West Coast of the Outer Hebrides proposed Special Protection Area … Protected... · West Coast of...

West Coast of the Outer Hebrides proposed Special Protection Area (pSPA)

Advice to Support Management

Advice under Regulation 33(2) of the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended)

Document version control

Version Date Author Reason / Comments

Version 1 28/05/15 Tracey Begg First draft of West Coast of the Outer Hebrides pSPA text.

Version 2 19/06/15 Emma Philip Updated to remove track changes, advice consistency across suite, add maps and conservation objectives and comments from Johanne Ferguson.

Version 3 21/06/15 Emma Philip Final draft

22/07/15 Greg Mudge QA completed

Version 4 08/12/15 Tracey Begg Amendments to address MSS comments

Version 5 18/02/16 & 21/02/16

Emma Philip Conservation objectives updated and final draft.

Version 6 26/02/16 Emma Philip Address comments from Marine Scotland on Conservation Objectives.

Version 7 03/06/16 Tracey Begg Amendments using new template following of from comments resulting from dSPA workshop

Version 8 13/6/06 Emma Philip Final draft (replaced A1822781 on 13/06/16)

Version 9 27/06/2016 Susan Luurtsema Consistency check between Management Option documents.

Version 10 28/06/2016 Emma Philip QA and final version for submission to Marine Scotland

Distribution list

Format Version Issue date Issued to

Electronic Version 1 28/05/15 Emma Philip

Electronic Version 1 29/05/15 Erica Knott

Electronic Version 1 19/06/15 Johanne Ferguson

Electronic Version 3 21/06/15 Marine Scotland, Greg Mudge & Katie Gilham

Electronic Version 5 18/02/15 Greg Mudge

Electronic Version 5 22/02/16 Marine Scotland

Distribution list


Electronic Version 7 27/06/16 Emma Philip


iii

Contents

Purpose of advice ............................................................................................................... 1

Site summary ...................................................................................................................... 1

Species distribution within the site ................................................................................... 4

Conservation objectives ..................................................................................................... 8

The role of conservation objectives ................................................................................... 8

Draft conservation objectives ............................................................................................ 8

Management options ........................................................................................................ 10

Purpose of management options ..................................................................................... 10

Existing species protection .............................................................................................. 12

Overview of activities ....................................................................................................... 12

Existing management ....................................................................................................... 14

Introduction to aquaculture activities.............................................................................. 15

Aquaculture – finfish ........................................................................................................ 15

Aquaculture – shellfish farming ....................................................................................... 19

Introduction to fishing activities ...................................................................................... 23

Fishing – mobile gear ...................................................................................................... 23

Fishing – static gear ........................................................................................................ 27

Navigational dredging and disposal ................................................................................ 29

Ports and harbours activities ........................................................................................... 33

Recreational activities ...................................................................................................... 36

Introduction to renewables activities .............................................................................. 39

Wave energy ................................................................................................................... 40

Summary of management options ................................................................................... 43

Annex 1. Background to the advice contained in this paper ......................................... 47

Annex 2. Map showing overlapping and neighbouring existing protected areas. ....... 49

iv

Further information on Special Protection Areas, the wider network and protected areas management is

available on the Scottish Natural Heritage website.

The following documents provide further information about the features, evidence and assessment of the West Coast of the Outer Hebrides pSPA

and should be read alongside this paper:

Site selection document

Marine SPA stakeholder workshop summary report

Consultation overview document.

http://www.snh.gov.uk/protecting-scotlands-nature/protected-areas/international-designations/spa/

http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/A2013190.pdf

http://www.gov.scot/Resource/0050/00500837.pdf

http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/A2017643.pdf

1

Purpose of advice

This is a working document that has been produced to support initial discussions with stakeholders about potential future management of activities associated with this proposed SPA during the formal consultation. It sets out the draft conservation objectives for the qualifying features and these provide the starting point for considering whether additional site management is required. This document also sets out management options based on our current understanding of the sensitivities of the qualifying bird species and their supporting habitats to marine activities. The development of site management is an ongoing process which will continue after classification.

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. The paper does not attempt to cover all possible future activities or eventualities (e.g. as a result of accidents), and whilst it identifies activities that could contribute to cumulative effects relating to the qualifying species, we do not at this stage have the information to carry out detailed assessments.

Site summary

West Coast of the Outer Hebrides proposed Special Protection Area (pSPA) comprises an area of 1321.70 square kilometres (km2) and lies along the western seaboard of the archipelago of the Outer Hebrides, from the island of Scarp, off north west Harris to the island of Sandray south of Barra. The site also encompasses most of the marine waters within the Sound of Harris and the Sound of Barra (Map 1). The qualifying species of the proposed SPA are listed within Table 1.

Table 1. Qualifying species and numbers within the West Coast of the Outer Hebrides proposed SPA1,2

Species Number of birds % of British population

Great northern diver (non-breeding) 1300 52

Red-throated diver (breeding) 60 pairs 4

Black-throated diver (non-breeding) 40 7

Common eider (non-breeding) 5070 9

Long-tailed duck (non-breeding) 810 7

1 Further information on source of population estimates is provided in the Site Selection Document.

2 ‘Number of birds’ represents the mean maximum value for each species and has been rounded to

the nearest 10. The % population has been rounded to the nearest whole number.

2

Species Number of birds % of British population

Slavonian grebe (non-breeding) 50 5

Red-breasted merganser (non-breeding) 240 3

Divers, grebes and mergansers feed on a wide variety of fish that are associated with a range of seabed substrates. The diet of divers and mergansers can include haddock, cod, herring, sprats and gurnard along with smaller species such as sand-eels, pipefish, gobies, flatfish and butterfish. Slavonian grebe predominately feed on the smaller fish species with all bird species generally focusing on the most abundant local prey species. These fish-eating birds forage by surface diving and pursuing their prey through the water column.

Eider and long-tailed duck have a different feeding ecology. They feed almost exclusively on molluscs and small crustaceans, diving from the surface to pluck their prey from the sea bed. Great northern divers will also feed opportunistically on small crustaceans.

Diving activity varies from species to species with average foraging dive depths for most species shallower than 15 metres (m). However, substantially greater maximum dive depths have been recorded for some species, particularly great northern diver (55m).

The presence of high densities of breeding and non-breeding waterfowl at this site is indicative of the productivity and availability of prey these shallow waters and their habitats provide.

Whilst these shallower areas may be the focus for foraging activities, the wider area within close proximity will also be used by non-breeding birds for preening, moulting, loafing and roosting. For birds that over-winter along this coast, the numerous inlets and bays provide comparative shelter and readily accessible food irrespective of the harsh winter conditions that frequently prevail the west coast of Scotland.

Parts of the west coast of the Outer Hebrides, notably Harris, Lewis and some locations to the south of the island chain, have steep rocky shores and seacliffs bordered by much deeper water. However, much of the west coast consists of extensive lengths of calcareous sandy shore with numerous sheltered bays and inlets for birds to moult, roost, rest and feed. Sea depths within 10 km of the west coast are shallow, overlying sea bed sediments of shell-sand and gravel. This coast supports one of the largest unbroken expanses of kelp forest in Scotland. These shallow inshore waters support a diverse range of plant and animal communities, with high densities of molluscs, crustaceans, pelagic and demersal fish species. These are an important prey resource for birds. The distributions and relative distributions of birds within the site are illustrated in Maps 2a to 2c.

The main activities within these waters are fishing, aquaculture and low key recreational activities.

3

Map 1. Location of the West Coast of the Outer Hebrides pSPA

4

Species distribution within the site

The distributions of qualifying species within the site are illustrated in Maps 2a to 2c. Spatial species distributions for great northern diver, eider and long-tailed duck are delineated using the species-specific boundaries illustrated in the Site Selection Document. They show the areas where densities exceeded a modelled threshold (maximum curvature). Species are likely to be present outwith these areas in lower numbers. We have not attempted to display densities of the species within the species-specific boundaries; these are available in the Site Selection Documents. Species densities are not uniform within the boundaries and we anticipate that some locations within the individual boundaries will be more or less important than others.

For species where only shore count data are available the point symbols on the distribution maps represent each count sector used during the shore based surveys. Where the point symbols identify that numbers of an individual species are relatively high, this will be true for the length of the count sector area. There is no spatial seaward distribution identified for these species.

All species are protected throughout the whole site irrespective of the species-specific distributions. For species where species-specific boundaries are available, these distributions represent our most recent knowledge of areas with high densities of the non-breeding qualifying species within the pSPA as a whole, and are the focus for protection. Accordingly, we have based our management options advice on the species-specific boundaries. When considering future plans or projects, these distributions will be the starting point for making an assessment of the impacts of proposals and would be informed further by surveys.

