52.8979 1.42472

07/08/2014 14 CSCB016 DC SoL 52.90192 1.40931

07/08/2014 14 CSCB016 DC EoL 52.90093 1.41033

07/08/2014 15 CSCB015 DC SoL 52.92058 1.38015

07/08/2014 15 CSCB015 DC EoL 52.91943 1.38177

07/08/2014 16 CSCB014 DC SoL 52.93572 1.36185

07/08/2014 16 CSCB014 DC EoL 52.93597 1.35956

07/08/2014 17 CSCB036 DC SoL 52.95155 1.34747

07/08/2014 17 CSCB036 DC EoL 52.95242 1.34582

07/08/2014 18 CSCB108 DC SoL 52.96625 1.33571

07/08/2014 18 CSCB108 DC EoL 52.96781 1.33361

07/08/2014 19 CSCB107 DC SoL 52.98247 1.32344

07/08/2014 19 CSCB107 DC EoL 52.98282 1.32034

07/08/2014 20 CSCB153 DC SoL 52.99195 1.31899

07/08/2014 20 CSCB153 DC EoL 52.99329 1.31863

07/08/2014 21 CSCB155 DC SoL 53.00212 1.32559

07/08/2014 21 CSCB155 DC EoL 53.00322 1.32368

07/08/2014 22 CSCB156 DC SoL 53.01275 1.34061

07/08/2014 22 CSCB156 DC EoL 53.01426 1.34115



07/08/2014 23 CSCB159 DC SoL 53.01209 1.36252

07/08/2014 23 CSCB159 DC EoL 53.01028 1.36493

07/08/2014 24 CSCB162 DC SoL 52.99953 1.39457

07/08/2014 24 CSCB162 DC EoL 52.99791 1.39736

07/08/2014 25 CSCB164 DC SoL 52.98678 1.42788

07/08/2014 25 CSCB164 DC EoL 52.98503 1.43092

07/08/2014 26 CSCB046 DC SoL 52.97877 1.44102

07/08/2014 26 CSCB046 DC EoL 52.97783 1.44522

21/08/2014 27 CSCB025 DC SoL 52.85183 1.52122

21/08/2014 27 CSCB025 DC EoL 52.85310 1.52022

21/08/2014 28 CSCB019 DC SoL 52.90181 1.44707

21/08/2014 28 CSCB019 DC EoL 52.90304 1.44601

21/08/2014 29 CSCB044 DC SoL 52.91628 1.43725

21/08/2014 29 CSCB044 DC EoL 52.91768 1.43617

21/08/2014 30 CSCB033 DC SoL 52.91610 1.40073

21/08/2014 30 CSCB033 DC EoL 52.91715 1.39979

21/08/2014 31 CSCB017 DC SoL 52.92572 1.38981

21/08/2014 31 CSCB017 DC EoL 52.92678 1.38910

21/08/2014 32 CSCB042 DC SoL 52.93280 1.42296

21/08/2014 32 CSCB042 DC EoL 52.93387 1.42213

21/08/2014 33 CSCB040 DC SoL 52.94971 1.40969

21/08/2014 33 CSCB040 DC EoL 52.95072 1.40852

21/08/2014 34 CSCB037 DC SoL 52.94899 1.38035

21/08/2014 34 CSCB037 DC EoL 52.95026 1.37874

21/08/2014 35 CSCB110 DC SoL 52.96584 1.36675

21/08/2014 35 CSCB110 DC EoL 52.96667 1.36487

21/08/2014 36 CSCB109 DC SoL 52.98122 1.35211

21/08/2014 36 CSCB109 DC EoL 52.98189 1.35054

21/08/2014 37 CSCB106 DC SoL 52.96682 1.30717

21/08/2014 37 CSCB106 DC EoL 52.96728 1.30559

21/08/2014 38 CSC011 DC SoL 52.95167 1.29165

21/08/2014 38 CSC011 DC EoL 52.95267 1.28990

21/08/2014 39 CSCB012 DC SoL 52.94434 1.28821

21/08/2014 39 CSCB012 DC EoL 52.94486 1.28946

21/08/2014 40 CSCB010 DC SoL 52.96869 1.27624

21/08/2014 40 CSCB010 DC EoL 52.96968 1.27705

21/08/2014 41 CSCB112 DC SoL 52.97032 1.27021

21/08/2014 41 CSCB112 DC EoL 52.97093 1.26927

21/08/2014 42 CSCB008 DC SoL 52.96885 1.24753

21/08/2014 42 CSCB008 DC EoL 52.96999 1.24699

21/08/2014 43 CSCB031 DC SoL 52.95268 1.23162