5

Map 2a. Distribution of main concentrations of non-breeding great northern diver and relative distributions of non-breeding black-throated diver, red-breasted merganser and Slavonian grebe within the West Coast of Outer Hebrides pSPA3

3 Point symbols represent shore based counts sectors with larger points identifying sectors where relatively high numbers of birds were recorded

6

Map 2b. Distribution of main concentrations of non-breeding eider and long-tailed duck within the West Coast of Outer Hebrides pSPA

7

Map 2c. Important foraging areas for red-throated divers during the breeding season within the West Coast of Outer Hebrides pSPA

8

Conservation objectives

The role of conservation objectives

This section sets out the draft conservation objectives for the West Coast of the Outer Hebrides pSPA. These have been developed by SNH and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) in consultation with Marine Scotland. The draft conservation objectives endeavour to comply with the European Commission’s guidance note (2012) on setting conservation objectives.

The conservation objectives set out the essential elements needed to ensure that the qualifying features are maintained or restored on the site. The conservation objectives are designed to ensure that the obligations of the Birds and Habitats Directives can be met; that is, if all the conservation objectives are met, then the integrity of the site will be maintained, and deterioration or significant disturbance of the qualifying interests avoided.

The conservation objectives form the framework for establishing appropriate management measures and assessing the impacts of all future plans and projects that have the potential to affect the qualifying features of the site. Should the site be classified, the management requirements and any future plans or projects would be assessed against these conservation objectives.

The conservation objectives will be finalised at the time of site classification.

Draft conservation objectives

The purpose of this proposed SPA is to enable the application of special conservation measures concerning the marine habitat of Annex 1 birds and regularly occurring migratory birds4, to ensure their survival and reproduction in their area of distribution.

The conservation objectives are set out in bold with supplementary advice provided in the boxes below. Our intention is to provide policy guidance on the conservation objectives which will provide more site-specific advice.

This pSPA has been specifically selected to protect:

foraging habitat used by breeding red-throated divers; and

areas used by non-breeding divers, Slavonian grebe and sea ducks.

The conservation objectives for the West Coast of the Outer Hebrides proposed SPA are:

To avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species or significant disturbance to the qualifying species, subject to natural change, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained in the long-term and it continues to make an appropriate contribution to achieving the aims of the Birds Directive for each of the qualifying species.

4 Article 4 of the Birds Directive requires important areas for rare and sensitive birds (identified in

Annex 1 of the Directive) and regularly occurring migratory birds to be classified.

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/management/guidance_en.htm

9

Marine bird species are exposed to a range of wider drivers of change. Some of these are natural (e.g. population fluctuations/ shifts or habitat changes resulting from natural processes) and are not a direct result of human influences. Such changes in the qualifying species’ distribution and use of the site which are brought about by entirely natural drivers, directly or indirectly, are considered compatible with the site’s conservation objectives.

There may also be wider ranging anthropogenic impacts driving change within the site, such as climate change or in some cases fisheries stock management, which cannot be managed effectively at site level.

In reality any assessment of whether a change is natural will need to be assessed in the context of each individual site.

This contribution will be achieved through delivering the following objectives

for each of the site’s qualifying features:

a) Avoid significant mortality, injury and disturbance of the qualifying

features, so that the distribution of the species and ability to use the site

are maintained in the long-term;

The purpose of this objective is to avoid significant mortality, injury or disturbance of qualifying species that negatively affect the site on a long-term basis. Such an impact would have a detrimental effect on the contribution that this site makes to the maintenance of qualifying species at appropriate levels (Article 2 of the Birds Directive) in their natural range in UK waters and therefore should be avoided.

This site supports 1% or more of the GB population of great northern diver, red-throated diver, black-throated diver, Slavonian grebe, eider, long-tailed duck and red-breasted merganser.

For this site “significant” is taken to mean anthropogenic mortality, injury or disturbance that affect the qualifying species distribution and use within the site such that recovery cannot be expected or effects can be considered lasting. An appropriate timeframe for recovery will need to be considered in the context of the life history traits of the species and the impact pathways being assessed.

All birds require energy which they obtain from food, to survive and to breed. Significant disturbance can include displacement and barrier effects on the species. Where such disturbance is brought about by human activities which affect the qualifying species’ distribution and use of the site, such that their ability to survive and/or breed is compromised in the long-term, it is considered significant. For each qualifying species, the ability to use the site should be maintained. Further advice on ecological use of the site including: occupancy, foraging areas, flightless moulting periods and appropriate recovery timeframes will be provided in policy guidance to support the interpretation of the conservation objectives.

10

b) To maintain the habitats and food resources of the qualifying features in favourable condition.

The qualifying bird species using the site require sufficient food resource to be available. Great northern diver, red-throated diver, black-throated diver, Slavonian grebe, eider, long-tailed duck and red-breasted merganser can eat a variety of pelagic and benthic prey and these should be maintained at a level able to support species populations. Some of these prey species have particular habitat requirements and where this is the case, the site needs to be managed to ensure the extent and quality of the habitats are sufficient to maintain these prey species.

For the purposes of Habitats Regulations Appraisal (HRA) consideration of the conservation objectives will be required for plans / projects inside and outside the site.

Management options

This section sets out SNH’s advice on management. This provides a starting point for discussing any management that might be required. Should the site be classified discussions on management will be led by the relevant authority and will involve stakeholders.

Purpose of management options

Management options are developed where we consider that some form of management may be necessary to achieve the conservation objectives for each qualifying feature. The approach to identifying management options for each activity is risk-based; i.e. we are focused on providing advice where we believe there is a risk to achieving the conservation objectives for the site. To do this we are using the best scientific data available at the time of writing. The management options may be informed by discussion with stakeholders. If new information becomes available during the consultation, the management options may be revised.

The information below (at pre-classification stage) is general and not exhaustive, and is provided to assist and focus stakeholders and authorities in their consideration of the management of these operations. All new plans and projects will still need to be considered by the relevant competent authority, and detailed advice from SNH on such proposals will be provided on a case by case basis (further detail is provided in Annex 1). The level of any impact will depend on the location, scale, nature and intensity of the relevant activity.

Management options are focussed on the activities that cause an effect (a pressure) that a feature is sensitive to. Pressures can be physical (e.g. abrasion of the sea bed), 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 seabed habitats of the prey species that marine birds depend upon.

An assessment of the sensitivities of qualifying bird species to various pressures is provided in FEAST5 available on the Marine Scotland website. Similar assessments for supporting habitats are also available in FEAST. These sensitivities reflect our

5 Feature, Activity, Sensitivity Tool

http://www.marine.scotland.gov.uk/FEAST

11

current general understanding of the associations between activities, pressures and features, and support the first steps of the assessment of risk to the features in the pSPA. In some cases, there is not enough evidence to quantify the level of sensitivity that a feature has to a particular pressure however a potential sensitivity is still recognised. This advice along with the supporting databases should be used by authorities to inform the management of any activity impacting upon the site’s features or supporting features.

Marine activities are listed in Table 2 if any of the qualifying species of the site are assessed as having a high or medium sensitivity to the pressures arising from the activity. These activities therefore present a risk to achieving the conservation objectives.

Management options to manage the risk are recommended for each activity with specific details provided in the following sections. Overlap between different activities/potential developments and the proposed qualifying features are described and where appropriate mapped. The text focuses on interactions in terms of physical overlap but the assessment of risk in future should also take account of the intensity, frequency of activities within the site and condition of the qualifying species.

Our advice in relation to disturbance is not about preventing or reducing the disturbance of individual animals per se, but about ensuring that any disturbance that does occur is not at a level that disrupts or prevents the key life cycle activities of the proposed qualifying species, including continued access to the site and the resources upon which they depend. To simplify discussion in this document, we use the term ‘risk to the conservation objectives’ as a short hand for this. Where we are describing known effects on individual animals as part of the evidence behind our advice, then we make this clear.

SNH has identified a range of management options that may be applied:

management to remove or avoid pressures

management to reduce or limit pressures

no additional management required

Where we advise ‘reduce or limit’ pressures, there are choices around how this could

be achieved for a given activity e.g. we could reduce the intensity of an activity

and/or limit the activity to certain parts of a site.

We have identified management options and stated whether they are ‘recommended’ or should be ‘considered’ where:

Recommended – highlights that an activity-feature interaction exists, there is a reasonable evidence base and a specific recommendation for action can be made / justified.

Considered – highlights that an issue exists, but a lack of evidence upon which to base an assessment of risk means that a specific recommendation for action cannot / or need not be made at this point. However, there is sufficient cause to make managers aware of the issue and for them to investigate possible further work to

12

better understand the issue, including whether a management measure or best practice guidance may be helpful in achieving conservation objectives.

This approach has been agreed with Marine Scotland to ensure consistency in our advice between different sites and features.

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 will help us to develop more specific management options, focused on interactions between features and activities. Management options for the site will be agreed with stakeholders following classification of the SPA.

Existing species protection

Marine bird species in Scotland are protected everywhere from intentional/deliberate or reckless killing or injuring under the provisions of Article 5 of the Birds Directive and Article 1(1) of the 1981 Wildlife and Countryside Act (as amended).

A map showing neighbouring and overlapping protected areas is provided at Annex 2.

Overview of activities

Table 2 below lists the activities that currently take place and are likely to occur in the future within or close to the West Coast of the Outer Hebrides pSPA. Activities that we consider likely to affect the proposed qualifying features are explored in more detail in the sections on individual activities. Activities that the proposed qualifying features are not thought to be sensitive to will not be considered further within this document. Table 2 is not exhaustive, further discussions with those who use the area are required to improve our understanding of current activities (e.g. locations, extent and intensity). New or other activities not identified within the table would need to be considered on a case-by-case basis. For the purposes of our initial advice, we have concentrated on those activities most likely to occur within the proposed SPA.

The initial advice provided in this document does not preclude the requirement for all new projects and plans to undergo a Habitats Regulations Appraisal (HRA) by the relevant competent authority. Equally it does not preclude the requirement for competent authorities to carry out a review of existing consents, permissions and/or licences (see Annex 1 for further details). We would however anticipate that for activities not covered by this document and for existing activities where we have identified no additional management that impacts from these activities on the qualifying features can be scoped out at an early stage of the HRA. Early engagement with SNH and/or the relevant competent authority is recommended to ensure HRA requirements for plans and projects are scoped appropriately and unnecessary costs are avoided.

13

Table 2. Overview of activities with potential to affect the qualifying features of the West Coast of the Outer Hebrides pSPA

Activities considered likely to affect the qualifying features

Activities not considered likely to affect the qualifying features (other than insignificantly)6

Aquaculture Finfish

Shellfish

Fishing - mobile gear

Mechanical and hydraulic benthic

dredging

Benthic trawls

Pelagic trawls and seines

Fishing – static gear

Drift nets

Bottom set nets (incl. fyke nets

Navigational dredging • existing maintenance dredging

dredge spoil disposal

capital dredging

Ports and harbours

New development -

Acarsaid, Aird Ma Ruibhe Terminal,

Aird Mhor, Ardhasaig, Ardveenish,

Barra, Castlebay, Ceann a Gharaidh,

Eriskay, Haunn, Hougharry,

Leverburgh, Ludag, Northbay and Pol

nan Crann

Recreational users Boating & kayaking

Renewables Wave energy developments

Anchorages & moorings Fishing – mobile gear Long-line fishing (including jigging)

Fishing – static gear Creels (including lobster, crabs and

Nephrops)

Infrastructure – cables, pipelines, outfalls power interconnectors

gas and oil pipelines

6 Only the specific examples of activities listed in the table have been excluded, rather than the

broad activity types. New plans or projects will still need to be considered by the relevant competent authority (see Annex 1 for further details).

14

Existing management

The West Coast of the Outer Hebrides pSPA overlaps with the Monach Isles SPA, Monach Isles Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and the Sound of Barra candidate SAC. As such management exists for these sites under the relevant legislation.

The West Coast of the Outer Hebrides pSPA boundary overlaps the Monach Isles Nature Conservation Marine Protected Area (NC MPA), designated under the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 for black guillemot and marine geomorphology of the Scottish Shelf seabed.

Marine Scotland is currently considering potential management measures for this NC MPA.

A map showing neighbouring and overlapping protected areas is provided at Annex 2.

15

Introduction to aquaculture activities

There are five finfish aquaculture sites within the boundary of the West Coast of the Outer Hebrides pSPA. These are Sound of Harris, West Loch Tarbert, Ardhasaig I, Ardhasaig II and Soay. There are a further three additional finfish farms within 1km of the pSPA. These are Grey Horse Channel, Hellisay and Rodel.

There are three shellfish aquaculture sites within the boundary of the pSPA. These are Biadh na Gradh, Garbh Lingeigh and Sound of Harris (Shellfish). There are a further four additional shellfish sites within 1km of the pSPA. These are Fuiay Rock South of Hellisay, Nursery Site, Rubha Charnain and Sounds of Barra. Sites are predominantly for production of Pacific oysters.

The locations of aquaculture farms are shown in Map 4. Aquaculture – finfish

All qualifying species of the West Coast of the Outer Hebrides pSPA (great northern diver, black-throated diver, red-throated diver, Slavonian grebe, eider, long-tailed duck and red-breasted merganser) are considered sensitive to pressures associated with finfish aquaculture. Our initial assessment identifies the following pressures:

Mortality – by-catch through entanglement All qualifying species are considered to have a high sensitivity to entanglement

in nets in the water column

Disturbance – vessel traffic and displacement from foraging areas. Breeding red-throated divers are considered to have a high sensitivity to visual

disturbance. Non-breeding great northern diver, black-throated diver, Slavonian grebe, and red-breasted merganser are considered to have a medium sensitivity to visual disturbance. All species display avoidance behaviour with flight responses varying between species.

Long-tailed duck and eider are considered to have low sensitivity to visual disturbance created by vessel traffic with some level of habituation occurring. For eider however, during periods of flightless moults their ability to avoid vessel traffic will be reduced.

Loss or damage to supporting habitats

All qualifying species are considered indirectly sensitive to pressures that could reduce the extent of, or damage, supporting habitat for prey species and therefore have the potential to reduce the availability of important food resources.

The key pressures associated with finfish aquaculture are disturbance and the potential to cause mortality of non-target species through entanglement in nets as the qualifying features pursue their prey in the water column. Finfish aquaculture activities pose a risk to the conservation objectives because of the sensitivities of all qualifying species to entanglement and reduction in prey

16

availability through damage or loss of prey supporting habitat. They also pose a risk because of the sensitivity of divers, Slavonian grebe and merganser. Existing finfish aquaculture Diving birds are considered to be highly sensitive to pressures associated with nets set in the water column, including cage nets, external anti-predator nets deployed to deter seals or set (gill) nets (for recapture of escaped fish7). Divers and merganser may be especially sensitive as aggregations of wild fish may be attracted to the vicinity of aquaculture cages.

The use of set (gill) nets for capture of escaped farm fish should be avoided. In reality the contingency is rarely used as most fish are beyond capture in the time it takes to deploy nets. No additional management should be required to manage entanglement risk with anti-predator nets provided continual application of best practice, informed by rigorous monitoring and reporting of incidences of bird entanglement at fish farms, to ensure that cage mesh sizes and tensioning are appropriate to minimise entanglement risk and to govern use of anti-predator nets.

Divers, Slavonian grebe and merganser are sensitive to disturbance associated with vessel movements. However, current patterns and levels of vessel movement associated with finfish aquaculture are not anticipated to pose a risk to conservation objectives.

New finfish farms or extension to existing farms

In addition to entanglement risk, new or extensions for existing farns pose a risk to the conservation objectives because of the sensitivities of all species to reduction in prey availability through damage or loss of prey supporting habitat.

The sea bed footprint, including the Allowable Zone of Effect (AZE), associated with fish farms also has the potential to exert pressures on birds through reduction in extent of accessible foraging areas and/or loss or damage to supporting habitat for prey species.

Any new proposals to extend existing FINfish farms or develop new sites within the pSPA will be required to undergo a HRA. To inform a HRA, it is likely that a bird survey will be required to determine the potential for disturbance to the qualifying species. In addition, a benthic survey of the seabed habitats within the site footprint may also be required to determine what the impact of the loss of supporting habitat on the qualifying species would be in terms of loss of area and prey resource to the birds (including barrier effects).

HRAs of proposals falling within areas used by divers, Slavonian grebes and merganser should also include development of appropriate mitigation measures to ensure that disturbance is not at a level that disrupts or prevents the key life-cycle activities of these species, including continued access to resources and roost areas.

7 As currently identified as a contingency in some ‘Escape Prevention and Recapture Strategy’ plans.

17

Appropriate mitigation to remove or avoid/reduce or limit pressures associated with these activities on the qualifying features may include:

Prohibiting of the use of set (gill) nets for capture of farm fish in the event of escape.

Application of best practice, informed by rigorous monitoring and reporting of incidences of bird entanglement at fish farms, to ensure that cage mesh sizes and tensioning are appropriate to minimise entanglement risk and to govern use of anti-predator nets.