21/08/2014 43 CSCB031 DC EoL 52.95264 1.23326

21/08/2014 44 CSCB007 DC SoL 52.95796 1.21353

21/08/2014 44 CSCB007 DC EoL 52.95824 1.21536

21/08/2014 45 CSCB005 DC SoL 52.95627 1.20124

21/08/2014 45 CSCB005 DC EoL 52.95630 1.20278

21/08/2014 46 CSCB032 DC SoL 52.96651 1.20333

21/08/2014 46 CSCB032 DC EoL 52.96598 1.20464



21/08/2014 47 CSCB102 DC SoL 52.98504 1.23309

21/08/2014 47 CSCB102 DC EoL 52.98603 1.23423

21/08/2014 48 CSCB104 DC SoL 52.98398 1.26257

21/08/2014 48 CSCB104 DC EoL 52.98457 1.26424

21/08/2014 49 CSCB105 DC SoL 52.98221 1.29253

21/08/2014 49 CSCB105 DC EoL 52.98209 1.29465

21/08/2014 50 CSCB158 DC SoL 52.98878 1.36386

21/08/2014 50 CSCB158 DC EoL 52.98872 1.36574

21/08/2014 51 CSCB161 DC SoL 52.98872 1.38186

21/08/2014 51 CSCB161 DC EoL 52.98868 1.38398

21/08/2014 52 CSCB113 DC SoL 52.97654 1.39136

21/08/2014 52 CSCB113 DC EoL 52.97639 1.39314

21/08/2014 53 CSCB039 DC SoL 52.96449 1.39565

21/08/2014 53 CSCB039 DC EoL 52.96414 1.39763

21/08/2014 54 CSCB045 DC SoL 52.95144 1.42295

21/08/2014 54 CSCB045 DC EoL 52.95100 1.42489

21/08/2014 55 CSCB047 DC SoL 52.93189 1.45164

21/08/2014 55 CSCB047 DC EoL 52.93134 1.45347

21/08/2014 56 CSCB058 DC SoL 52.88341 1.52253

21/08/2014 56 CSCB058 DC EoL 52.88285 1.52436

22/08/2014 57 CSCB027 DC SoL 52.87290 1.53553

22/08/2014 57 CSCB027 DC EoL 52.87224 1.53742

22/08/2014 58 CSCB052 DC SoL 52.93528 1.47485

22/08/2014 58 CSCB052 DC EoL 52.93502 1.47591

22/08/2014 59 CSCB043 DC SoL 52.96419 1.42528

22/08/2014 59 CSCB043 DC EoL 52.96479 1.42557

22/08/2014 60 CSCB035 DC SoL 52.95016 1.18374

22/08/2014 60 CSCB035 DC EoL 52.95044 1.18163

22/08/2014 61 CSCB094 DC SoL 52.95735 1.17699

22/08/2014 61 CSCB094 DC EoL 52.95721 1.17820

22/08/2014 62 CSCB090 DC SoL 52.95718 1.17112

22/08/2014 62 CSCB090 DC EoL 52.95644 1.16939

22/08/2014 63 CSCB088 DC SoL 52.95611 1.16585

22/08/2014 63 CSCB088 DC EoL 52.95581 1.16515

22/08/2014 64 CSCB029 DC SoL 52.95312 1.16359

22/08/2014 64 CSCB029 DC EoL 52.95340 1.16529

22/08/2014 65 CSCB030 DC SoL 52.96337 1.15971

22/08/2014 65 CSCB030 DC EoL 52.96322 1.16154

22/08/2014 66 CSCB004 DC SoL 52.97061 1.18755

22/08/2014 66 CSCB004 DC EoL 52.97173 1.18790

28/08/2014 67 CSCB060 DC SoL 52.89891052 1.539656639

28/08/2014 67 CSCB060 DC EoL 52.89770889 1.539498329

28/08/2014 68 CSCB053 DC SoL 52.96276093 1.485663295

28/08/2014 68 CSCB053 DC EoL 52.9621315 1.487201691

28/08/2014 69 CSCB0151 DC SoL 53.01519775 1.295741677

28/08/2014 69 CSCB0151 DC EoL 53.01490021 1.297746658

28/08/2014 70 CSCB139 DC SoL 53.02159882 1.298993349

28/08/2014 70 CSCB139 DC EoL 53.02118683 1.301026702



28/08/2014 71 CSCB0127 DC SoL 53.02221298 1.290804982

28/08/2014 71 CSCB0127 DC EoL 53.02190399 1.292966723

28/08/2014 72 CSCB0126 DC SoL 53.02524185 1.269711614

28/08/2014 72 CSCB0126 DC EoL 53.02506256 1.272480011

28/08/2014 73 CSCB125 DC SoL 53.02295303 1.258090019

28/08/2014 73 CSCB125 DC EoL 53.02268219 1.260151625

28/08/2014 74 CSCB138 DC SoL 53.02780914 1.255271673

28/08/2014 74 CSCB138 DC EoL 53.02756882 1.257725

28/08/2014 75 CSCB124 DC SoL 53.03209305 1.234529972

28/08/2014 75 CSCB124 DC EoL 53.03187943 1.236548305

28/08/2014 76 CSCB123 DC SoL 53.02978134 1.223453283

28/08/2014 76 CSCB123 DC EoL 53.02954102 1.225863338

28/08/2014 77 CSCB147 DC SoL 53.02093506 1.224009991

28/08/2014 77 CSCB147 DC EoL 53.02060699 1.225870013

28/08/2014 78 CSCB115 DC SoL 53.00815201 1.241479993

28/08/2014 78 CSCB115 DC EoL 53.00792694 1.243783355

28/08/2014 79 CSCB150 DC SoL 53.00455856 1.276168346

28/08/2014 79 CSCB150 DC EoL 53.00431824 1.278745055

28/08/2014 80 CSCB101 DC SoL 53.00114822 1.219110012

28/08/2014 80 CSCB101 DC EoL 53.00091171 1.221166611

28/08/2014 81 CSCB167 DC SoL 53.01027679 1.195729971

28/08/2014 81 CSCB167 DC EoL 53.01017761 1.19808495

28/08/2014 82 CSCB096 DC SoL 53.00298691 1.159178376

28/08/2014 82 CSCB096 DC EoL 53.00291061 1.161304951

28/08/2014 83 CSCB068 DC SoL 52.98793793 1.14348495

28/08/2014 83 CSCB068 DC EoL 52.98787689 1.145353317

28/08/2014 84 CSCB087 DC SoL 52.9754715 1.16209662

28/08/2014 84 CSCB087 DC EoL 52.97556305 1.163841724

28/08/2014 85 CSCB092 DC SoL 52.97823334 1.145249963

28/08/2014 85 CSCB092 DC EoL 52.97823715 1.147078276

28/08/2014 86 CSCB111 DC SoL 53.01714706 1.12836504

28/08/2014 86 CSCB111 DC EoL 53.01763535 1.130078316

28/08/2014 87 CSCB097 DC SoL 53.01748276 1.175803304

28/08/2014 87 CSCB097 DC EoL 53.01793289 1.177576661

28/08/2014 88 CSCB146 DC SoL 53.02821732 1.192276716

28/08/2014 88 CSCB146 DC EoL 53.02843094 1.19415164

28/08/2014 89 CSCB136 DC SoL 53.02855682 1.197236657

28/08/2014 89 CSCB136 DC EoL 53.02878189 1.199283361

28/08/2014 90 CSCB122 DC SoL 53.03256989 1.204471707

28/08/2014 90 CSCB122 DC EoL 53.03324127 1.206136703

28/08/2014 91 CSCB133 DC SoL 53.03190231 1.185695052

28/08/2014 91 CSCB133 DC EoL 53.03239822 1.187868357

28/08/2014 92 CSCB137 DC SoL 53.03829956 1.179826617

28/08/2014 92 CSCB137 DC EoL 53.03882217 1.177994967

28/08/2014 93 CSCB131 DC SoL 53.03863525 1.165993333

28/08/2014 93 CSCB131 DC EoL 53.0391922 1.164281726

28/08/2014 94 CSCB120 DC SoL 53.04136658 1.156445026

28/08/2014 94 CSCB120 DC EoL 53.04232407 1.155066609



28/08/2014 95 CSCB130 DC SoL 53.03875351 1.155208349

28/08/2014 95 CSCB130 DC EoL 53.03943253 1.153805017

28/08/2014 96 CSCB165 DC SoL 53.03453827 1.15621829

28/08/2014 96 CSCB165 DC EoL 53.03549194 1.154466629

28/08/2014 97 CSCB116 DC SoL 53.04159927 1.130223274

28/08/2014 97 CSCB116 DC EoL 53.04251099 1.128606677