Seasonal limitations and/or defining routes for maintenance vessels (particularly to avoid important foraging areas for red-throated divers).

Spatial limitations to avoid damaging or restricting access to prey supporting habitat of all qualifying species. Should future research establish a clear relationship between a specific management activity and displacement of divers, grebes and seaducks from foraging areas, we will review all relevant information and provide advice on a management option.

Recommended management option:

Remove or avoid pressures – existing and new finfish farms:

Prohibiting the use of set (gill) nets for recapture of escaped farmed stock within the pSPA is recommended.

No additional management – existing finfish farms: There should be no additional management required for existing finfish farms providing management of entanglement pressures at finfish farms within the pSPA follow current and evolving best practice with respect to cage mesh size and tensioning and the use of anti-predator nets.

Reduce or limit pressures – proposed new finfish farms:

Reduce or limit entanglement pressures associated with new finfish farms or undeveloped consents as well as the expansion or relocation of existing fish farms through application of best practice is recommended.

Reduce or limit pressures associated with disturbance by maintenance vessels is recommended.

Reducing or limit pressures associated with the reduction (extent and accessibility) of prey supporting habitat through careful siting of new farms should be considered.

18

Proposed way forward: We will continue discussions with those involved with aquaculture within or adjacent to the proposed SPA to help us to understand more about the interactions between finfish farms and the qualifying features. Where management measures are required, the development of these would be undertaken via discussion with the relevant industries and scientific organisations. Marine Scotland and/or the relevant authority will lead on the development of specific management measures.

19

Aquaculture – shellfish farming

Shellfish farms require relatively shallow, sheltered waters which are likely to coincide with aggregations of those qualifying features which could be impacted by associated pressures. In addition, eider in particular may be attracted to shellfish farms.

Our initial assessment identifies the following pressures:

Mortality – by-catch through entanglement All qualifying species are considered to have a high sensitivity to entanglement

in nets in the water column

Disturbance - vessel movement, auditory deterrents and displacement from foraging, sheltering and / or roosting areas.

Breeding red-throated divers are considered to have a high sensitivity to visual disturbance. Non-breeding great northern diver, black-throated diver, Slavonian grebe and red-breasted merganser are considered to have a medium sensitivity to visual disturbance. All species display avoidance behaviour from vessels with flights responses varying between species.

Eider and long-tailed duck are also potentially sensitive to incidental or

deliberate disturbance, through use of auditory or other deterrents. Long-tailed duck and eider are considered to have low sensitivity to visual

disturbance created by vessel movement with some level of habituation occurring. For eider however, during periods of flightless moults their ability to avoid vessel traffic will be reduced.

Loss or damage to supporting habitats All qualifying species are considered indirectly sensitive to pressures that

could reduce the extent of or damage supporting habitat for prey species and therefore, have the potential to reduce the availability of important food resources.

The key pressures associated with shellfish aquaculture are disturbance and the potential to cause mortality of non-target species through entanglement in protective netting designed to deter predation. Bivalve-eating seaducks such as eider and long-tailed duck may be especially sensitive as they can be attracted to shellfish farms. Breeding red-throated divers show a clear avoidance of areas with high shipping intensity and can take flight of small vessels approaching within 1km of them foraging. Eider and long-tailed duck can be displaced from favoured feeding or resting areas by auditory or other deterrents deployed by shellfish farmers to deter predators. Both species show clear avoidance behaviours from such deterrents. Shellfish aquaculture activities pose a risk to the conservation objectives because of the sensitivities of divers, Slavonian grebe, eider, long-tailed duck and merganser and to entanglement, disturbance and reduction in prey availability through damage or loss of prey supporting habitat.

20

Existing shellfish aquaculture No additional management should be required to manage entanglement risk with anti-predator nets provided continual application of best practice, informed by rigorous monitoring and reporting of incidences of bird entanglement at fish farms, to ensure that cage mesh sizes and tensioning are appropriate to minimise entanglement risk and to govern use of anti-predator nets.

Divers, Slavonian grebe and red-breasted merganser are sensitive to disturbance associated with vessel movements. However, current patterns and levels of vessel movement associated with finfish aquaculture are not anticipated to pose a risk to conservation objectives.

New shellfish farms or extension to existing farms

In addition to entanglement risk, new or extensions for existing farms pose a risk to the conservation objectives because of the sensitivities of divers, Slavonian grebe and red-breasted merganser (vessel movement) and eider and long-tailed duck (anti-predator deterrents) to disturbance and, to the reduction in prey availability through damage or loss of prey supporting habitat.

The sea bed footprint associated with shellfish farms also has potential to exert

pressures on diving birds through reduction in extent of accessible foraging areas

and/or loss or damage to supporting habitat for prey species.

Any new proposals to extend existing shellfish farms or develop new sites within the pSPA will require to undergo a HRA. To inform a HRA, particularly for proposals falling within hotspots for eider or long-tailed duck, it is likely that a benthic survey of the seabed habitats within the site footprint will be required to determine what the impact of the loss of supporting habitat on these benthic feeders would be in terms of loss of area and prey resource to the birds.

HRA of proposals falling within areas used by species sensitive to disturbance from vessel movements (divers, Slavonian grebe and red-breasted merganser) and deterrents (eider and long-tailed duck) should also include development of appropriate mitigation measures to ensure that any such disturbance is not at a level that disrupts or prevents the key life cycle activities of these species, including continued access to the resources, including roost areas.

Should future research establish a clear relationship between a specific management activity and displacement of divers, sea duck and grebes from foraging areas, we will review all relevant information and provide advice on a management option.

Appropriate mitigation to remove or avoid/reduce or limit pressures associated with these activities on the qualifying features may include:

Application of best practice, informed by rigorous monitoring and reporting of

incidences of bird entanglement at shellfish farms to govern use of anti-

predator nets.

Seasonal or spatial restrictions on use of auditory or other deterrents to

ensure that associate disturbance is not at a level that disrupts or prevents the

21

key life-cycle activities of the proposed qualifying species, including continued

access to the site and the resources upon which they depend.

Spatial limitations to avoid damaging or restricting access to prey supporting

habitat of all qualifying species. Should future research establish a clear

relationship between a specific management activity and displacement of

divers, grebes and seaduck from foraging areas, we will review all relevant

information and provide advice on a management option.


No additional management – existing shellfish farms: No additional management providing pressures associated with the use of any anti-predator netting at shellfish farms within the pSPA follow current and evolving best practice with respect to net mesh sizes and tensioning and use of anti-predator nets (Map 4). Reduce or limit pressures – proposed new shellfish farms: Reducing or limiting pressures associated with the use of anti-predator netting at shellfish farms within the pSPA by following best practice, as above, is recommended. Reduce or limit pressures associated with disturbance by maintenance vessels and predator deterrents is recommended. Reducing or limiting pressures associated with the reduction (extent and accessibility) of prey supporting habitat through careful siting of new farms should be considered.

Proposed way forward:

We will continue discussions with those involved with aquaculture within or adjacent to the proposed SPA to help us to understand more about the interactions between shellfish farms and the qualifying features. Where management measures are required, the development of these would be undertaken via discussion with the relevant industries and scientific organisations. Marine Scotland and/or the relevant authority will lead on the development of specific management measures.

22

Map 4. Aquaculture sites in relation to the West Coast of the Outer Hebrides pSPA.

23

Introduction to fishing activities

In providing our advice on management options for fishing activities, we have focussed on what we know about the sensitivities of the proposed qualifying features to different types of fishing activity and whether or not that fishing activity may affect the achievement of the site’s conservation objectives. More information on the specific characteristics of the various fisheries and therefore their specific interactions with the qualifying species is required. Discussions with those involved with fishing within or adjacent to the site will be important for completing the assessment of the extent to which these features may actually be affected by fishing activities.

Our current understanding of fishing activities within the West Coast of the Outer Hebrides pSPA is information provided in the Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment (BRIA) for pSPA. The BRIA identifies that pots operate mainly in the west part of the pSPA and in the east in the channels between Isle of Harris and North Uist and between South Uist and Barra. Dredges and trawls operate mainly in the east part of the Sounds of Harris and Barra at the eastern extent of the pSPA boundary.

Activities not considered further:

Pelagic and bottom-set long-line fisheries are largely restricted to offshore waters and therefore at present pose a low risk to the qualifying species.

Fishing using creels is likely to be widespread throughout the site. Whilst some mortality through entanglement has been recorded for some species, occurrence is rare and therefore we consider pose a low risk to the qualifying features.