28/08/2014 98 CSCB095 DC SoL 53.01806641 1.155509949

28/08/2014 98 CSCB095 DC EoL 53.01886368 1.153736711

28/08/2014 99 CSCB145 DC SoL 53.02913284 1.174129963

28/08/2014 99 CSCB145 DC EoL 53.02968979 1.172213316

28/08/2014 100 CSCB132 DC SoL 53.03620529 1.172534943

28/08/2014 100 CSCB132 DC EoL 53.03691483 1.170799971

28/08/2014 101 CSCB134 DC SoL 53.03465652 1.183276653

28/08/2014 101 CSCB134 DC EoL 53.03542328 1.181419969

28/08/2014 102 CSCB121 DC SoL 53.03252029 1.193009973

28/08/2014 102 CSCB121 DC EoL 53.03326035 1.191174984

28/08/2014 103 CSCB135 DC SoL 53.03218842 1.201709986

28/08/2014 103 CSCB135 DC EoL 53.03278351 1.199754953

28/08/2014 104 CSCB140 DC SoL 53.03226471 1.215654969

28/08/2014 104 CSCB140 DC EoL 53.03287506 1.213578343

28/08/2014 105 CSCB141 DC SoL 53.02628708 1.228500009

28/08/2014 105 CSCB141 DC EoL 53.02682495 1.226461649

28/08/2014 106 CSCB148 DC SoL 53.02038574 1.248743296

28/08/2014 106 CSCB148 DC EoL 53.02098846 1.246675014

28/08/2014 107 CSCB168 DC SoL 53.0118103 1.254245043

28/08/2014 107 CSCB168 DC EoL 53.01230621 1.25199163

28/08/2014 108 CSCB103 DC SoL 52.96625 1.250481725

28/08/2014 108 CSCB103 DC EoL 53.00047684 1.24811995

28/08/2014 109 CSCB152 DC SoL 53.00251007 1.306424975

28/08/2014 109 CSCB152 DC EoL 53.0030899 1.304218292

28/08/2014 110 CSCB160 DC SoL 53.00070953 1.373821616

28/08/2014 110 CSCB160 DC EoL 53.00138474 1.371676683

Key: DC; Drop Camera; EoL - End of Line; SoL – Start of Line


Survey metadata (CEND0113Y)

Date Stn No Station code Gear Latitude Longitude

29/01/2013 180 CSBC100 DC SoL 53.02971 1.16075

29/01/2013 180 CSBC100 DC EoL 53.02974 1.16061

29/01/2013 183 CSBC103 DC SoL 53.01352 1.21019

29/01/2013 183 CSBC103 DC EoL 53.01355 1.21101

29/01/2013 182 CSCB101 DC SoL 53.02951 1.18368

29/01/2013 182 CSCB101 DC EoL 53.02949 1.18387

29/01/2012 181 CSCB102 DC SoL 53.01985 1.16151

29/01/2012 181 CSCB102 DC EoL 53.01983 1.16161

30/01/2013 197 CSCB104 DC SoL 53.00366 1.22539

30/01/2013 197 CSCB104 DC EoL 53.00387 1.22548

30/01/2013 195 CSCB106 DC SoL 52.982 1.28419

30/01/2013 195 CSCB106 DC EoL 52.98201 1.28434

30/01/2013 194 CSCB108 DC SoL 52.96418 1.37707

30/01/2013 194 CSCB108 DC EoL 52.96417 1.37735

30/01/2013 193 CSCB109 DC SoL 52.95738 1.41563

30/01/2013 193 CSCB109 DC EoL 52.9574 1.41527

30/01/2013 192 CSCB110 DC SoL 52.94839 1.43842

30/01/2013 192 CSCB110 DC EoL 52.94827 1.43871

29/01/2013 184 CSCB112 DC SoL 53.02327 1.19869

29/01/2013 184 CSCB112 DC EoL 53.0232 1.19857

30/01/2013 191 CSCB113 DC SoL 52.95066 1.48862

30/01/2013 191 CSCB113 DC EoL 52.95061 1.48879

30/01/2012 196 CSCD105 DC SoL 52.99368 1.29015

30/01/2012 196 CSCD105 DC EoL 52.99382 1.29018

Key: DC; Drop Camera; EoL - End of Line; SoL – Start of Line


Survey metadata (EA Survey 2012)