Fishing – mobile gear

This section considers fishing by benthic (mechanical or hydraulic) dredges, benthic trawls, pelagic trawls and seines. Benthic dredges and trawls

Benthic dredging includes both hydraulic dredges and simple mechanical dredges used for targeting scallops, mussels and other bivalves, including cockles. Benthic trawls include the various types of bottom-contacting, active gears, such as otter (single-rig and multi-rig, pair trawling, semi-pelagic), beam and bottom contacting seines e.g. Scottish seine/anchor seine.

All of the qualifying features of the West Coast of the Outer Hebrides pSPA are considered sensitive to pressures associated with benthic dredging and trawls. Our initial assessment identifies the following pressures associated with these fisheries:

Mortality – by-catch through entanglement. All qualifying species are sensitive to entanglement in fishing nets. However,

numbers caught as by-catch in benthic trawls is considered to be low.

Disturbance – vessel movement (see All mobile gear – vessel movements).

24

Removal of prey species. All qualifying species are considered indirectly sensitive to pressures that have

the potential to reduce the availability of important food resources, particularly sandeel.

Abrasion to supporting habitats for prey species. All qualifying species are considered indirectly sensitive to pressures that

could reduce the extent of or damage to supporting habitat for prey species and therefore have the potential to reduce the availability of important food resources.

The key pressure associated with benthic dredging and trawling is the potential to reduce the amount and/or quality of prey available to all qualifying features through removal of their prey species, including bivalves, crustaceans and/or fish. Benthic dredging and trawling therefore pose a risk to the conservation objectives if these activities cause a significant reduction in prey availability, either by direct removal or changes to the prey-supporting habitat. Sandeels are an important prey species for divers, grebe and red-breasted merganser and are known to be highly sensitive to the pressures associated with targeted sandeel fishing i.e. sandeel abundance can be affected by targeted fishing. There is currently no targeted fishery for sandeels within the pSPA, this position should be retained.

Benthic dredging can also cause abrasion to the seabed surface which has the potential to affect the availability of suitable prey species for bottom-feeding seaducks such as long-tailed duck and eider.

The prey supporting habitats of seaducks are relatively fixed and prey species are not particularly mobile which means that consideration of site-based management in the future may be appropriate. However, because we know less about the extent of interactions between benthic fisheries and the key prey species and their supporting habitats, we have not currently identified a site-based management option. We recommend that a principal objective of the management of the relevant fisheries should be to ensure that the fishing activity does not cause damage to the benthic habitats and associated prey species such that it adversely affects the availability of prey to bottom-feeding seaducks.

It is possible that on the basis of future research, additional site-based management may be required but based on our current understanding, we think it is appropriate that management continues to take place at a wider scale.

Pelagic trawls and seines

Species such as divers, red-breasted merganser and Slavonian grebe that pursue fish prey in the water column are considered sensitive to pressures associated with pelagic trawls and seines, but all qualifying species are potentially at risk of entanglement in specific circumstances. However, recorded incidences of entanglement in these gears are few and therefore, on the basis of the current evidence, we consider that these methods pose a low risk to the qualifying species.

25

Our initial assessment identifies the following pressures associated with these fisheries:

Mortality – by-catch through entanglement All qualifying species, and in particular divers, Slavonian grebe and merganser are sensitive to entanglement in fishing nets. Numbers however caught as by-catch in pelagic trawls and seines are considered to be low.

Disturbance – vessel movement (see all moble gear – vessel movement)

Removal of prey species Divers, grebe and mergansers are indirectly sensitive to the removal of fish prey as targeted species from fisheries activities.

The key pressure associated with pelagic trawls and seines is the potential to reduce the amount of prey available to divers, grebe and mergansers through removal of prey species from the water column. Pelagic trawls and seines therefore pose a risk to the conservation objectives if these activities cause a reduction of prey availability. Whilst we know that fishing activity will reduce the amount of prey species, we do not know enough about what level of stock reduction would cause a significant reduction in prey availability that would then pose a risk to conservation objectives. However, prey species are mobile and, consequently so is bird foraging activity which will often take place beyond the boundary of the site. We have therefore not identified a site-based management option for pelagic fisheries because management of these fisheries takes place at a wider scale. All mobile gear fisheries - vessel movement

Fishing boat movement can also cause pressures through visual disturbance to the qualifying features.

Red-throated divers are considered to have a high sensitivity to visual disturbance

during the breeding season. Great northern diver, black-throated diver, Slavonian

grebe and red-breasted merganser are considered to have a medium sensitivity to

visual disturbance created by vessel movement. All species display avoidance

behaviour with flight responses varying between species.

Long-tailed duck, and eider are considered to have low sensitivity to visual disturbance created by fishing traffic with some level of habituation occurring. For eider however, during periods of flightless moults their ability to avoid vessel movement will be reduced.

Fishing poses a risk to the conservation objectives because of the sensitivities of great northern diver, red-throated diver, Slavonian grebe and red-breasted merganser to disturbance. However, current patterns and levels of vessel movement associated with fisheries activities are not anticipated to pose a risk to conservation objectives.

26


Remove or avoid pressures: Removing or avoiding pressures associated with fishing for sandeels is recommended. Reduce or limit pressures: Removing or avoiding pressures associated with fishing that has the potential to damage sandeel habitat should be considered.

We have not identified a site-based management option for pelagic fisheries because management of these fisheries takes place at a wider scale.

We have not identified a site-based management option for benthic fisheries because there is currently insufficient information available.

Proposed way forward:

Pelagic fishing for herring/sprat may occur within or around the pSPA. We recommend that a principal objective of the management of the fishery should be ensuring that the fishing activity does not prevent or disrupt the availability of prey species for divers, red-breasted merganser or Slavonian grebe i.e. it should be considered as part of a broader ecosystem-based approach to management of this fishery.

Similarly, whilst we know less about the extent of interactions between benthic fisheries and prey supporting habitat, we recommend that a principal objective of the management of the relevant fisheries should be to ensure that the fishing activity does not cause such damage to the benthic habitats that it adversely affects the availability of prey to bottom-feeding seaducks.

Additional research is required to better understand the relationships between the impact of dredging and benthic trawling on supporting habitats, their ability to support suitable prey and any consequential effect this may have on the birds.

Where management measures are required, the development of these would be undertaken via discussion with the relevant industries and scientific organisations. Marine Scotland and/or the relevant authority will lead the development of specific management measures.

27


This section considers fishing using drift nets, fixed salmon nets, bottom set nets and fyke nets whether bottom set or in the water column.

All of the qualifying features of the West Coast of the Outer Hebrides pSPA are considered to be sensitive to pressures associated with fisheries using static nets. Our initial assessment identifies the following direct and indirect pressures associated with these fisheries:

Mortality – by-catch through entanglement. All qualifying species are sensitive to entanglement in set nets.

Disturbance – vessel movement. Breeding red-throated divers are considered to have a high sensitivity to visual

disturbance. Non-breeding great northern diver, black-throated diver, Slavonian grebe and red-breasted merganser are considered to have a medium sensitivity to visual disturbance. All species display avoidance behaviour from vessels with flights responses varying between species.


Removal of prey species. All qualifying species are considered indirectly sensitive to pressures that have

the potential to reduce the availability of important food resources.

The key pressure associated with static gear fisheries is the potential to cause mortality of qualifying species through entanglement in nets as the qualifying features dive for their prey. All diving birds are considered to be highly sensitive to pressures associated with set nets including drift nets, fixed salmon nets and bottom set nets (possibly including fyke nets). Drift nets set in the water column present the highest risk to diving birds, particularly those which pursue fish in the water column such as divers, grebes and mergansers. Bottom-feeding sea ducks such as eider and long-tailed duck will also be sensitive to nets set close to the sea bed or in areas close to rocky substrates where they forage for bivalves and crustaceans.

Fishing using drift nets, fixed salmon nets, bottom set nets and fyke nets pose a risk to the conservation objectives because of the sensitivities of all qualifying features to the by-catch entanglement and removal of prey, and the sensitivities of great northern diver, black-throated diver, red-throated diver, Slavonian grebe and red-breasted merganser to disturbance.

Consideration of management measures to remove or avoid pressures associated with these activities on the qualifying species may include:

Spatial restrictions to avoid static gear within foraging dive ranges of the qualifying species. Most diving species, with the exception of great northern diver, forage in depths of less than 15m; however maximum dive depths for some species have been recorded at greater than 55m. The extent to which

28

bottom-set nets set deeper than 15m impact on these diving birds is unclear and requires further consideration.

Seasonal restrictions, avoiding fishing during the winter months when non-breeding waterfowl are present. Although consideration needs to be given to eider that is resident throughout the year.

Vessel movement Divers, Slavonian grebe and red-breasted merganser are sensitive to disturbance associated with vessel movements. However, current patterns and levels of vessel movement associated with static gear fisheries activities are not anticipated to pose a risk to conservation objectives.


Remove or avoid: Prohibiting the use of all set nets in areas identified as being important for eider is recommended. Remove or avoid – seasonal – non-breeding birds: Prohibiting the use of drift nets in areas identified as being important for great-northern diver, black-throated diver, Slavonian grebe, long-tailed duck and red-breasted merganser between September and mid-May each year is recommended. Prohibiting the use of bottom set nets and fyke nets in areas identified as being important for great-northern diver, black-throated diver, Slavonian grebe, long-tailed duck and red-breasted merganser between September and mid-May is recommended. Remove or avoid – seasonal – red-throated diver: Prohibiting the use of drift nets in areas identified as being important for red-throated diver between April and mid-September each year is recommended. Prohibiting the use of bottom set nets and fyke nets in areas identified as being important for red-throated diver between April and mid-September is recommended.

Proposed way forward: Where management measures are required, the development of these would be undertaken via discussion with the relevant industries and scientific organisations. Marine Scotland and/or the relevant authority will lead on the development of specific management measures.

29

Navigational dredging and disposal

This section encompasses periodic maintenance dredging which is already carried out at established areas and, the disposal of dredge material at recognised disposal sites. It also provides management advice on changes to current practice and future proposals for capital dredging projects.

All of the qualifying features of the West Coast of the Outer Hebrides pSPA are considered sensitive to pressures associated with dredging and disposal activities. Our initial assessment identifies the following pressures:

Disturbance – vessel traffic

Breeding red-throated divers are considered to have a high sensitivity to visual disturbance. Non-breeding great northern diver, black-throated diver, Slavonian grebe and red-breasted merganser are considered to have a medium sensitivity to visual disturbance. All species display avoidance behaviour from vessels with flight responses varying between species.


Removal of prey species All qualifying species are considered indirectly sensitive to pressures that have the potential to reduce the availability of important food resources.

Abrasion and smothering of supporting habitat for prey species All qualifying features are considered indirectly sensitive to pressures that could reduce the extent of or damage to supporting habitat for prey species and therefore, has the potential to reduce the availability of important food resources.

Changes in water clarity All qualifying features rely on underwater visibility to capture prey and/or

forage on the sea bed. Divers and grebes exhibit a low sensitivity to this pressure. Information on potential impacts of water clarity changes on sea duck however is sparse.

Navigational dredging and disposal activities pose a risk to the conservation objectives because of the sensitivities of all qualifying species to the reduction in prey availability, either by direct removal or changes to the prey supporting habitat and, the sensitivities of all divers, Slavonian grebe and red-breasted merganser to disturbance. Existing periodic maintenance dredging and spoil disposal Divers, grebe and sea ducks are sensitive to removal of bivalve, crustacean and fish prey from the sea bed associated with dredging and also abrasion of supporting seabed habitats caused by dredging and smothering caused by dredge spoil disposals. The existing dredge disposal site within the pSPA is currently closed.

30

Periodic maintenance dredging of harbour basins and around piers within the pSPA for navigational reasons, and disposal of dredge material (including capital dredge material) at existing disposal sites are established activities which at their current scale we consider do not require additional management. This is because, the supporting seabed habitats at these established dredging areas and closed disposal sites will already be regularly disturbed or smothered by spoil so will have limited foraging value to divers, grebe and sea ducks. Dredge disposal sites are shown on Map 5. Additionally, periods of poor underwater visibility resulting from dredging and disposal activities that could prevent feeding in the immediate vicinity are likely to be short-term and therefore not anticipated to cause an adverse effect on site integrity.

However, we would recommend that all maintenance dredging is treated as a plan or project and the Statutory Harbour Authority, as a competent authority, despite current license exemption, carries out a HRA to satisfy themselves that baseline activities have no adverse effect on site integrity. This approach will also have the advantage of giving a baseline to inform any new capital and associated projected maintenance dredging against. To ensure there is sufficient protection for the site, as set out in Regulation 48 of the ‘Habitats Regulations’ the HRA should also cover realistic worse-case scenario’s, e.g. providing contingencies for ‘emergency’ operations.

Capital dredge operations or new disposal sites Capital dredge projects and/or new disposal sites within the pSPA, including future associated maintenance dredging should be considered as a new plan or project and undergo a HRA. The level of potential impacts and therefore management advice depends on the scale, location, and type and intensity of use of any future proposals. To inform a HRA it is likely that a benthic survey of the seabed habitats and bird surveys will be required in the area to be dredged and/or used for spoil disposal. Appropriate mitigation to reduce or limit pressures associated with these activities on the qualifying species may include:

spatial limitations to avoid damaging supporting habitat within foraging dive ranges of the qualifying species and/or;

seasonal restrictions (particularly in areas used for foraging by breeding red-throated divers, as they will have a restricted foraging range during this period).

Most foraging activity for the qualifying species occurs in waters shallower than 15m (except great northern diver). These areas are considered unlikely to meet the desired requirements for new spoil disposal sites.

We advise that in developing any proposals within the pSPA, the applicant should enter into early discussions with both Marine Scotland and SNH to ensure that a HRA is scoped adequately, including considerations regarding the potential for cumulative impacts and therefore, unnecessary costs avoided.

31

Vessel movement Dredge spoil can be relocated on land or at sea. For those cases where the spoil is disposed of at sea, the transit phase will create additional vessel traffic in the area between the dredged site and the disposal site. Divers, Slavonian grebe and red-breasted merganser are sensitive to disturbance associated with vessel movements. However, current patterns and levels of vessel movement associated with dredging and disposal activities are not anticipated to pose a risk to the conservation objectives.


No additional management – existing maintenance dredging and disposal (ports and harbours):

There should be no additional management requirements for established maintenance dredging and licensed disposal sites. This includes seasonal restrictions (Map 5).

Reduce or limit pressures: Reducing or limiting pressures associated with capital dredging projects, associated maintenance dredging and new disposal sites should be considered.

Proposed way forward: All new plans and projects will require a HRA. Early discussions with both Marine Scotland and SNH to ensure that a HRA is scoped adequately, including considerations regarding the potential for cumulative impacts is recommended.

Where management measures are required, the development of these would be undertaken via discussion with Statutory Harbour Authorities, Marine Scotland and SNH.

32

Map 5. Dredge material waste disposal sites in or adjacent to the West Coast of the Outer Hebrides pSPA.

33

Ports and harbours activities

This section encompasses ports and harbour related activities both existing and potential future proposals that occur within harbour and port statutory limits and that could affect the qualifying features of West Coast of the Outer Hebrides pSPA. The coastal boundary of the pSPA follows the mean low water springs (MLWS). All permanent man-made hard structures (infrastructure) that protrude from land i.e. jetties, piers, harbour walls, ferry terminals, slipways and docks within statutory limits are excluded from the pSPA. Anchorages with floating buoys or moorings are not excluded from the pSPA boundary as these are floating structures around which the qualifying species can still forage, preen, loaf or roost.

All of the qualifying features of the West Coast of the Outer Hebrides pSPA are considered sensitive to pressures associated with various ports and harbour activities. Our initial assessment identifies the following pressures:

Disturbance – vessel movement and new development Breeding red-throated divers are considered to have a high sensitivity to visual disturbance. Non-breeding great northern diver, black-throated diver, Slavonian grebe and red-breasted merganser are considered to have a medium sensitivity to visual disturbance. All species display avoidance behaviour from vessels with flights responses varying between species.


Loss or damage to supporting habitat for prey species - species – new developments/port expansion. All qualifying features are considered indirectly sensitive to pressures that could reduce the extent of or damage to supporting habitat for prey species and therefore, has the potential to reduce the availability of important food resources.

New developments within port and harbour limits pose a risk to the conservation objectives because of the sensitivities of all qualifying species to the reduction in prey availability through damage or loss of prey supporting habitat and, the sensitivities of all divers, Slavonian grebe and red-breasted merganser to disturbance.

Existing ports and harbour operations The West Coast of the Outer Hebrides pSPA area encompasses many port and harbour limits including Acarsaid, Aird Ma Ruibhe Terminal, Aird Mhor, Ardhasaig, Ardveenish, Barra, Castlebay, Ceann a Gharaidh, Eriskay, Haunn, Hougharry, Leverburgh, Ludag, Northbay and Pol nan Crann.

34

It is not anticipated that any additional management measures will be required for the current level and range of activities at existing ports and harbours.

Vessel movement

Divers, Slavonian grebe and red-breasted merganser are sensitive to disturbance associated with vessel movements. However, current patterns and levels of vessel traffic associated with port and harbour activities are not anticipated to pose a risk to the conservation objectives.