01/03/2012 CSCB_48 CS SoL 52.83735 1.53289

01/03/2012 CSCB_48 CS EoL 52.83886 1.53060

01/03/2012 CSCB_46 CS SoL 52.85654 1.51778

01/03/2012 CSCB_46 CS EoL 52.85757 1.51710

01/03/2012 CSCB_39 CS SoL 52.87703 1.46340

01/03/2012 CSCB_39 CS EoL 52.87737 1.46179

01/03/2012 CSCB_42 CS SoL 52.89675 1.48404

01/03/2012 CSCB_42 CS EoL 52.89790 1.48354

01/03/2012 CSCB_34 A1 CS SoL 52.91690 1.43014

01/03/2012 CSCB_34 A1 CS EoL 52.91726 1.42931

01/03/2012 CSCB_34 A2 CS SoL 52.91812 1.42718

01/03/2012 CSCB_34 A2 CS EoL 52.91835 1.42605

01/03/2012 CSCB_56_A1 CS SoL 52.92458 1.36314

01/03/2012 CSCB_56_A1 CS EoL 52.92462 1.36278

01/03/2012 CSCB_56_A2 CS SoL 52.92458 1.36298

01/03/2012 CSCB_56_A2 CS EoL 52.92547 1.35874

01/03/2012 CSCB_55 CS SoL 52.94441 1.30985

01/03/2012 CSCB_55 CS EoL 52.94444 1.30780

01/03/2012 CSCB_29 CS SoL 52.91616 1.39333

01/03/2012 CSCB_29 CS EoL 52.91557 1.39306

01/03/2012 CSCB_57 CS SoL 52.90404 1.41211

01/03/2012 CSCB_57 CS EoL 52.90458 1.40993

03/03/2012 CSCB_rRA_A1 CS SoL 52.92220 1.47784

03/03/2012 CSCB_rRA_A1 CS EoL 52.92424 1.47647

03/03/2012 CSCB_rRA_A2 CS SoL 52.91959 1.47538

3/03/2012 CSCB_rRA_A2 CS EoL 52.92288 1.47320

03/03/2012 CSCB_35 CS SoL 52.95657 1.43217

03/03/2012 CSCB_35 CS EoL 52.95596 1.43511

03/03/2012 CSCB_25 CS SoL 52.95783 1.35873

03/03/2012 CSCB_25 CS EoL 52.95934 1.36102

03/03/2012 CSCB_17 CS SoL 52.96030 1.28367

03/03/2012 CSCB_17 CS EoL 52.96189 1.28302

03/03/2012 CSCB_54 CS SoL 52.95219 1.27638

03/03/2012 CSCB_54 CS EoL 52.95324 1.27953

03/03/2012 CSCB_52 CS SoL 52.95547 1.19126

03/03/2012 CSCB_52 CS EoL 52.95663 1.19144

03/03/2012 CSCB_11 CS SoL 52.98166 1.22876

03/03/2012 CSCB_11 CS EoL 52.98317 1.22959

03/03/2012 CSCB_14 CS SoL 53.00071 1.24944

03/03/2012 CSCB_14 CS EoL 53.00321 1.25063

03/03/2012 CSCB_08 CS SoL 53.02059 1.19593

03/03/2012 CSCB_08 CS EoL 53.02258 1.19873

Key: CS; Camera Sledge; EOL - End of Line; SOL – Start of Line


Appendix 2. Outputs from acoustic surveys


Appendix 3. Evidence of human activities within the rMCZ


Appendix 4. Species list

Species list for grab samples (Species FOCI indicated by grey shading, if present). Percentage occurrence was calculated as the ‘Number of samples where the species occurs/Total number of samples x 100’.

Taxa % Occurrence

PROTOZOA

Astrorhiza 2 Protozoa 2

FORAMINIFERA Lagotia viridis 22

SPONGES Sycon ciliata 24 Cliona 17 Porifera 12 Leucosolenia 5 Dysidea fragilis 2

HYDROIDS, CORALS, JELLYFISH, ANEMONES Actiniaria 39 Sertularia 22 Hydrallmania falcata 20 Clytia hemisphaerica 17 Eudendrium 17 Sertularella 17 Corynidae 15 Diphasia 10 Calycella syringa 7 Campanulariidae 7 Cnidaria 7 Nemertesia 7 Plumularia setacea 7 Tridentata distans 7 Abietinaria abietina 5 Edwardsia claparedii 5 Halecium 5 Kirchenpaueria pinnata 5 Nemertesia antennina 5 Tubulariidae 5 Hydrozoa 2 Sertularella rugosa 2

FLATWORMS Turbellaria 27

RIBBON WORMS Nemertea 41 Tubulanus polymorphus 12 Cerebratulus 2

ROUND WORMS Nematoda 46

ENTOPROCTS Pedicellina 7 Barentsia 2

ARROW WORMS Spadella cephaloptera 2

PEANUT WORMS Golfingia elongata 29 Nephasoma minutum 12 Golfingia vulgaris 2


Taxa % Occurrence

SEGMENTED WORMS Lumbrineris cingulata (agg) 56 Sabellaria spinulosa 54 Scoloplos armiger 54 Polycirrus 46 Spirobranchus lamarcki 44 Dipolydora coeca (agg) 41 Nephtys 41 Eteone longa (agg) 39 Mediomastus fragilis 37 Pholoe inornata (sensu Petersen) 34 Syllis variegata 34 Harmothoe impar (agg) 32 Notomastus 32 Eumida bahusiensis 29 Eumida sanguinea (agg) 29 Nephtys caeca 29 Nephtys cirrosa 29 Pholoe baltica (sensu Petersen) 29 Glycera lapidum (agg) 27 Lanice conchilega 27 Caulleriella alata 24 Lepidonotus squamatus 24 Myrianida 24 Sphaerosyllis taylori 22 Syllis armillaris 22 Aonides paucibranchiata 20 Dipolydora caulleryi 20 Eulalia bilineata 20 Leiochone 20 Spio goniocephala 20 Cirriformia tentaculata 17 Eunereis longissima 17 Exogone naidina 17 Exogone verugera 17 Psamathe fusca 17 Spiophanes bombyx 17 Travisia forbesii 17 Aphelochaeta marioni 15 Eusyllis blomstrandi 15 Ophelia borealis 15 Pseudopolydora pulchra 15 Scalibregma celticum 15 Spio armata 15 Syllides 15 Ampharete lindstroemi 12 Eulalia expusilla 12 Exogone hebes 12 Nicolea venustula 12 Procerastea 12 Protodorvillea kefersteini 12 Scalibregma inflatum 12 Serpulidae 12 Asclerocheilus 10 Cirriformia 10 Grania 10 Nereimyra punctata 10 Pista elongata 10 Poecilochaetus serpens 10


Taxa % Occurrence

Synmerosyllis lamelligera 10 Terebellidae 10 Circeis spirillum 7 Eulalia viridis 7 Nephtys longosetosa 7 Sphaerosyllis bulbosa 7 Thelepus cincinnatus 7 Ampharete acutifrons 5 Anaitides maculata 5 Aphelochaeta (Type A) 5 Chaetozone christiei 5 Cirratulus 5 Euclymene oerstedii 5 Gattyana cirrhosa 5 Glycera oxycephala 5 Harmothoe extenuata 5 Hydroides norvegicus 5 Magelona johnstoni 5 Nereididae 5 Praxillella affinis 5 Sabella discifera 5 Scalibregma (Type A) 5 Sphaerosyllis erinaceus 5 Sthenelais boa 5 Tubificidae 5 Amblyosyllis formosa 2 Ampharete baltica 2 Amphicteis midas 2 Capitella 2 Chaetozone zetlandica 2 Eulalia aurea 2 Eulalia ornata 2 Eupolymnia nebulosa 2 Eusyllis blomstrandi (epitoke) 2 Euzonus flabelligerus 2 Fabricia (Type A) 2 Galathowenia oculata 2 Hesionura elongata 2 Lagis koreni 2 Laonice bahusiensis 2 Macrochaeta 2 Magelona mirabilis 2 Mysta picta 2 Nereis pelagica 2 Nereis zonata 2 Nicolea zostericola 2 Ophelina acuminata 2 Orbinia sertulata 2 Paraonis fulgens 2 Perinereis cultrifera 2 Pherusa plumosa 2 Pista malmgreni 2 Proceraea 2 Pseudopotamilla (Type A) 2 Rullierinereis ancornunezi 2 Sabellidae 2 Salvatoria 2 Scolelepis korsuni 2 Sphaerosyllis tetralix 2


Taxa % Occurrence

Spio filicornis (agg) 2 Spio martinensis 2 Syllis gracilis 2 Syllis licheri 2 Thelepus setosus 2 Trypanosyllis coeliaca 2

SEA SPIDERS Callipallene 20 Nymphon brevirostre 20 Nymphon hirtum 7 Anoplodactylus petiolatus 5 Endeis spinosa 2

CRUSTACEANS Pisidia longicornis 34 Urothoe elegans 34 Ampelisca diadema 32 Galathea intermedia 27 Unciola crenatipalma 27 Bathyporeia elegans 20 Paguridae 17 Pseudoprotella phasma 17 Sessilia 17 Verruca stroemia 17 Balanus crenatus 15 Hippolyte varians 15 Macropodia 15 Aora gracilis 12 Cheirocratus (female) 12 COPEPODA 12 Gnathia dentata 12 Abludomelita obtusata 10 Ampelisca spinipes 10 Aoridae (female) 10 Gammaropsis cornuta 10 Janira maculosa 10 Othomaera othonis 10 Pagurus cuanensis 10 Pseudoparatanais batei 10 Bathyporeia guilliamsoniana 7 Eualus pusiolus 7 Gastrosaccus spinifer 7 Gnathiidae 7 Leptocheirus pectinatus 7 Parapleustes bicuspis 7 Stenothoe marina 7 Thoralus cranchii 7 Zenobiana prismatica 7 Ascidicola rosea 5 Cancer pagurus 5 Cheirocratus assimilis 5 Eurydice spinigera 5 Gammaropsis maculata 5 Gnathiidae (female) 5 Hippolytidae 5 Liocarcinus 5 Macropodia parva 5 Monocorophium acherusicum 5 Nebalia reboredae 5 Orchomene humilis 5


Taxa % Occurrence

Pilumnus hirtellus 5 Upogebia 5 Urothoe brevicornis 5 Acidostoma neglectum 2 Acidostoma obesum (sensu Stoddart & Lowry) 2 Alteutha 2 Amphilochus manudens 2 Amphilochus neapolitanus 2 Anapagurus hyndmanni 2 Apherusa bispinosa 2 Bodotria scorpioides 2 Caprella 2 Caprella equilibra 2 Cheirocratus intermedius 2 Crassicorophium bonellii 2 Crassicorophium crassicorne 2 Ebalia 2 Elminius modestus 2 Eualus occultus 2 Galathea squamifera 2 Iphimedia nexa 2 Leptocheirus hirsutimanus 2 Monocorophium sextonae 2 Orchomenella nana 2 Pagurus bernhardus 2 Pandalus montagui 2 Philocheras fasciatus 2 Philocheras sculptus 2 Phtisica marina 2 Pirimela denticulata 2 Pleurocrypta porcellanae 2 Pontocrates altamarinus 2 Socarnes erythrophthalmus 2 Synchelidium maculatum 2 Tritaeta gibbosa 2 Upogebia deltaura 2 Urothoe marina 2

MOLLUSCS Abra alba 37 Crepidula fornicata 34 Goodallia triangularis 32 Gibbula cineraria 29 Gibbula tumida 27 Nucula nucleus 24 Onoba semicostata 22 Rissoa parva 20 Hiatella arctica 15 Kurtiella bidentata 12 Leptochiton asellus 10 Mya truncata 10 Mytilus edulis 10 Anomiidae 7 Buccinum undatum 7 Ocenebra erinacea 7 Onchidoris muricata 7 Spisula 7 Spisula elliptica 7 Chrysallida interstincta 5 Lucinoma borealis 5