Development or expansion of ports and harbours

All new development, expansion proposals and/or changes in intensity of use should be considered as a new plan or project and undergo a HRA. The level of potential impacts and therefore management advice depends on the scale, location, type and intensity of use of any future proposals. Such development or expansion has the potential to impact upon the pSPA (as well as existing SPAs). To inform a HRA it is likely that a benthic survey of the seabed habitats and bird surveys will be required in the area proposed for development.

Appropriate mitigation to reduce or limit pressures associated with new development proposals on the qualifying species may include:

spatial limitations to avoid damaging supporting habitat within foraging dive ranges of the qualifying species and/or;

seasonal restrictions to avoid periods when birds are present.

We advise that in developing any proposals within or adjacent to the pSPA, the applicant should enter into early discussions with both Marine Scotland and SNH to ensure that a HRA is scoped adequately, including considerations regarding the potential for cumulative impacts.


Anchorages & moorings

Beyond pressures associated with the vessel traffic (covered above), we are not aware of any further pressures that have the potential to cause an adverse effect on the qualifying features.


No additional management – existing operations There should be no additional management requirements for established activities at ports and harbours within the West Coast of the Outer Hebrides pSPA. This includes seasonal restrictions. Reduce or limit pressures – new development: Reducing or limiting pressures associated with new development proposals or expansion of ports and harbours within or adjacent to the pSPA should be considered.

35

Proposed way forward: All new plans and projects will require a HRA. Early discussions with both Marine Scotland and SNH to ensure that a HRA is scoped adequately, including considerations regarding the potential for cumulative impacts is recommended.

Where management measures are required, the development of these would be undertaken via discussion with Harbour Authorities, Marine Scotland and SNH.

36

Recreational activities

Current recreational activities within the pSPA are relatively low key, restricted in distribution and almost entirely confined to the summer months (Map 6).

All qualifying species are considered sensitive to pressures associated with recreational activities. Our initial assessment identifies the following pressures:

Disturbance - through displacement from foraging, sheltering and / or roosting areas, or disturbance during moulting period for eiders.

Breeding red-throated divers are considered to have a high sensitivity to visual disturbance. Non-breeding great northern diver, black-throated diver, Slavonian grebe and red-breasted merganser are considered to have a medium sensitivity to visual disturbance. All species display avoidance behaviour to vessel traffic including kayaks and yachts with flights responses varying between species.


The key pressure associated with recreational activities is disturbance to divers, grebes and red-breasted merganser particularly around areas they use for shelter, roosting and/or foraging. Disturbance of birds from these areas can be costly for the bird, requiring them to use valuable energy reserves getting away from the activity. Eiders are also sensitive during their moult when they are flightless and less able to get away.

Increase in activities

Most water-borne activities occur during the summer when breeding red-throated diver are present. This is a growing industry, should evidence of pressures at particular locations and/or if there is major increase in intensity of these pursuits within the pSPA there may be a requirement to consider reducing pressures.


Existing sea kayaking, yachting and angling Current patterns and levels of these recreational activities are not anticipated to cause a risk to the conservation objectives.


No additional management – existing sea kayaking, recreational boating and angling:

There should be no additional management requirements’ providing the Scottish Marine Wildlife Watching Code is followed by water-borne recreational users.

Reducing or limit pressures – increase in activities

Reducing or limiting disturbance of red-throated divers by water-borne recreational activities should be considered if, in the future, there is evidence of existing pressures at

37

particular locations and/or if there is major increase in intensity of these pursuits within the pSPA.

There would be potential for some zonation of measures across the site given distribution of sensitive species within the site.

Proposed way forward: Continue to promote best practice guidance and raise awareness of avoiding disturbance to non-breeding birds with representatives from relevant organisations. Where management measures are required, the development of these would be undertaken via discussion with the relevant industries and scientific organisations. Marine Scotland and/or the relevant authority will lead on the development of specific management measures

Relationship with existing management:

Recreational boat users generally view wildlife as a positive part of their experience on the water. If disturbance does occur, this is often as a result of lack of understanding of the bird’s behaviour or how human activities can affect a bird’s well-being. Awareness-raising and education are therefore an important part of existing management. The following best practice guidance is available:

The Scottish Marine Wildlife Watching Code (SMWWC) highlights why breeding and non-breeding birds are sensitive to disturbance and offers practical advice on how to avoid disturbance. More information on the Code can be found at www.marinecode.org .

http://www.marinecode.org/

38

Map 6. Recreational activities within the West Coast of the Outer Hebrides pSPA.

39

Introduction to renewables activities

Renewable marine energy encompasses offshore wind (fixed and floating technologies, wave and tidal (stream and barrage) developments. Development areas have been identified through previous Crown Estate leasing rounds, option areas in the draft Sectoral Plans produced by Marine Scotland and or individual developers prospecting and locating suitable sites, particularly for small scale demonstration sites.

Offshore wind technology is a proven technology; however more recently drivers to reduce build out costs have introduced more novel technology in terms of turbine types and also in the foundations being used. Wave technology is still being developed and whilst there have been some applications for commercial scale arrays, the technology is still in its infancy and only small scale demonstration and prototype devices have been successfully deployed to date. Tidal stream is further advanced than wave technology but in terms of numbers of applications and MW outputs; however it is still reasonably novel with considerable areas of uncertainty surrounding how animals interact with turbines. Interest in Scottish waters for tidal barrage schemes is considerably lower than in the rest of the UK.

This section provides information on marine renewable interests - both existing and planned that could affect the qualifying interests of West Coast of the Outer Hebrides pSPA. Consideration has been given to the draft Sectoral plans - any identified options areas, leasing rounds, applications, consented and any operational developments.

There are no offshore wind, wave or tidal stream draft option areas identified in the respective draft Sectoral plans that overlap with the pSPA. There is one wave draft option areas identified in the respective draft Sectoral plans that overlap with the West Coast of the Outer Hebrides pSPA.

All of the qualifying features of the West Coast of the Outer Hebrides pSPA are considered sensitive to pressures associated with wave renewable activities. Our initial assessment identifies the following pressures associated with wave renewables:

Mortality – through collision All qualifying species are considered to be sensitive to collision with underwater artificial structures such as wave devices. Wave energy devices pose a risk to all species, but as the risk is a novel one it is not possible to quantify.

Disturbance - through displacement from foraging, sheltering and / or roosting areas. All qualifying species are considered to be potentially sensitive to disturbance from wave devices. Birds may avoid the area due to the presence of wave devices, therefore reducing areas of accessible foraging either directly or by creating a barrier to foraging areas. Repeated disturbance associated with maintenance activities may also cause displacement.

Loss or damage to supporting habitat for prey species All qualifying species are considered indirectly sensitive to pressures associated with the loss or damage of supporting habitat for prey species and

40

therefore potential reduction in food resources. Construction and installation of supporting infrastructure such as cables on the sea bed has the potential to cause an impact on the qualifying features however, the risk is considered to be low.

Wave energy

Lease areas

New wave proposals within the lease area pose a risk to the conservation objectives because of the sensitivities of all qualifying species to collision and disturbance. All new development should be considered as a new plan or project and undergo a HRA. The level of potential impacts and therefore management advice depends on the scale, location, type and intensity of use of any future proposals. To inform a HRA it is likely that a bird survey will be required in the area proposed for development. Appropriate mitigation to reduce or limit pressures associated with new wave proposals on the qualifying features may include:

spatial limitations to avoid particularly high density areas of the qualifying features and/or;

seasonal restrictions to avoid periods when birds are present. We advise that in developing any proposals within the lease areas, the applicant should enter into early discussions with both Marine Scotland and SNH to ensure that a HRA is scoped adequately, including considerations regarding the potential for cumulative impacts and therefore, unnecessary costs avoided.


Reduce or limit pressures - new wave proposals: Reduce or limit pressures through effective mitigation measures. Reducing or limiting pressures associated with wave energy capture devices in areas identified as being important for all the qualifying species should be considered.

Proposed way forward: All granted consents for not yet constructed renewable developments should be reviewed to identify if any additional mitigation and / or research is required. Should any new proposals be brought forward within the pSPA area then these would need to be considered on a case by case basis. All new plans and projects will require a HRA. Early discussions with both Marine Scotland and SNH to ensure that a HRA is scoped adequately, including considerations regarding the potential for cumulative impacts is recommended.

41

Where management measures are required, the development of these would be in discussion with the developer, regulator Marine Scotland Licensing Operations Team (MS LOT) and advisers Marine Scotland Science (MSS) and SNH.