Taxa % Occurrence

Alvania semistriata 2 Barnea candida 2 Cuthona 2 Doto 2 Ensis 2 Flabellina 2 Goniodoris nodosa 2 Hinia incrassata 2 Lacuna crassior 2 Modiolus 2 Oenopota rufa 2 Pholadidae 2 Polititapes 2 Tornus subcarinatus 2

BRYOZOANS Conopeum reticulum 51 Electra pilosa 46 Alcyonidioides mytili 37 Crisia 37 Escharella immersa 37 Flustra foliacea 37 Amphiblestrum auritum 32 Amathia lendigera 29 Bicellariella ciliata 29 Alcyonidium diaphanum 27 Vesicularia spinosa 24 Eucratea loricata 15 Scrupocellaria scruposa 15 Chorizopora brongniartii 12 Fenestrulina (Type A) 12 Tubulipora 12 Bowerbankia 10 Bugula plumosa 7 Candidae 7 Escharella ventricosa 7 Eurystrotos compacta 7 Schizomavella auriculata 7 Scruparia 7 Bugula fulva 5 Callopora 5 Callopora dumerilii 5 Plagioecia patina 5 Schizomavella linearis 5 Alcyonidium gelatinosum 2 Cellepora pumicosa 2 Disporella hispida 2 Electra monostachys 2 Penetrantia concharum 2 Phaeostachys spinifera 2 Schizotheca fissa 2

HORSESHOE WORMS Phoronis 27

SEA STARS, URCHINS, SEA CUCUMBERS Ophiuridae 24 Amphipholis squamata 22 Amphiuridae 20 Crossaster papposus 10 Cucumariidae 5 Ophiura albida 5


Taxa % Occurrence

Thyone fusus 5 Ophiothrix fragilis 2

SEA SQUIRTS Ascidiacea 37 Dendrodoa grossularia 37 Ascidiella scabra 29 Didemnidae 27 Polycarpa fibrosa 20 Botryllus schlosseri 17 Polycarpa pomaria 15 Botrylloides leachi 12 Archidistoma aggregatum 2 Microcosmus claudicans 2 Polyclinidae 2 Styela clava 2

ALGAE Chlorophyta 2 Heterosiphonia plumosa 2 Melobesia membranacea 2 Plocamium cartilagineum 2 Rhodophyta 2


Species list for video samples (Species FOCI indicated by grey shading, if present). Percentage occurrence was calculated as the ‘Number of samples where the species occurs/Total number of samples x 100’.