42

Map 7. Wave renewable energy activities within the West Coast of the Outer Hebrides pSPA

43

Summary of management options

Aquaculture – Finfish Remove or avoid pressures – existing and new finfish farms:

Prohibiting the use of set (gill) nets for recapture of escaped farmed stock within the pSPA is recommended.

No additional management – existing finfish farms: There should be no additional management required for existing finfish farms providing management of entanglement pressures at finfish farms within the pSPA follow current and evolving best practice with respect to cage mesh size and tensioning and the use of anti-predator nets.

Reduce or limit pressures – proposed new finfish farms:

Reduce or limit entanglement pressures associated with new finfish farms or undeveloped consents as well as the expansion or relocation of existing finfish farms through application of best practice is recommended.

Reduce or limit pressures associated with disturbance by maintenance vessels is recommended.

Reducing or limit pressures associated with the reduction (extent and accessibility) of prey supporting habitat through careful siting of new farms should be considered.

Aquaculture – Shellfish

No additional management – existing shellfish farms: No additional management providing pressures associated with the use of any anti-predator netting at shellfish farms within the pSPA follow current and evolving best practice with respect to net mesh sizes and tensioning and use of anti-predator nets (Map 4). Reduce or limit pressures – proposed new shellfish farms: Reducing or limiting pressures associated with the use of anti-predator netting at shellfish farms within the pSPA by following best practice, as above, is recommended. Reduce or limit pressures associated with disturbance by maintenance vessels and predator deterrents is recommended. Reducing or limiting pressures associated with the reduction (extent and accessibility) of prey supporting habitat through careful siting of new farms should be considered.

44

Fishing – mobile gear

Remove or avoid pressures: Removing or avoiding pressures associated with fishing for sandeels is recommended. Reduce or limit pressures: Removing or avoiding pressures associated with fishing that has the potential to damage sandeel habitat should be considered.

We have not identified a site-based management option for pelagic fisheries because management of these fisheries takes place at a wider scale.

We have not identified a site-based management option for benthic fisheries because there is currently insufficient information available.


Remove or avoid: Prohibiting the use of all set nets in areas identified as being important for eider is recommended. Remove or avoid – seasonal – non-breeding birds: Prohibiting the use of drift nets in areas identified as being important for great-northern diver, black-throated diver, Slavonian grebe, long-tailed duck and red-breasted merganser between September and mid-May each year is recommended. Prohibiting the use of bottom set nets and fyke nets in areas identified as being important for great-northern diver, black-throated diver, Slavonian grebe, long-tailed duck and red-breasted merganser between September and mid-May is recommended. Remove or avoid – seasonal – red-throated diver: Prohibiting the use of drift nets in areas identified as being important for red-throated diver between April and mid-September each year is recommended.

Prohibiting the use of bottom set nets and fyke nets in areas identified as being important for red-throated diver between April and mid-September is recommended.

Navigational dredging

No additional management – existing maintenance dredging and disposal (ports and harbours):

There should be no additional management requirements for established maintenance dredging and licensed disposal sites. This includes seasonal restrictions (Map 5).

Reduce or limit pressures:

Reducing or limiting pressures associated with capital

45

dredging projects, associated maintenance dredging and new disposal sites should be considered.

Ports and harbours activities

No additional management – existing operations There should be no additional management requirements for established activities at ports and harbours within the West Coast of the Outer Hebrides pSPA. This includes seasonal restrictions. Reduce or limit pressures – new development: Reducing or limiting pressures associated with new development proposals or expansion of ports and harbours within or adjacent to the pSPA should be considered.

Recreational activities No additional management – existing sea kayaking, recreational boating and angling:

There should be no additional management requirements’ providing the Scottish Marine Wildlife Watching Code is followed by water-borne recreational users.

Reducing or limit pressures – increase in activities

Reducing or limiting disturbance of red-throated divers by water-borne recreational activities should be considered if, in the future, there is evidence of existing pressures at particular locations and/or if there is major increase in intensity of these pursuits within the pSPA.

Renewables – wave

Reduce or limit pressures - new wave proposals: Reduce or limit pressures through effective mitigation measures.

Reducing or limiting pressures associated with wave energy capture devices in areas identified as being important for all the qualifying species should be considered.

Cumulative effects: Potential cumulative effects are recognised for all new or increased activities identified under ‘Activities considered likely to affect the qualifying features’ in Table 2, and for activities sharing the following pressures:

Mortality:

Aquaculture – through entanglement in anti-predator nets and/or contingency set nets for recapture of escaped fish.

Fishing with mobile and static gear – through by-catch entanglement.

Wave energy – through collision with turbines.

46

Disturbance:

Aquaculture – through displacement from foraging areas.

Fishing with mobile gear and static gear– through disturbance associated with increased vessel activity.

Navigational dredging – through disturbance associated with increased vessel activity.

Ports and harbours – through disturbance associated with new development.

Recreational activities – through displacement from foraging areas.

Wave energy – through displacement from foraging, sheltering and / or roosting areas, or disturbance.

Reduction in prey availability:

Fishing with mobile gear – through direct removal of prey and potential damage to prey supporting habitat.

Navigational dredging (capital projects) – through removal of prey and potential damage to prey supporting habitat.

Wave energy – through installation of infrastructure causing damage to prey supporting habitat.

Before any firm recommendations are made, discussions should be held with stakeholders to ensure that there is a good understanding of the features and the likely interactions with 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. The discussions should lead to an improved understanding of the risk to the proposed qualifying features. The options presented here will then be reviewed by SNH and a preferred way forward may be recommended. This will form the basis of advice from SNH to Marine Scotland on the management measures required for this site should it be classified as an SPA.

Marine Scotland will be responsible for making recommendations to Scottish Ministers on any management measures that may be required. The development of these measures will be done through discussion with stakeholders after the formal consultation on the proposed SPA. Should any management measures require statutory underpinning, Marine Scotland will undertake further consultation.

47

Annex 1. Background to the advice contained in this paper

The Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended), commonly referred to as the Habitats Regulations, transpose the EC Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora (Habitats Directive) into domestic legislation. Regulation 33(2) gives Scottish Natural Heritage a statutory responsibility to advise other relevant authorities as to the conservation objectives for European marine sites in Scotland, and any operations which may cause deterioration of natural habitats or the habitats of species, or disturbance of species for which the site has been designated. This document presents the Regulation 33 advice, plus supporting information, for the West Coast of the Outer Hebrides pSPA to assist relevant and competent authorities, local interest groups and individuals in considering management (including any management scheme) of the site. This advice will also help to determine the scope and nature of any “appropriate assessment”, which the Habitats Directive requires to be undertaken for proposed plans and projects that are not connected to the conservation management of the site and are considered likely to have a significant effect. Where necessary Scottish Natural Heritage will also provide more detailed advice to relevant, and other competent, authorities to inform assessment of the implications of any such plans or projects. Relevant and competent authorities Within the context of a marine SPA, a relevant authority is a body or authority that has a function in relation to land or waters within or adjacent to the site (Regulation 5) and include: a nature conservation body; a local authority; water undertakers; a navigation authority; a harbour authority; a lighthouse authority; a river purification board (SEPA); a district salmon fishery board; and a local fisheries committee. All relevant authorities are competent authorities. A competent authority is defined in Regulation 6 as “any Minister, government department, public or statutory undertaker, public body of any description or person holding a public office”. In the context of a plan or project, the competent authority is the authority with the power or duty to determine whether or not the proposal can proceed.

The role of relevant authorities The Habitats Regulations require relevant authorities to exercise their functions so as to secure compliance with the Habitats Directive. A management scheme may be drawn up for each European marine site by the relevant authorities as described under Regulation 34. For marine SPAs and SACs with overlapping interests, a single management scheme may be developed. Where a management scheme is in place the relevant authorities must ensure that all plans for the area integrate with it. Such plans may include shoreline management plans, local Biodiversity Action Plans (BAPs) and sustainable development strategies for estuaries. This must occur to ensure that only a single management scheme is produced through which all relevant authorities exercise their duties under the Habitats Regulations.

48

Plans and projects The Habitats Regulations require that, where an authority concludes that a development proposal is unconnected with the nature conservation management of a Natura site and is likely to have a significant effect on that site, it must undertake an appropriate assessment of the implications for the qualifying interests for which the area has been designated. Review of Consents Competent authorities are required by the Habitats Regulations (Regulation 50) to undertake a review of relevant consents and permissions for activities affecting the site as soon as reasonably practicable after it becomes a European site.

49

Annex 2. Map showing overlapping and neighbouring existing protected areas.

West Coast of the Outer Hebrides proposed Special Protection Area … Protected... · West Coast of...

Documents

Transcript of West Coast of the Outer Hebrides proposed Special Protection Area … Protected... · West Coast of...