Taxa % Occurrence

SPONGES

Porifera 29

Dysidea fragilis 15

Sycon ciliatum 6

Amphilectus fucorum 2

Cliona celata 2

Grantia compressa 2

Polymastia penicillus 2

Polymastiidae 2

Sycon 2

Hymedesmiidae 1

HYDROIDS, CORALS, JELLYFISH, ANEMONES

Hydrozoa 69

Actiniaria 53

Urticina 51

Nemertesia antennina 50

Hydrallmania falcata 47

Sagartiidae 45

Nemertesia 15

Sertularia 13

Halecium 10

Nemertesia ramosa 10

Abietinaria abietina 7

Tubularia 6

Aglaopheniidae 6

Sertulariidae 6

Tubularia indivisa 6

Urticina felina 6

Plumularioidea 4

Alcyonium digitatum 2

Haleciidae 2

Cereus pedunculatus 2

Cerianthidae 2

Haliclona oculata 2

Metridium senile 2

Aglaophenia tubulifera 1

Halcampa chrysanthellum 1

Sertularella 1

Urticina eques 1

RIBBON WORMS

Nemertea 1

Tubulanus annulatus 1

SEGMENTED WORMS

Spirobranchus 53

Sabellaria spinulosa 31

Lanice conchilega 27


Taxa % Occurrence

Serpulidae 9

Sabella 4

Sabellida 3

Sabella pavonina 2

Canalipalpata 1

Chaetopterus 1

Lagis Koreni 1

Myxicola 1

Serpula vermicularis 1

Terebellidae 1

SEA SPIDERS

Pycnogonida 1

CRUSTACEANS

Balanidae 79

Cancer pagurus 42

Paguridae 34

Liocarcinus 24

Galatheidae 23

Inachidae 23

Crepidula fornicata 19

Pagurus bernhardus 15

Brachyura 15

Decapoda 14

Palamonoidea 11

Ebalia 10

Carcinus maenas 8

Necora puber 7

Caridea 6

Palaemon 6

Crustacea 6

Pandalidae 5

Homarus gammarus 4

Inachus 4

Majoidea 4

Macropodia 2

Majidae 2

Galathea 2

Liocarcinus depurator 2

Maja squinado 2

Munida rugosa 2

Crangonidae 1

Pisidia longicornis 1

MOLLUSCS

Calliostoma 31

Gastropoda 30

Gibbula 16

Gibbula cineraria 15

Janolus cristatus 6

Mollusca 5

Nudibranchia 4


Taxa % Occurrence

Bivalvia 3

Buccinum undatum 3

Nucella lapillus 2

Ostrea edulis 2

Triviinae 2

Anomiidae 1

Calliostoma zizyphinum 1

Eledone cirrhosa 1

Nassarius 1

Pholadinae 1

Polyplacophora 1

Trivia 1

BRYOZOANS

Bryozoa 73

Flustra foliacea 53

Alcyonidium diaphanum 29

Vesicularia spinosa 26

Bowerbankia 10

Bugula 3

Eucratea loricata 3

BRACHIOPODA

Brachiopoda 1

SEA STARS, URCHINS, SEA CUCUMBERS

Asterias rubens 62

Crossaster papposus 61

Henricia 29

Ophiuroidea 11

Ophiura albida 10

Asteroidea 6

Echinoidea 1

SEA SQUIRTS

Ascidiacea 24

Didemnidae 21

Styelidae 20

Molgula 11

Botryllus schlosseri 10

Polyclinidae 6

Clavelina lepadiformis 5

Molgula manhattensis 2

Polycarpa pomaria 2

Polycarpa 1

FISH

Callionymus 15

Pholis gunnellus 9

Pisces 8

Pomatoschistus 8

Gobiidae 6

Actinopterygii 2

Syngnathidae 2

Taurulus bubalis 2


Taxa % Occurrence

Gadidae 1

Labridae 1

Perciformes 1

Pleuronectiformes 1

ALGAE

Rhodophyta 23

Corallinales 14

Phaeophyceae 1


Appendix 5. Analyses of sediment samples: classification and composition

Stn No Stn Code Latitude Longitude Sediment Description EUNIS Level 3/BSH Gravel (%) Sand (%) Silt/clay (%)

110 GT116 53.042090 1.128645 sand and muddy sand Subtidal sand 0.94 99.06 0.00



113 GT165 53.035020 1.155122 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 31.46 68.54 0.00


115 GT132 53.036495 1.171437 mud and sandy mud Subtidal mud 0.00 18.72 81.28












127 GT147 53.020838 1.224483 mixed sediments Subtidal mixed sediments 13.62 66.03 20.35























150 GT060a 52.898158 1.539292 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 36.82 59.48 3.70

150 GT060b 52.897957 1.539555 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 39.66 56.17 4.17























Appendix 6. BSH/EUNIS Level 3 descriptions derived from video and stills

Station No. Station Code Latitude Longitude Habitat No. EUNIS Level 3/BSH MNCR Code

180 CSCB100 53.0295678 1.161554 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS










184 CSCB112 53.0227617 1.197671 S1 A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock CR.MCR


066 GT004 52.97061 1.18755 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS





004 GT009 52.9559 1.27028 S1 A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock CR.MCR


038 GT011 52.95167 1.29165 S1 A4.1 High energy circalittoral rock CR.HCR




015 GT015 52.92058 1.38015 S1 A5.2 Subtidal sand SS.SSa



013 GT018 52.89878 1.42577 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx











057 GT027 52.8729 1.53553 S1 A5.6 Subtidal biogenic reef SS.SBR



























Appendix 7. Example images from survey for broadscale habitats

Broadscale habitat Description Example image taken during survey

A4 Circalittoral rock

(Note: EUNIS Level 2,

not a BSH)

Circalittoral rock is

characterised by animal

dominated communities

(a departure from the

algae dominated

communities in the

infralittoral zone)

A5.1 Subtidal coarse

sediment

Coarse sediments

including coarse sand,

gravel, pebbles, shingle

and cobbles which are

often unstable due to

tidal currents and/or

wave action

A5.2 Subtidal sand Clean medium to fine

sands or non-cohesive

slightly muddy sands

on open coasts,

offshore or in estuaries

and marine inlets

A5.3 Subtidal mud Mud and cohesive

sandy mud extending

from the extreme lower

shore to offshore,

circalittoral habitats

No image available

A5.4 Subtidal mixed

sediments

Sublittoral mixed

(heterogeneous)

sediments found from

the extreme low water

mark to deep offshore

circalittoral habitats

http://eunis.eea.europa.eu/habitats/2500






Appendix 8. Example images from survey for habitat FOCI

Habitat FOCI Description Example image taken during survey

Subtidal Sands and

Gravels

Sand and gravel

seabeds widespread

around the UK

Subtidal Chalk Bored chalk bedrock

reef with sparse fauna

Ross Worm

(Sabellaria spinulosa)

Reefs

Sand with elevated

clumps of Sabellaria

spinulosa aggregations

Peat and Clay

Exposures

Seabeds formed of

exposed peat or clay

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site...

Documents

Transcript of Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site...